Object pictures?

Gridley · Post by **Gridley** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 2:18 am

I'm sure its me, being new here and all. The dialog box that pops up when placing objects has a spot where a preview image of the object is supposed to be, but I get no images...is there an extra download somewhere?

Thanks!
sg

PS> Can all default objects be placed, or just those in objects.txt (maybe that is all of them)? I'd like to move the tower at KSPG, but I can't find the tower object.

Luis Sa · Post by **Luis Sa** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 4:37 am

Hello,

Please see:

http://www.ptsim.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=163

on the bottom there is a link to a set of pictures! If you are using a recent version (2.04) you can create your own categories.

The list in objects.txt is just a dump (not complete) of MS IDs! Note that some objects are localized (see the discussion on avsim). Now that SB supports categories, it is possible to clean the list objects.txt. I would not delete localized objects from the list. For example I could create a category "San Francisco Objects" and users in the area could use "sfo" objects.

I am working on Sbuilder at this moment. Here are some improvments already done but not yet uploaded (it will be 2.05):

- tessalation of VTP polygons is now much more robust
- support for FS2002 library objects
- many small adjustments and corrections

and still under development:

- points in polygons now have altitude
- support for API objects
- support for slopped polygons
- high resolution photo scenery

Regards, Luis

PS: can you place Rwy12 objects with SBuilder? I never had feedback about this functionality.

Gridley · Post by **Gridley** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 4:42 am

That sounds awesome, Luis - I hope 2.05 comes along soon. I'm currently using SBuilder to make VTP polygon islands, and that optimization sounds great.

Regarding RWY12...I just downloaded it so I'll give it a try after I install it tonight.

Thanks Luis! Really like SBuilder.

Best,
sg

Horst · Post by **Horst** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:48 am

Hello,
I did some tests with Rwy12 objects.
They show up in the preview, and they will get placed correct.
I think everything works fine here!

A small question to Luis:
Is it also possible to see the base size of the object? (I hope the correct word, I am not the object guy).
Moving and rotating is very easy, but I can not see the distance to the next object.

Kind regards
Horst

Luis Sa · Post by **Luis Sa** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:24 am

Hi Horst,

I am happy that Rwy12 work! [:)]

In my implementation of objects.txt I have 3 parameters:

- width
- lenght
- scale

Scale is useful on OldFS8 objects. And OldFS8 object has a parameter of 0 following the ID as in:

54690001267300F0022E0DB1C0F65F5C 0 1500 45 1.1 Ponte_Vasco_Gama

In this case the object is 1.1 times greater than if it is called with scale=1. Also for these OldFS8 objects you can use V1 and V2 parameters.

The Lenght and Width (1500 and 45 meters in the example) are useful if you know the exact footprint of the object.

For FS9 objects and Rwy12 objects the scale (and V1 and V2) are ignored. The Lenght and Width are useful for precise location. Because I am borrowing the RWy12 structure as I found it, I can not store (Update command) the Lenght and Width as I do on the Libray objects.

Finally note: SBuilders uses SCASM to place the Rwy12 objects.

Please get sbxxx with date of today for a version that works as I am explaining.

Horst - VTP polygons are divided with less errors! If you can test it, please give it a try!

Regards, Luis

Gridley · Post by **Gridley** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:02 am

>VTP polygons are divided with less errors!
>If you can test it, please give it a try!

I can test that, Luis - it's just what I'm doing right now!

So:

I've imported a LWM bgl, converted the polys to VTP2 polygons, selected all and compiled. Here's the result with the previous version 2.04

and here's the result with the new version (still 2.04, but dated 27-FEB-05):

The increase in accuracy is obvious! Great job, Luis!

Thanks,
sg

Luis Sa · Post by **Luis Sa** » Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:16 am

Hi Gridley,

[:)] thanks for confirming! LWM polygons also have errors in very rare cases! That is why I check the BGLs by appending them and inspecting the result visually!

At the moment I am very involved with the implementation of LWM3 polygons (slopped polygons). When I finish I will see if the bug that caused VTP dividing to fail, is the responsible for the few errors remaining in LWMs.

Thanks,

Luis

Horst · Post by **Horst** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 2:01 am

Hello,
Luis, thanks for the detail explanation.
Seeing Scotts images (thanks), I think you did it! Wow

Of course, I will try it (currently very busy)!

Kind regards
Horst

Horst · Post by **Horst** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:13 am

Hello,
Luis, I can confirm, as far as I tested.
You found the correct algorithm. Great!!
I tested with landclass texture and up to 600 kb bgl files.
I could not find anything!?
All the polygons show visually in TmViewer and LWMviewer correct, and also in the SIM!
(except the gaps from the MS scenery engine along the grid lines!)

I did not tested polygons inside polygons. (As you can see on Scotts second image).

Kind regards
Horst

Gridley · Post by **Gridley** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 6:09 am

Those are LWM land masks inside VTP2 polygons - worked great!

Horst · Post by **Horst** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:49 am

Hello,

Scott, do you see the LWM polys in the SIM?

I think, they will be covered from the VTP Polys – a layer conflict.
Sorry, when I am wrong.
(you can merge inside polys in mapedit)

A hint:
When using landclass for the VTP Polys:
http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az= ... &mode=full
For the landclass texture gaps: Draw a very big VTP poly (a whole country) and assign 122. You will see it (this is an MS problem).

Regards
Horst

Gridley · Post by **Gridley** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:03 am

Horst, in the end I never copied the LWM bgl to FS as I was still just trying to get those islands positioned properly. Now that its done, I'm going to go back and check, so you might be entirely right...I'll take a look and report back!

Best,
sg

Horst · Post by **Horst** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:45 am

Hello Scott,
I think the correct textures will not be applied!
That’s how MS masking the world.
It is better to merge the polygons.

Horst

Gridley · Post by **Gridley** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:51 am

Well, the intention is for the landclass to show though the "holes" in the VTP2 polygons created by the LWMs...is that what you mean?

Horst · Post by **Horst** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:10 am

Hello,
Yes, you will see only the mask (LWM), when you use a low VTP layer (i.e :1).
When you use a higher layer (more than 3), the VTP will cover the area.
Please correct me, when I am wrong!

Horst