|
|
Old Caboose
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
Old Caboose // Work in Progress
Post by slang // Dec 9, 2007, 11:49am
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
This is an old caboose that has been restored.
The main reason that I chose this to model is for the photos that are available of it. There is a website with many good photos along with some of the history.
The Old Caboose link (http://www.trainweb.org/gggrs/95011/LVRR_Caboose_95011.html)
The old trains are of interest to many people today and the project would use mostly linear surfaces. Seems like a good WIP to start with.
At this point the basic shape and features are there but looking at the model it still lacks much of the detail that is available through the photos on the site.
Those items that have been created will now serve as a startpoint to dig in and tinker with all the TS modeling features.
One of the hardest aspects of working with TS here is that it is very powerful and at this point of learning my models just don't look as good as others seen here. It's truly an issue for me coming away from being very competent with another software.
One of the uses for this model would be a clip guiding a camera at specific points of detail and also moving through the cabin. That same clip could have some sound to explain the history of the caboose as well.
I've done a few very rough sorts of clips years ago. This one should prove to be much more complete. |
Post by jamesmc // Dec 9, 2007, 12:22pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
sweet! My father retired from Railroad work and I grew up around it.
Love to see anything with trains in it.
Love that caboose, reminds me of years past, good job on the reconstruction.
They don't use cabooses anymore though and that's too bad. :( |
Post by butterpaw // Dec 9, 2007, 2:18pm
|
butterpaw
Total Posts: 831
|
Very nice! I love trains! ^_^ You will soon feel more comfortable with trueSpace :) |
Post by RichLevy // Dec 9, 2007, 7:02pm
|
RichLevy
Total Posts: 1140
|
Hey Slang
I like trains to, it will be fun watching the progress of your project. I also took a look at your introduction post, I am really looking forward to seeing and hearing your comments on truespace and doing scaled models.
As for your caboose, I have a couple of small crits. The scale seems to be a tad bit off on your model. It is hard to model from photographs and keep a reasonably accurate scale.
Here is a quick picture of the caboos I modeled from one of the pictures... I cheated I used a program VTour which is great at previz stuff like this and archviz things...
You might also consider using the pictures from the site as textures for you model also, a program like photoshop is pretty good at ripping textures for things like this.
Sorry if I am butting in on your WIP :D I tend to perk up to threads like this lol.
Rich |
Post by kena // Dec 9, 2007, 7:17pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
And if you don't have the overpriced Photoshop (I stopped upgrading when the upgrade went through the roof) Try the Gimp. It has most of the functionallity of Photoshop and is free. |
Post by RichLevy // Dec 9, 2007, 7:26pm
|
RichLevy
Total Posts: 1140
|
And if you don't have the overpriced Photoshop (I stopped upgrading when the upgrade went through the roof) Try the Gimp. It has most of the functionallity of Photoshop and is free.
Wouldn't that just be your opinion? Or do you know something the rest of the 10 million PS users should know hehehe... PS has many tools that Gimp does not, I am not aware of a vanishing point tool in their package, though I could be wrong.
Rich |
Post by kena // Dec 9, 2007, 8:11pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
Wouldn't that just be your opinion? Or do you know something the rest of the 10 million PS users should know hehehe... PS has many tools that Gimp does not, I am not aware of a vanishing point tool in their package, though I could be wrong.
Rich
it has most of what I personally use. Honestly, I have PS but no longer use it, since Gimp is free. I don't know if it has a vanishing point tool, because I've never needed one.
for making snapshots into textures, the Gimp program works just as well as Photoshop does.
And Yes - It is my opinion. :D
I have LOTS of THEM! |
Post by RichLevy // Dec 9, 2007, 8:40pm
|
RichLevy
Total Posts: 1140
|
it has most of what I personally use. Honestly, I have PS but no longer use it, since Gimp is free. I don't know if it has a vanishing point tool, because I've never needed one.
for making snapshots into textures, the Gimp program works just as well as Photoshop does.
And Yes - It is my opinion. :D
I have LOTS of THEM!
NP, I can be pretty opinionated myself...
I can not say whether Gimp works as well as PS, but PS has some awesome distortion and perspective removing tools even with out the vanishing point tool... I would guess that gimp may have as much as 80% of the functionality of PS, if you do not need the 20% you do not get... I use it all of the time for my photography and textures/pictures.
My brother uses Gimp, he can do some nice things with his photos... I think my stuff is better :) though that is just my opinion lol.
I use PSCS3 Extended, I've been using it since version 7, for whatever little bit that is worth.
The Vanishing Point Tool in PSCS3 Extended can be used to clone in details into a perspective picture, remove perspective from a picture, or take a 2D picture and make the elements in the picture 3D, it can export the planes into a 3D program. For TS I use 3DS. Do you need that feature? Maybe, maybe not... PS has many other cool features besides that though.
Putting down my PS banner and going back to work on some more PS editing.
Rich |
Post by slang // Dec 10, 2007, 12:44am
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
Thanks everyone for your kind words and suggestions. Comments and suggestions are welcome, of course.
You can even take it another direction if you wish.
I forgot to include the file in the original post. I file often as you can tell from the file name. :D
Take a look and play around with it yourself.
Now, off to investigate this TruePlay/TrueSpace program. It looks alredy as though I'll soon be addicted. |
Post by slang // Dec 10, 2007, 6:17pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
The task of the moment is to create more detail and a better scale of the wheel assemblies.
It's a bit harder to do this with just the photos but it's progressing nicely. The color and texture are still bland or non-existent but it's the shape of the parts in the assembly that I'm working on right now.
Getting a rusty cast iron look would be great down the line. :)
Using TS is getting easier too. |
Post by kena // Dec 10, 2007, 7:11pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
Someone here on the forums posted a link a while back to several blueprints for various things.. Including trains.
Sorry I don't remember who found it first, but if you click this link, it may have what you are looking for...
http://www.the-blueprints.com/index.php?blueprints/trains/ |
Post by slang // Dec 10, 2007, 7:27pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
Outstanding! Thank you Kena. |
Post by slang // Dec 11, 2007, 8:12am
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
The more detail that goes into the wheel assemblies the more complicated it gets for everything to line up correctly.
The scale of the wheels has been corrected though it's not dead on yet for sure. Using the photos as a reference the body has been resized too.
At what point is a file too big? The level of detail that I'm shooting for includes rivets and fixtures seen in the exterior walls. Everything is separated into different layers but I'm still guessing that it's going to be very hard to manage when everything is turned on.
So this is the "wheels up" redo so far. It's getting much more interesting to work with seeing results.
Big lesson learned; get your info and dimensions together beforehand. That will surely make the next project flow much quicker. |
Post by kena // Dec 11, 2007, 11:53am
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
a very old trick is to not actually model the small things... Just have them as part of the texture for the big things. |
Post by slang // Dec 11, 2007, 12:58pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
a very old trick is to not actually model the small things... Just have them as part of the texture for the big things.
That makes a lot of sense. At this point I'm more familiar with the modeling than the texturing and I'm getting a bit crazy with the features in the model. :D
The original file started getting quirky so I broke off the sections into other files. When everything is complete the modular object sections can be imported into a clean main file and the animation can progress from there.
The image shows the interior. There are not many clear photos of the inside so I'm guestimating what might be there from other pictures seen on the net.
Overall it's going well but nothing looks as good as the other models here. The texturing and the lighting might be the problem. This machine is a bit old and underpowered so maybe once everything is complete another file with some logical lighting can be put in place.
The goal is to have the model ready to start a clip moving through the interior by Friday.
This will be the first model in my collection. The collection would like to have at least 5 models before I can show it as examples. This was a big shortfall from my last attempt to get into using TS a few years ago. |
Post by slang // Dec 12, 2007, 6:21pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
A few more details for the interior. The stove. It does look a bit big for that size space.
The toilet seems a bit too modern for 1940 as well.
Still plenty to complete before tomorrow. With a bit of luck I'll have a animation clip complete by the end of the weekend. It wont be the final cut but there should be something to see anyway. |
Post by W!ZARD // Dec 15, 2007, 2:23am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
At what point is a file too big? The level of detail that I'm shooting for includes rivets and fixtures seen in the exterior walls. Everything is separated into different layers but I'm still guessing that it's going to be very hard to manage when everything is turned on.
trueSpace - even the older versions - can happily deal with surprising large files with massive poly counts - what chokes it (and many other apps) is unwieldy file trees. The deeper and wider the file tree for your sub-grouped objects the more work the program has to do.
So, taking your proposed rivets as an example - it can be tempting to keep each rivet as a separate object and glue it to other objects in a wider hierarchy of objects. This feels like the intuitive way (to me anyway) to build a complex model as it is closer to the 'realworld' way of building things. The better way to do it with tS is to boolean add all your rivets into one super rivet object. Ts handily deals with a small group of really large objects far faster and more efficiently than it does with the same number of polygons spread in a large group of small objects.
If at some stage in the future you wish to use your geometry in another application you will find a small group of large objects translate far better than a large group of small objects.
Care must be taken when boolean unioning objects that touch but joining lots of objects that don't touch - like pickets in a fence or rivets in a caboose carriage - is easy, and trouble-free and its a recommended way to make your models more efficient to compute which allows for much larger scenes than would otherwise be easily managed. Model all your rivets (or model one and copy it as required) and once you are happy with texturing and placement, put them all on a single layer, turn off any unrequired layers and boolean connect all the rivets together into a single large object. You can still edit individual rivets as required using point edit tools if you need to.
Optimizing your models and scenes and file trees this way will allow you to utilize far larger overall file sizes with a relative ease than would not be possible with wide and deep object hierarchies. This is a valuable technique and I generally optimize all my models and scenes this way. Not only do big polycounts become more manageable but the scenes render faster too!
HTH |
Post by slang // Dec 15, 2007, 3:13pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
The deeper and wider the file tree for your sub-grouped objects the more work the program has to do.
.....is to boolean add all your rivets into one super rivet object.
......you will find a small group of large objects translate far better than a large group of small objects.
Care must be taken when boolean unioning objects that touch but joining lots of objects that don't touch
Not only do big polycounts become more manageable but the scenes render faster too!
HTH
These are certainly things that I'll incorporate asap.
This is an old AMD machine here with only 512MB of memory and who knows what the graphics card is. Just having it run TS makes me happy for what the computer is.
It's been very sluggish and even started crashing regularly until the file was split.
The problem with the file was the depth and width of the file trees. It all makes perfect sense now.
Thank you for explaining these things. |
Post by slang // Dec 15, 2007, 3:31pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
The tree has been changed to one deep from the TS main folder. It was previously 5 deep from that main folder.
The caboose scene moves crisply, there's no lag or hesitation and the functions work quicker.
Great suggestions. :) |
Post by W!ZARD // Dec 16, 2007, 2:17am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
The tree has been changed to one deep from the TS main folder. It was previously 5 deep from that main folder.
The caboose scene moves crisply, there's no lag or hesitation and the functions work quicker.
Great suggestions. :)
Glad to help :D. I can identify with trying to make large scenes with a lesser powered PC - my earlier 3d work was all done on a machine I had built as a sound processing station - top of the line sound card, junky graphics and so on.
Getting a more capable computer will certainly help but even then the comments about deep and wide file trees and nested hierarchies still holds. |
Post by slang // Dec 16, 2007, 12:37pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
It's not easy to see the items worked on today but it's been a bit slow making them.
The interior of the caboose has some cabinets and doors on the inside. It's not clear from the photos that I have what they are used for so they're not going to be totally accurate. Anything moving inside now has a joint.
The man that made the website about the caboose may be able to help me out with some additional photos and possibly some dimensions as he seems to be an enthusiast.
When I get the model a bit more prepared I'll have to make a clip showing the inside and the features there. Then I can send the clip to the webmaster. Together we should be able to get accurate information and make the clip a good display tool for anyone else that's interested.
The stove door has a joint on it now too. The glow inside that is to represent the fire is not looking as it should but the basics are there.
This is taking longer than expected but now the prefered or quicker way to make many of these features is clear. My future models should certainly be quicker and more accurate. |
Post by slang // Dec 16, 2007, 12:48pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
Here is another shot. Still cant see the cabinets but it's better. |
Post by spyfrog // Dec 17, 2007, 12:33pm
|
spyfrog
Total Posts: 181
|
Very interesting thread. I am looking into making some train inspired models myself, and perhaps export them to use in Train Railroad Simulator 2006 |
Post by slang // Dec 17, 2007, 12:54pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
Very interesting thread. I am looking into making some train inspired models myself, and perhaps export them to use in Train Railroad Simulator 2006
Thank you Spyfrog,
The caboose was just one of about 8 items that I started. Getting momentum is so difficult for me with something like this.
I'd work on one file for a while until I was stumped, then jump to the next. After a week or so the caboose started pulling ahead with completion.
Sure, I do like trains but it just worked out that way that this would be a model that I'd be building with great detail.
Now, after Kena pointed those blueprints out, it seems that many train models could easily be modeled. The detail of the prints are not engineering quality, of course, but show the outline and the features.
Is there a specific train that you might like to have available? This is my "training" here on TS and working with people to make scenes and clips. I would consider making a specific train engine or style after the caboose is complete.
It might possibly be a good thing for both of us as you would get the model that I made and you could critiq the model and make suggestions on how to make them easier to manipulate in other systems. |
Post by slang // Dec 18, 2007, 11:09pm
|
slang
Total Posts: 23
|
Try the Gimp. It has most of the functionallity of Photoshop and is free.
Another great suggestion for someone who doesnt know a lot about .....these sorta things. :)
My paint program began to fail a few days ago. I'd load up the photo needed for whatever mods and it would just hang....then crash my already shakey machine.
I loaded the Gimp and fiddled around with it for a few hours and am now good enough with it to do those basic tasks that the MS Paint program used to do.
No progress today on the caboose but there are other little things being modeled with TS today.
More to come.
Thanks for all the great suggestions. |
|
