Itoo Software Forum
Forest Pack => Forest Pro (*) => Topic started by: BB1610 on May 08, 2009, 02:32:15 AM
-
Hellou there,
I have some suggestions on some new features, simple yet powerfull :
1. Probabilty randomizer - it will randomly assign % to every tree model while the sum of all % will be 100, so if you have lets say 5 trees, then randomizer will assign % for example like this : 10%, 7%, 30%, 50%, 3% ...
2. Add rotation for X,Y axis in `Transform` rollout
-
Hello,
Thanks for the input. We'll consider it for next releases.
-
Hellou there, got another request :
Generating forest objects on spline via parametrized `spacing objects on spline` - like in standard 3ds max `spacing tool`, particullary to achieve the `follow` feature of standard 3ds max spacing tool & define exact spacing between generated objects.
Or, at least to be able to generate objects exactly at every vertex of spline.
-
Both features are already included in Forest Pro. Please see Tree Edition->Creation Tools:
http://www.itoosoft.com/english/menu.php?id=forest_refedition
You must set object to Custom Edit mode to enable Creation Tools.
-
Hellou,
thanks for that, it works, but how can i setup the `follow` feature , as in 3ds spacing tool ?
-
Sorry, actually there is not a "follow" option. We'll add it for next release.
-
So the new release will be Forest Pro v4 , or subversion like v3.x.x ?
-
The next version will be 3.2.4, that will include some minor fixes and the "follow" option (it's easy to implement). It must be ready in the next days.
Other features as random rotation in all axis, and more goodies that we like to include, will be in Forest 3.3. This version will take some time, and will be available for testing as beta versions for Forest Pro users.
We have not planes to release Forest 4 by now.
-
Hi, any news with the 3.2.4 update ?
-
Sorry by the delay. Forest 3.2.4 was already to be released, but we have delayed it some days, because we are working in a fix for a licensing issue that have been reported recently.
-
Hi Carlos,
first - many thanks for the nice 3.2.4, the `follow` feature is really neat :)
I just wonder, if it is possible for you to add a few more ultimate features for spacing :
1. start / end offset for spacing at spline
2. specify exact amount of placed objects
3. In custom edit - to have an option to detach not into another ForestPro objects, but also into instances of placed objects
For example :
When you made a forest via custom edit on custom spline, and when you detach selected placed objects, it will detach into a new ForestPro object, instead of it, it will detach into instances of placed objects, so you will have in 3ds max many instanced objects placed via ForestPro
4. Use non-geometry for placing, like 3ds max lights.
-
I just wonder, if it is possible for you to add a few more ultimate features for spacing :
1. start / end offset for spacing at spline
2. specify exact amount of placed objects
Agreed. We like to improve Creation Tools in Forest 3.3, and these options are easy to add.
3. In custom edit - to have an option to detach not into another ForestPro objects, but also into instances of placed objects
This feature is already included in Forest Tools:
http://www.itoosoft.com/english/menu.php?id=forest_tools
4. Use non-geometry for placing, like 3ds max lights.
Sorry, but is not possible. A Geometric object (as Forest) only can create geometry. Why don't use Max Spacing Tool for that ?
-
Thanks Carlos for reply, so, when do you plan release 3.3 ? :)
-
We are now evaluating the changes that we like to include, it is too soon to estimate a release date.
-
first post first wish here ;)
Is it possible to support the AEC Foliage objects in a "smart" way to change the randomID per tree and/or optimize the generated trees on the fly as mr proxy or vray proxy?
-
Is it possible to support the AEC Foliage objects in a "smart" way to change the randomID per tree and/or optimize the generated trees on the fly as mr proxy or vray proxy?
We will look at it, but is not easy because the optimizations that we use to handle the high-poly meshes.
However, for the renderer, generating 1000 different trees at render time would be the same (in resources and memory required) that having 1000 different proxies, since the trees must be created in the scene before rendering.
-
I can use ~10-15 unique foliage trees without serious problems, but then it becomes a problem - i think this limit wouldn't change if FP shuffles the randomID, but it would be a timesaver and is still better then use the FP transform params.
on the other side ..if shuffling the IDs isn't possible then there could be another timesaver:
FP can handle at the moment on my machine(quad, 4gb ram but on 32 bit system with max2008) ~40-50 trees based on one complex Foliagetree (can be onyx or xfrog too) without crashing ..which is fine, but if the custom object is converted to a vray/mr proxy the whole picture changes and there is much more possible...
It would be a timesaver if FP could convert such trees before it renders, because then the custom tree would still be editable, which a proxy isn't.
..just some thoughts... :)
-
Unfortunately is not possible to convert meshes to proxies from a plugin, because some technical limitations. As most, we would to create random mesh trees, but as you point out, this is much less efficient. :-\
-
Hi, it`s me again,
currently we have density controlling via bitmap, what about mask/map controled placing of trees ? And the density fallof will be also controlled with shades of grey from the mask/map.
-
These options are already in the wishlist. We like to add map support for next releases, besides other improvements in the distribution algorithms.
-
Another one:
Color tinting via texture ( for ex. : visually fine color blending via orthophoto texture on terrain )
-
Carlos,
I know that is inappropriate to bring competition software links here, but could we get some fancy stuff like http://www.gugila.com/man/_gwp_plantingtools%20top%20clustering.html (http://www.gugila.com/man/_gwp_plantingtools%20top%20clustering.html) ?
-
Don't worry, we also are know about the competition products. Actually we are working to include some of these features (and others completely new), but i cannot give more details by now. ;)
-
That`s good to hear. Btw, can you tell us when the next release, whatever it would be, will be ?
-
We have not a release date, since we must to make a lot of changes. We will release some beta versions, adding new features in each one. In fact, we just uploaded the first one:
http://www.itoosoft.com/forum/index.php?topic=302.0
-
I`m liking this company much more every day, the customer support is top-notch.
-
I agree! I have only been a customer for a couple of days but from what I hear & see it's all more than great! Thanks very much for this wonderful product and for caring about + listening to your customers! :)
-
Another one :
Add multiple meshes for surface.
-
Would be possible to combine bitmap & spline area distribution together ?
-
Actually area spline and bitmap can be used together. What do you need exactly ?
-
Ah,
sorry to no explain it correctly. I want to add some more forest objects in the areas where FP didn`t create because the bitmap isn`t precise , so I created some closed shapes to add the additional objects, but I cant use them, because the include area of FP is already occupied with shape that cover the whole terrain area. So i propose to make an additional option to define more `include splines / areas`.
-R
-
That could be like having multiple splines, each with its own map. Unfortunately, this is very difficult to implement and would involve drastic changes in the interface. I see two solutions for this:
- Use Custom Edit mode to add more trees in the desired areas
- Create additional Forest objects. When finished, you can also attach them to the main object using Custom Edit.
-
Thanks for reply,
what about this sitation : add the button to pick `correction spline` when using distribution map in custom map mode, and this spline only add objects based on the distribution map from the predefinied maps ( full, dense, scattered.... ) ?
-
We'll take a look to it, although i'm not sure if is possible to use both maps in the distribution process.
Thanks for your suggestions. ;)
-
Thanks very much !
-R
-
Hi,
if object which will be added to the forest has multisub material assigned ( lets mark it as "multisub A" ), then FP assign its own multisub material ( "multisub B" ) to the forest, and this "multisub B" will have as much materials as is the highest ID number in "multisub A" , so if you have in reality in "multisub A" just 2 materials which one if have id=999 , then "multisub B" will consist of 999 materials. Coudl that be corrected ? This may look as silly request, but in complex scenes with complex multisubs, it`s hard to navigate in multisubs created by FP.
-
When you create a multisub which has a single material with an ID of 999, Max creates internally a multisub with 999 materials: 1 material + 998 unused (you can verify it using Maxscript). To hide the unused materials, it uses the property "materialIDList" that contains the list of materials in use.
But, i'm not sure why, this property is not accesible from the plugins using the SDK (although it is from Maxscript). Because this, we cannot hide from Forest all those unused materials.
I just wrote a email to Autodesk asking about this issue. If they give us a solution, we will fix it for the next patch.
-
Wonderfull :)
I have a next question, it is not related directly to the purpouse of FP, but only about its part. When we have a lot of unique hipoly object which haven`t been placed by FP, we tend to hide the ones which aren`t in the frameview. We do it quite often, and I though if FP could have a minor `offspring` which basically do this : select object from objectlist, or from selection, and then use the FP function "camera - area - limit to visibility" to that objects. It would save a ton of time.
Thanks,
Radomir
-
Forest hides automatically from render the custom objects (if "Display->Hide Custom Objects..." parameter is enabled). You would to create a dummy Forest object (as instance, using a very small area spline) and assign all meshes to it, that would to work.
-
Forest hides automatically from render the custom objects (if "Display->Hide Custom Objects..." parameter is enabled). You would to create a dummy Forest object (as instance, using a very small area spline) and assign all meshes to it, that would to work.
Hi,
we misunderstood each other, I meant, that this `program` - based on FP, will load a geometry from scene ( for example houses which are placed on exact positions , not by FP ) and it will use the "camera - area - limit to visibility" function on them. So if you have for example - thousands of houses placed in scene NOT by FP, but manually - then this `program` will hide unnecessary houses - based on FOV of the camera ( as is "camera - area - limit to visibility" )
-R
-
Ah, ok. I though that you want to hide from render the objects used as custom meshes, although they not be assigned to any Forest object.
About your suggestion, it could to be a new plugin. I will think on it ... ;)
-
About your suggestion, it could to be a new plugin. I will think on it ... ;)
Aww, that`s wonderful new, hope , really hope that you`ll not just think of it, but, actually make it happen :)
-
Well, the big problem about writing new plugins are not the technical issues, but how to get time for all planned projects... :(
-
how to get time for all planned projects... :(
Tell me something about it , in fact, if I could, I`ll buy spare time from others who doesn`t need it. :D
-
Hi, another feature that would be great :
Density/Size fallof working also on bitmaps,not just on splines.
-
Also if distribution map could work with your ColorEdge plugin...
-R
-
Density/Size fallof working also on bitmaps,not just on splines.
But what value would to be used to evaluate the density/size ? (for splines we use the distance to the spline's edge)
Also if distribution map could work with your ColorEdge plugin...
I think that is not possible, because the way that ColorEdge works (it's hard to explain... max programming stuff)
-
But what value would to be used to evaluate the density/size ? (for splines we use the distance to the spline's edge)
It would be the pixel range - RGB 255/255/255 = 100% of density , 128/128/128 = 50% an so on ... . For example imagine white rectangle with feathered edges.
I think that is not possible, because the way that ColorEdge works (it's hard to explain... max programming stuff)
I expected that, but I hoped it would be somehow possible. After `studying` the results of ColorEdge - I saw, that the results are strictly based on the triangulation of the mesh, which is somehow different of GradientEdge ( maybe you know that plugin - it has the same purpouse ) which generates more correct results not so strictly based on the triangulation, but nonetheless, the GradientEdge is somehow compatible with another generator - VrayScatter ( less powerfull than FP imho ) - so that`s why I hoped that ColorEdge - since it`s yours creation, would work :)
-
It would be the pixel range - RGB 255/255/255 = 100% of density , 128/128/128 = 50% an so on ... . For example imagine white rectangle with feathered edges.
I see it used as scale map, but for density... what is the difference of using a gray-level distribution map ? You can adjust the density modifying the Threshold parameter.
About ColorEdge, it needs some improvements and we had planned to rewrite it from some time ago, but we must first finish the current projects. If we release a new version, we will try to make it compatible with Forest.
-
Another one:
To incorporate Z-offset from `geometry` rollout to `transform` , to specify ranges for it too.
-
And here I go again :
f you have - for example 2 trees - `tree A` is 3x bigger than `tree B`, if you want to make them equal dense you have to raise the density - this leads to that the B trees will be scattered less than A or vice versa, the solution will be to raise the density until the smaller of trees will be at desired density, but then the density of A trees would be too much - the solution is the collision detection, but collsion detection is very slow when using on large landscapes, so is there another way to make equal density of trees with variable sizes ?
EDIT:
I propose another distribution mode, based on bounding box of geometry.
So it will work like this : for B tree use distribution map with these params : pixels=100 / units=1000m, and for the A tree would be set pixels=33 ( because the A tree bounding box is 3x bigger than B tree ) and units=1000m
-
Well, without using collision detection you would to decrease the probablity of 'tree A' from 50% to a lower value, until to get the desired density. Alternatively, you can create two Forest objects sharing the same spline and adjust the density of each one.
-
Well, without using collision detection you would to decrease the probablity of 'tree A' from 50% to a lower value, until to get the desired density.
But that will change the whole distribution ( placement at area ). Less probability=less area too.
Alternatively, you can create two Forest objects sharing the same spline and adjust the density of each one.
Well, thats doable, but very unpractical, if you have a few trees, okay, but with many (20+) it would be pain to make this way. :-\
---
So then, do you think that the automatic density based on meshes bounding boxes would be possible ?
-
So then, do you think that the automatic density based on meshes bounding boxes would be possible ?
It would be very difficult to implement in the current version. We like to add new scattering modes in the future, but this will take some time.
-
Thanks :)