Thanks for the feedback.

Quote from Evolution_R :

(latest attached screenshot seems fine, yet there is an error), points are close, but not that close.

Please can you cut out that tiny part of the model, including those round buttons, maybe save it as a tiny sre file and attach it here (no need for textures) just so I can see it and get an idea of the size involved.

Ideally the code would detect error triangles but not small triangles that are there for a reason.

Quote from Scawen :

Please can you cut out that tiny part of the model

Yes, I exported it.

Thanks, I agree those tiny triangles should be acceptable so I'm having a look at that.

Would "invert selection" be a useful function?

I was showing Leo an issue and at one point I wanted to delete all the triangles other than what I had selected. He asked "do you have invert selection?" and I said no.

I had to: hide selected, select all, delete, unhide all

Suppose it would be simpler and more intuitive to: invert selection, delete

Though I don't remember people asking for this, maybe it's not that useful? What do you think?

Quote from Scawen :

Would "invert selection" be a useful function?

I was showing Leo an issue and at one point I wanted to delete all the triangles other than what I had selected. He asked "do you have invert selection?" and I said no.

I had to: hide selected, select all, delete, unhide all

Suppose it would be simpler and more intuitive to: invert selection, delete

Though I don't remember people asking for this, maybe it's not that useful? What do you think?

Yes. Would be a time saver

I've been working on bad normals and the small triangles or thin triangles that cause them. To usefully inform the user if there is a thin triangle, but not detecting them unnecessarily. It's not exciting work and I want to get off it but it had to be done as the bad normals spam was problematic.

I've improved it to the point where a right angled triangle with short sides of 0.3 mm is acceptable (one third of a mm). Down to that size, normals will be contributed correctly. In my version there are now sensible warnings for "too small" and "too thin" triangles.

But this brings me to something I remember someone requested, to display more accuracy in the point positions. Currently they are in metres, with 3 decimal places. But internally there is more accuracy. I think one more decimal place would be sufficient for display but I think it would be confusing, 0.0005 would now mean 0.5mm (but kind of looks like 5mm) and 0.0020 would be 2mm (but sort of looks like 20mm).

Up until now you could read the number as metres and mm which is easy on the brain. I wonder if the best solution would be to display in mm, with 1 decimal place?

Then of course 2000.0 would be 2 metres, and 1.5 would be 1.5 mm.

Would this be better, more 'engineering' style to display things?

Quote from Scawen :

Would "invert selection" be a useful function?

Yes, for sure.

Quote from Scawen :

Then of course 2000.0 would be 2 metres, and 1.5 would be 1.5 mm. Would this be better, more 'engineering' style to display things?

I think yes, this is better.

I've heared about new modeller features. Cant wait to see them, especially i wanna say a HUUUUGE THANK YOU for the subobject names! Scawen, you the best!!!

Quote from Scawen :

Would "invert selection" be a useful function?

Great function i commonly use in Zmodeler.

D18 and D19 updates:


Changes in 0.7D18: (2 April 2023)

New function "invert" to invert selection (selected - unselected)
Point merge options now on one line and includes distance merge

Improved merge by distance to update every second if merge is long
- you can watch the progress and stop at any time by pressing ESC

Improved handling of bad normals and some of the reasons for them
- triangles that are too small or too thin are separately listed
- triangles as small as 1/3 of a millimetre can contribute normals


Changes in 0.7D19: (5 April 2023)

Hotkey for "hide/unhide (un)selected" changed from X to H (like blender)
- small H button at top left to hide/show message history (old H function)

Left click increments should now always be smaller than right click
- previously this was not consistent for all types of buttons
- as before, CTRL may do smaller steps, SHIFT may do larger steps
- this change should apply to distance, colour, angle and scale

Find button for error triangles or points now selects all as expected
- previously only selected the first point or triangle in the list

Quote from ivancsx :

For me, it's same crucial just like how we hide-unhide tris and points, so when we working on specific subobject, we can hide the other subobject that overlapping our view to recent subobject that we working on

Quote from Flame CZE :

Something like a "single subobject mode" which would only show triangles and points of the currently selected subobject would be nice.

Quote from Snoop.DriftEra :

Yeah. Would be great. I dream of a list with sububject names (as we have in maps or cutouts, for example) and have a button to the side of it that hides/unhides.

The single subobject mode is now available in Editor test Patch D20.

It works quite simply: if "show subobs" is set to NO it will still display the selected subobject. You can select a different subobject either by clicking in the new list of named subobjects or by switching "show subobs" to YES again, select the other object then "show subobs" NO.

https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/102626

Would it be possible to hide points in points mode that are not visible. Just like triangles arent all visible. Because its super hard to select separate points if you want to set ambient darkness on them. Its like working with x-ray enabled on blender.

Quote from Drifteris :

...

I have a two tricks:
1. Select the part you want to work and move the tris to a free layer.
When its ready take it back to original layer.

2. If you dont have free layers:
Select the part you want to work on by selecting the triangles using groups mode for example, clock on 'hide unselected'(tris) , select tris again with ctrl+right mouse drag or press A to select all, click on 'select selections points' and again click on 'hide unselected'(points) - and you have it.

Quote from ivo_drifta :

I have a two tricks:
1. Select the part you want to work and move the tris to a free layer.
When its ready take it back to original layer.

2. If you dont have free layers:
Select the part you want to work on by selecting the triangles using groups mode for example, clock on 'hide unselected'(tris) , select tris again with ctrl+right mouse drag or press A to select all, click on 'select selections points' and again click on 'hide unselected'(points) - and you have it.

I mean ye its an option but it would be easier if i didnt have to do all that extra work. I cant imagine modeling in permanent xray mode in blender. With complex models it would be really confusing.

Quote from Drifteris :

Would it be possible to hide points in points mode that are not visible. Just like triangles arent all visible. Because its super hard to select separate points if you want to set ambient darkness on them. Its like working with x-ray enabled on blender.

I also asked this during early testing and I got this answer from Scawen:

Quote from Scawen :

It's hard to make them auto-hide as the point buttons aren't rendered in 3D space so don't have the use of the z-buffer and even if they did, the interface wouldn't know if you were clicking on a button that was occluded or not.

But the usual thing is to manually hide the point buttons you don't want to see - select points and click "hide selected". Then "unhide all" when you want them again. There is a similar function for triangles.

Any plans to add a virtual mirror texture? It would be really useful in the prototype and Porsche mod

Eventually yes, but it's complicated so I don't want to do that in the public version and also the new development version. It will require camera positions and some restrictions (e.g. options for which mirror it replaces, options for multiple camera mirrors). Right now I'm focused on getting the tyre physics finished and won't take on extra difficult tasks.

I agree, graphics and physics this is what we are all waiting for now.

Would it be complicated to allow subobjects like steering wheel, mudguard, trailing arm to cast shadow in LOD2? Naked motorbikes look a bit weird with those off.

In the development version, shadows are now highly detailed because of a shadow map system. It would be a waste of my time to develop a new subobject shadow system for the current public version. In the meantime I suggest that LOD2 should have enough geometry representing the subobjects, as part of the main object. This way it can function as a reasonable LOD at distance and cast a better shadow.


By the way, this suggestion and the previous one about virtual mirrors have absolutely nothing to do with the modeller. Could everyone please try to use an appropriate thread?

From the first post:

This thread is for suggestions regarding the LFS object modeller only. That is, the editor you see if you click "Modeller" or you press E or "edit model" when you are in the vehicle editor. The modeller is about points, triangles, mappings and the tools you use to create, manipulate and texture the object.

Please DO NOT post suggestions for the VEHICLE EDITOR, or the mods system in general, in this thread.
If you have suggestions for the vehicle editor, please post them in Vehicle Editor Suggestions

There is also another thread for the mods system, such as how it appears in game and on the website.
If you have suggestions for the mods system OUTSIDE editors, please post them in Mods System Suggestions

didnt read everything back so it may already have been suggested and i missed it

polygon selection by angle threshold would help assigning those smoothing groups, wich is a painfull and long process when importing models built on other 3d modelers.

something like this :
click one poly, set angle threshold, click some "select by angle" button, and editor would select all adjacent polys with a normal angle difference below the threshold.

ex : if threshold is set to zero, all adjacent polys on the same plan (a flat surface) are selected.

Threshold should have at least one digit precision ex: 15.7

If you use latest LFSE, you can select all tris and make it one group, then select pretty easy others with Ctrl + Left mouse click and drag over the tris. It's not hard at all.

@ivo_drifta i dont understand the point of ur comment,
even if it has been improved with the click + drag, it still remains a uselessly painfull and time consuming process.

@turbofan I can share with you other trick I've learned in LFSE.
I see you have complex model, so you can try to select the tris and the part (for example bumper) l.r.swap Ctrl+Shift+Left click on mouse. Then with Shift+Right click and drag you can deselect unwanted and set the group. Plus Ctrl + Left mouse click and drag over the tris I think you will make it. You can try to use levels, and if you have mappings to select piece of the part. It will be easier for you to select the groups without selecting something else.
Remember that good things take time (Sometimes the greatest artists spends years to finish their work)

Quote from turbofan :

polygon selection by angle threshold would help assigning those smoothing groups, wich is a painfull and long process when importing models built on other 3d modelers.

If you import the model that was triangulated on export then LFSE will assign smoothing groups properly for it. LFS doesn't understand models made with quads or if model is set to flat shading. If the model was built properly in blender or in any other 3D software there should be no issues.

Blender has "Shade Auto Smooth" when you right click on model and then select the angle of threshold. Or set big angle like 180 and mark sharp edges manually.

lol ? did i ask for a 3d modelling course ? I hate unsollicited teachers.

how is it u feel obliged to explain me those useless "tricks", and assume I am working in blender with quads ? huh ???

I cant preserve groups when importing an obj that has been built and saved with them.

Poly selection by angle threshold is available for years on some 3d modelers, it is simple usefull and saves time, much more than those complicated "tricks".

To me, this suggestion thread is about making the lfse tool more efficient, so i'll never understand reactionnary (opposed to change) comments like those that want to explain you the tricks to circumvent the inefficiency of that tool. Just plain non sense.