Forest Pack > Forest Pro (*)

Mis-Alignment of FP Trees to Surface Object

(1/2) > >>

Mike Truly:

I am getting some mis-alignment of FP trees to a surface terrain object.  It was aligned properly earlier but now it's not.  The terrain object is linked to a helper and the helper has been rotated and I'm thinking this is the cause.

Are there any particular rules about using a surface object?  Can it not be parented or translated?

Should it be un-linked and be at the root level?  Reset transform?


Mike Truly:
I should note I have tried the 'Update' button as well as 'Clear' and picked again.

I just tried unlinking to put the terrain at the root... but still no luck.

Mike Truly:
Here's a picture of the problem.

The terrain object was rotated about 2 degrees from it's original position.  The FP trees seem to be using the original position of the terrain to make the trees.


Mike Truly:
OK,  I ended up having to make new FP objects to get the alignment to work properly.  I saved the settings from the previous FP objects and used these in the new.

Creating the new objects, they did not have whatever transforms were influencing the old to make them mis-aligned.   

I think this is because the terrain object, the old FP trees, the FP trees splines, were all linked to a helper object.  The helper object has been rotated in order to adjust the whole scene.  This was adjusted several times.  This transform was somehow making the FP trees mis-aligned.

I tried unlinking the terrain, the trees, etc. but it never fixed it.

Is there some way to 'Reset Transform' of the FP trees like you can with objects?



The problem is that Forest must not be moved for its original position after creating it. This is a limitation or the algorithm used for the 'Limit to visibility' feature.

In the next major Forest release, we like to modify this, making of Forest a free object so it would be placed in any position (building Forests in any plane, not only X/Y). Unfortunately, that will need a lot of modifications of the code, so we cannot implement it in a revision patch.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version