|
|
Post by galacticplumbob on Mar 20, 2017 14:14:47 GMT -5
Hello, it is my coffee table and I again. There is this shading that appears in game that is not in Blender or in S4S. I tried looking at tutorials and other threads but still cant figure out how to get rid of it.  I have tried: -Changing the shading to smooth in blender but the shadows still don't appear. -Using edge split (although I am not too sure which edges I am supposed to select but I tried a bunch of different ones and the result never changes). -Deleting the weird faces/edges and replacing them with new ones. My blender file is here. Thank you and have a nice day:) |
|
|
|
Post by inabadromance on Mar 20, 2017 17:00:27 GMT -5
hi! If the issue isn't visible in blender, then it might be because you need to edit both bumpmap and specular from the package (warehouse). You have to modify those textures to fit your mesh. |
|
|
|
Post by galacticplumbob on Mar 20, 2017 20:09:54 GMT -5
I replaced both file by a transparent file for now, could that be the problem?
|
|
|
|
Post by brujah on Mar 20, 2017 22:05:06 GMT -5
This is a mesh problem, there are many extra pieces that are either hidden or overlapping. First thing I would do is remove doubles. I did that on the entire mesh and it removed over 1900 vertexes. You can select different parts and do it bit by bit, but that is where I would start.
|
|
|
|
Post by galacticplumbob on Mar 21, 2017 12:15:48 GMT -5
Thank you! I seem to have a problem with remove doubles though. I did this a few times: I clicked remove doubles and my vertices count went down from 1162 to 412. But then if I save it straight away without doing anything else and import it in s4s it goes back up to 1143. And if I export the mesh and open it in Blender it has 1143 vertices. Is this normal?    |
|
|
|
Post by galacticplumbob on Mar 23, 2017 12:11:07 GMT -5
Updates: I tried to replace my faces that looked weird with a plane (cause I wont get triangles if I only have a rectangle). Just adding that one plane made my vertx count go from 412 to 832. Now if I do remove doubles, it removes a couple of my faces too.
Also, when I import this table in s4s, the vertices go from 832 to 2236 and the package doesnt save when I click save. It saves when I click save as though.
Anyone knows why my vertex count is on a rollercoaster? Should I report this as a bug?
|
|
|
|
Post by brujah on Mar 23, 2017 17:27:01 GMT -5
Removing doubles does exactly as it says, meaning if there are any vertexes in the same space in 3D they will be merged into one. I feel that what is actually happening is: After removing doubles you are not checking the UV map to see which vertexes actually got removed, then since it looked weird, you just added new planes to replace the "odd faces" thus increasing the poly count. When you say "it removes a couple of my faces too" this makes me think that the faces are actually just facing the wrong way. If you turn off backface culling you will be able to see the ones that are turned around, but to make sure you select the right ones, turn it back on then flip the normals on them.
I have an idea why this happens but am not 100% sure the answer I can give is correct. I will respond again once I have a clear and concise answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by galacticplumbob on Mar 23, 2017 21:00:42 GMT -5
Thank you for your response! You were right my faces reverted when I removed doubles, but it did that after I added the plane not before. The poly and vertex counts shouldn't have gone up though, I deleted 2 faces and replaced them with a plane.
If it helps you figure out what is going on, I just noticed the vertex count sometimes increases and decreases in blender when I don't do anything that would add or delete vertices. I was just moving things around and the vertex count went from 416 to 450 something, then when I pressed a to select everything it automatically went back down to 416. That makes me think it's a blender issue rather than a s4s one. I'll try to read up about that on blender forums. Maybe I should just start again. It's taking more time and effort trying to fix the table than it did to create it:p
|
|
