Fomenting Mutiny

[Legacy_Proleric]

               

Zarathustra217 wrote...

...What I want you to notice here is how the objects in the "after" image appears more in continuance (lightning-wise) with the default Bioware models...

That looks like a huge improvement, especially when viewed on decent kit.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MerricksDad]

               yes, this is a critical difference! good find!
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_OldTimeRadio]

               Zarathustra217, I don't find your explanation pursuasive.  Some of your assertions are flat-out incorrect.

If you've taken the time to explore what the Ambient and Diffuse settings are, you'll know they exist to tweak or tint an existing texture, either to produce a specific effect in certain lighting conditions or, in the case of tinting, modify the overall color of the texture without having to create an entirely new texture.

Bioware even brought up the method in the 3DS Max Export script documentation, indicated they'd used it themselves, and recommended it to the community:

The second is the diffuse colour. We can use this colour to tint the lighting of an object, which is useful in many cases. It should be noted that if you use this tinting as an actual colour changer (which we did), dynamic lights can still bring it up to its full value.

References to this method (or variations on it) can also be found in the Omnibus.  In light of this, when you make statements that Bioware's use of non-1 1 1 Ambient and/or Diffuse were probably "oversights", your assertion loses credibility.  When you apply that same dubious assumption to hundreds and potentially thousands of models in CEP, made by almost as many different community members, it doesn't gain any more credibility. 

There's also the unstated implication that any new models going into CEP will also have this process run on them.  That's troubling.

Now, I want to address something else you said, specifically:

Zarathustra217 wrote...
...because when you texture an object, you will almost always make the texture as you want it to appear when fully lit. Among other things, this gives you the largest range of light available to be determined by your texture, thus allowing the texture to add more depth - but it also simply give you the most control of the final appearance.

That's completely incorrect.  My tests indicated that forcing the Ambient and Diffuse to 1 1 1 did the exact opposite of what you state.  I posted about it in some detail so the community would be aware of the issue.  Applying an Ambient and Diffuse of 1 1 1 on a trimesh yeilds the absolute least range of light possible for those settings on a texture.

Carrying this process out indescriminately en masse is a terrible idea.  Ambient and Diffuse are not dials on a mixing board whose sole purpose is to always be turned up to 10.  Think about it.  Does that even make sense? 

According to your own estimates, this is a change that you'd like to indiscriminately apply to around 7,000 models.  There's no technical benefit to be gained.  This is purely an aesthetic presumption on your part.  It is not a "fix".  I'm sure it has some application in individual scenarios but that's not what we're talking about here.

After looking over just this aspect of your mass manipulation, I'm worried your other "fixes" might also be as arbitrary.  Looking at your comments in this thread earlier and here (Message I'm talking about starts with "I did a complete" and includes your self-replies), I get the impression that your skills and trepidation are lacking in a situation where finished work will be passed out to the lion's share of the NWN community.

Worse, none of this work has to take place at all.  You're declaring it does.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_3RavensMore]

               Well, after reading the last few pages regarding ambient and diffuse values in the models, and the mass "fixes" being made, I'm growing more and more cautious about ever updated my CEP.  As a builder, I've worked very hard to light my placeable heavy areas.  How would these changes effect the tons of work already done?
               
               

               

                     Modifié par 3RavensMore, 19 février 2014 - 12:14 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_OldTimeRadio]

               

3RavensMore wrote...
Well, after reading the last few pages regarding ambient and diffuse values in the models, and the mass "fixes" being made, I'm growing more and more cautious about ever updated my CEP.  As a builder, I've worked very hard to light my placeable heavy areas.  How would these changes effect the tons of work already done?

I don't think they've actually been included in whatever is to become of the next CEP update.  Just proposals at this point.  AFAIK.

As far as how much the changes would affect existing work, it all depends on the Ambient and Diffuse settings in the existing area lighting and how much of Ambient, Diffuse or both was used to modify the texture, originally. 
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Zarathustra217]

               Oh my, oh my! All bow down to the all-knowing old sage and let his wisdom shine upon us!

He has been taken many screenshots, and certainly, something is terrible, terrrible wrong. The ignorants must be redeemed!

But what is that? A strange burlap texture? How can we objectively assess the amount of detail?

Let us set up a test. We shall use the following texture, containing shades from the darkest black to the lightest light!



We will need two models as well, one with ambient and diffuse set to 1 1 1, and one set to 0.5 0.5 0.5

Left is 1 1 1, and right is 0.5 0.5 0.5

First, we shall test the hypothesis that 1 1 1 may actually cause loss of detail if diffuse lighting is very bright. We set up an area with rgb(255,255,255) diffuse and ambient, that should be enough!

This is how it looks:



Huh? They look perfectly the same? So there was no loss then?

But wait, that was both diffuse and ambient at 255 (totalling 510), and we all know there's only 256 shades of gray in 24-bit textures. Could it then be more appropriate to use something else - as in rgb(128,128,128)?

That yielded the following result:



Does it not appear that the texture to the left - the one using the "1 1 1" setting has the widest range of shades? Indeed, as we look at the histograms, this is how they compare:



But what does all that mean? To some extend, the use of the "1 1 1" setting is a design choice - and as the above indicates, it does not seem to entail any loss of detail.However, Bioware could alternatively have chosen to make all the lighting settings of areas brighter (twice as bright had they gone for 0.5 0.5 0.5), but the point is that they didn't. What this all comes down to is consistency - and for the most, Bioware went for (1 1 1) and all area lighting and everything else is tailored to that.a

And a second point. Will you drop the arrogancy? Too many good people have left the NWN community over the years over exactly that. I know what I'm doing - I've been modelling for NWN since release, long before there was anything called NWMax or whatever, so I'm well familiar with the technical workings of the model format versus the rendering engine. If you want to contribute to the constructive discussion, do so nicely and without boasting yourself, and perhaps we can all learn some.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Tarot Redhand]

               Seems like the title of this thread is more apt than AD expected. I may be getting towards the age when senility can set in but it seems to me that the current argument ultimately boils down to taste. There is one thing that does bother me about bulk setting of ambient and diffuse though. Have you considered that the original author may have deliberately given their models the values for these for a reason unbeknownst to either you or me?

TR
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_FunkySwerve]

               

Zarathustra217 wrote...

Oh my, oh my! All bow down to the all-knowing old sage and let his wisdom shine upon us!
*snip*

And a second point. Will you drop the arrogancy? Too many good people have left the NWN community over the years over exactly that. I know what I'm doing - I've been modelling for NWN since release, long before there was anything called NWMax or whatever, so I'm well familiar with the technical workings of the model format versus the rendering engine. If you want to contribute to the constructive discussion, do so nicely and without boasting yourself, and perhaps we can all learn some.

A few remarks:

1) I agree that some of your models look improved in the screenshots in the previous page
2) Your demonstration in your most recent post is moderately convincing - moderately, only because I don't know enough to pass a more complete judgment
3) When you respond to several telling critiques by OTR with name-calling, accusations of arrogance, and other assorted ad hominem nonsense, you throw whatever credibility you have out the window. While I agree at least tentatively with your point of view, he's not the one that comes off as arrogant.

If you have a legitimate point of view to convey, there is no reason to resort to this sort of thing, and many reasons not to. Food for thought.

Funky
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Michael DarkAngel]

               Taken from the BioWare Neverwinter Exporter Documentation

Materials Editor
Simply put, there are only two things that should be read from this area. The first
is the actual texture name and location.
The second is the diffuse colour. We can use this colour to tint the lighting of an
object, which is useful in many cases. It should be noted that if you use this
tinting as an actual colour changer (which we did), dynamic lights can still bring
it up to its full value… e.g., if you want to have a dark wood using a lighter wood
texture, this is fine, except that if a player walks by with a torch, he will make it
look like a light wood colour again. For the most part, this is not noticeable
though.

BioWare does in fact use this to darken the cliff terrain of the raised tiles in the Rural tileset (that is only one example, I'm sure there are others).

My opinion, FWIW

If you were to look at each model and see the following (or something relatively close based on rounding)

ambient 0.5859375 0.5859375 0.5859375
diffuse 0.5859375 0.5859375 0.5859375

then I would say you might have an argument for artist oversight.

The above would be the default settings that both gMax and 3DSMax use when creating a new material.  Anything other than that should be considered artist choice.  Even then, in some cases, those defaults may be left that way by artist's choice.

My measley two cents


 MDA
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Zarathustra217]

               

FunkySwerve wrote...

3)
When you respond to several telling critiques by OTR with name-calling,
accusations of arrogance, and other assorted ad hominem nonsense, you
throw whatever credibility you have out the window. While I agree at
least tentatively with your point of view, he's not the one that comes
off as arrogant.

If you have a legitimate point of view to
convey, there is no reason to resort to this sort of thing, and many
reasons not to. Food for thought.

Funky

Well, I apologise if it was too blunt - it was simply a (somewhat immature) attempt at illustrating a point. I'm very open to discussing all these things (and I certainly have no ambition on including it without the consent of people), but it becomes tiring when someone returns to this topic time and time again only to point out how ignorant and misguided the things I'm working on is.

Michael DarkAngel wrote...

Taken from the BioWare Neverwinter Exporter Documentation

Materials Editor
Simply put, there are only two things that should be read from this area. The first
is the actual texture name and location.
The second is the diffuse colour. We can use this colour to tint the lighting of an
object, which is useful in many cases. It should be noted that if you use this
tinting as an actual colour changer (which we did), dynamic lights can still bring
it up to its full value… e.g., if you want to have a dark wood using a lighter wood
texture, this is fine, except that if a player walks by with a torch, he will make it
look like a light wood colour again. For the most part, this is not noticeable
though.

BioWare
does in fact use this to darken the cliff terrain of the raised tiles
in the Rural tileset (that is only one example, I'm sure there are
others).

I admit that Bioware uses it in more situations that can just be deemed oversights. It is a somewhat viable option when you want to retexture something using an existing texture, though it's only benefit is that you can then reduce the video-memory footprint. It could mean a lot back when NWN was released, but we don't have to worry about that at all today. If you want to recolour or darken something, it's far better to make a copy of the texture and apply more flexible and sophisticated ways of re-tinting (in Photoshop and similar) than just the flat overlay that the ambient/diffuse options give. And if it's not a matter of reusing a texture, then there's no reason to customizing these settings at all.

Michael DarkAngel wrote...
My opinion, FWIW

If you were to look at each model and see the following (or something relatively close based on rounding)

ambient 0.5859375 0.5859375 0.5859375
diffuse 0.5859375 0.5859375 0.5859375

then I would say you might have an argument for artist oversight.

The above would be the default settings that both gMax and 3DSMax use when creating a new material.  Anything other than that should be considered artist choice.  Even then, in some cases, those defaults may be left that way by artist's choice.

My measley two cents

"Oversight" may have also been a poor choice of word from my part earlier, as I think most of it is probably the result of unawareness of what the full implications are, i.e. what the settings really do and mean. I imagine a lot of people who have modelled have tried to increase the default settings a bit because it seems really dark, but didn't know what settings were then the ideal. I also imagine though that it's not a coincidence that the exporter plugin now change those settings for you by default, but as far as I'm aware, that's a more recent addition (relatively recent, anyway), meaning many models exist from before that. That OldMansBeard made it an option in CM3 to set the ambient/diffuse settings of all models to 1 isn't just a coincidence either. It's a very common issue.

Tarot Redhand wrote...

Seems like the title of this thread
is more apt than AD expected. I may be getting towards the age when
senility can set in but it seems to me that the current argument
ultimately boils down to taste. There is one thing that does bother me
about bulk setting of ambient and diffuse though. Have you considered
that the original author may have deliberately given their models the
values for these for a reason unbeknownst to either you or me?

TR

I have considered it, yes, and at times changing those settings may even cause improper results, which will then have to be identified - but it's my impression that this is exceptionally rare.

And beyond that, it does indeed - at least to some extend - come down to taste. That's why I've posted those earlier screenshots and why I'm hoping that a lot of people will check it out and give their feedback (3RavensMore, I hope you will do that as well and see how it affects your sitauation). If the quality is acceptable and the errors identified and fixed, we can assess if a majority actually considerers it an improvement, or if a majority would rather be without.

That's the beauty of giving the CEP back to the community.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Zarathustra217, 19 février 2014 - 05:30 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

3RavensMore wrote...

Well, after reading the last few pages regarding ambient and diffuse values in the models, and the mass "fixes" being made, I'm growing more and more cautious about ever updated my CEP.  As a builder, I've worked very hard to light my placeable heavy areas.  How would these changes effect the tons of work already done?

I think you are the best candidate to try the Zaharustra's model corrections. If it doesnt turn out badly for your placeable-heavy areas, where would be?

Im dont understand modelling at all but from the examples that Zaharatrusta showed it seems to me as a great improvement whether or not its a bug shouldnt matter when the outcome is better.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Pstemarie]

               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

3RavensMore wrote...

Well, after reading the last few pages regarding ambient and diffuse values in the models, and the mass "fixes" being made, I'm growing more and more cautious about ever updated my CEP.  As a builder, I've worked very hard to light my placeable heavy areas.  How would these changes effect the tons of work already done?

I think you are the best candidate to try the Zaharustra's model corrections. If it doesnt turn out badly for your placeable-heavy areas, where would be?

Im dont understand modelling at all but from the examples that Zaharatrusta showed it seems to me as a great improvement whether or not its a bug shouldnt matter when the outcome is better.

I'm kind of partial to the screenshots Zath posted, but I also understand where OTR is coming from. Personally, I prefer to use ambient/diffuse settings of 1/1 for the texture palette I use. However, I have also created several models where, despite the best efforts to tint the texture, I needed to use the diffuse setting to make it just right. What it boils down to is that you're going to have to look at why certain models might have alternate settings and then assess the impact of changing those settings. This being said, I'm pretty confident that what Zath has done will improve a good portion of the models in the CEP.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Pstemarie, 19 février 2014 - 03:02 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Zarathustra217]

               Yeah, the crucial thing to assess here is simply if the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks  (and not whether my "skills and tripidation are lacking" that is just diverting us from the real issue). I have tried to locate all the models where using custom lighting settings gave a better effect (the NWN2 sofa on the screenshot is actually one such), but it's hard to imagine that I won't miss other (especially on the first release). There aren't many, but there are some. That's why I'm asking for help with testing and for people to give feedback.

And I had admittedly not anticipated this would be so controversial either, so based on that, it may be better to categorize it as an "overhaul" rather than a flat out "fix". It complicates things a bit though, because running it through CM3 and the compiler entails a lot of other fixes (as well as the other manual stuff I do as I work through it). I'm not sure whether I'm prepared to do that over again, but given the controversy I wouldn't be comfortable adding it to the CEP unless there's a popular decision in favour of it either.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Zarathustra217, 19 février 2014 - 03:17 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_3RavensMore]

               ShaDoOoW, I think I'm going to pass on being a beta tester for this. With my limited time at the moment, I'm trying to learn a few new skills while putting any new building and story writing on hold.  Sifting through thousands of placeables isn't really something I'm keen on doing right now.  

As for the use of what Zath is doing, I completely agree with Pstemarie on all points (especially the last line.)
               
               

               

                     Modifié par 3RavensMore, 19 février 2014 - 03:29 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Zarathustra217]

               I completely understand if you do not feel you have the time. That said, what I'm suggesting people to do is simply to install the updated haks and then keep doing what you usually do, but report if you encounter any issues, strange behaviour or loss of visual quality.