Future of Blender export scripts for developers

[tkyler]

I would put this in the developer section, but it applies to both scenery and aircraft developers alike.  This is just my personal report and opinion of where I think the scripts will go in the future.  Ben Supnik and I have been working on them recently and we've talked about the future.  This is in no way a "Laminar Statement", there are too many  unknowns, but I think folks would be interested just the same...it's just my opinion and observation as a "3rd party developer" and not a laminar developer.

 

First a bit of history of Blender scripts for scenery and aircraft dev.

 

1.)  Jonathan Harris makes "blender2xplane" and maintains it for all sorts of 3D development, BUT stops short when manipulators are introduced in 2008.

2.)  X-Aviation develops it's own private strain of scripts for blender 2.49b that support manipulators.  Implementation of manip support is quick and dirty and gets the job done but not intuitive.

3.)  Sam256 develops his own strain of scripts for blender 2.49b, instigated by Dan Klaue with it's own manipulator support and interface....no longer supported.

4.)  Ben Supnik rewrites the blender2xplane 2.49 exporter to be about 5x faster.  This rewrite goes into the XAviation strain of scripts.  (Don't know if it is in Sam256 strain)

5.)  Sam256 develops scripts for new breed of Blender, 2.5+.  Currently work in progress, not sure of it's level of implementation of manips.  Known inefficiencies in the exporter exist.

6.)  Ben Supnik further modifies the blender2xplane scripts for internal laminar use.  Supports V10 technology for scenery development of AGPs and multi-object exporter as well as other new features.

7.)  Ben Supnik modifies the XAviation strain of blender2xplane to support aircraft and scenery development with a single export command if desired, for internal Laminar usage currently.

8.)  Ben Supnik modifies the XAviation strain of scripts to incorporte Sam256 2.49 work and create an agnostic "super strain" of 2.49 script that supports multiple workflows (but not both simultaneously...pick one or the other).  Not yet released as of 3.16.13

 

Because I work for Laminar, Ben Supnik makes sure that the scripts I use are up to date and current with the latest tech, optimization and efficiency tools, not to support X-Aviation....its in Laminar's interest to see that I stay productive.  The downside?  It's for Blender 2.49b only and the manip implementation is still cryptic and limited.  There is not enough incentive to port it to Blender 2.6+ / python 3 as the workload it too great for the possibilities of the future.

 

What are the possibilities?   A new object format!  This means scrapping the existing line of scripts.  We're probably years away so the question to ask is, will Blender 2.49 be a viable animation / export platform for a few years till a new format?  We feel yes, so we put time into developing the 2.49 scripts.   We leave the development of Blender 2.6+ scripts to Sam256 and I believe that Ben Supnik will work with him to keep that one up to date, efficient and current when he has time until a new object format ensues way off in the unknown future.

 

For now, the community has easy access to Sam256 scripts for both Blender 2.49 and Blender 2.6+ and of course the original blender2xplane scripts are available I think without manip support.  These scripts are not as optimum or feature rich as the Laminar internal ones.   We want to get the Laminar ones into folks hands but the current barrier is training and documentation time.  These scripts are sufficiently different in their implementation to require training / documentation to accompany them and we have not time for that yet.   time is money when we have families and we must endeavor on doing what pays our bills at the moment.  I am entertaining ideas to fund my time to teach the community how to use the scripts but that probably won't happen till after the release of the 737.

 

When a new OBJ format inevitably comes out, I expect Laminar will take it's years of experience with add-on devs and come up with solutions that allow the creation of reliable exporters for multiple 3D applications.  That doesn't mean that laminar will write such exporters for these apps, only that it will facilitate some "common intermediary technology" making it much easier to write exporters....and work with those who would write them.  Such new object format would allow mesh manipulation, which video cards support and almost all new 3D apps.  Can you say human animations, cloth simulation....we're talking "per vertex" animation.  X-Plane is way behind mainstream 3D game titles in this regard.  Thank goodness we have Ben Supnik who wants to keep up.  Don't look for this for some years yet though.

 

For now though, I think we have several good years of "OBJ 8" left.    Those that feel they want to embrace the Laminar scripts when we get around to making them available should stay comfortable with Blender 2.49 for animating and export.  I'll do tutorials on these in the future.  Those that don't want anything to do with 2.49, I'd say get comfy with Sam256 Blender 2.6+ scripts.    It IS possible to develop in other 3D apps, export out through the wavefront / lightwave  into blender 2.49, then animate and set up manips in blender 2.49 and export.  When the time comes for us to put out the scripts, I for one, will try to put out comprehensive training on it.

 

For those interested in scenery creation, I'd say keep 2.49 close at your side for object setup and export.  Model in whatever you want, but plan to "organize, setup and export" in 2.49.  Most of the tools we have in the internal laminar scripts are for scenery dev.  it's used for all of the autogen development as well as airports.   It has tools to allow you to export out 1000 objects at a time, set up AGP scenery groups and control draw order and layer grouping, import library items for referencing, etc.   The same script allows export of an aircraft in one command, including cockpit object...allows you to set the path of the exported object should it not be in the same folder as the blender file.....export out a scenery object AND a aircraft object all at once and into different folders. (not sure why anyone would do this, but it can be done).  So pick your poison.  stay comfy with 2.49....get benefit of Laminar workflow when the scripts hit...or  move to 2.6+ and Sam256 scripts and get benefit of 2.6 work environment.  It probably wouldn't hurt to learn both!

 

EDIT:  IF you're wanting to do casual 3D cockpit work, then Sam256 scripts for Blender 2.6+ supports many more manipulators than does the 2.49 version and it probably a better bet for getting interactive 3D cockpits done but it is a WIP so "stalls" may be common while waiting for features.   If you use blender 2.49 scripts for cockpits and do not roll your own manip code, you'll end up post processing (hand editing) the xported cockpit object file...no fun, BUT at least there's lots of experience around these issues.

 

Tom K

Laminar / IXEG

Edited March 16, 2013 by tkyler

[Kieran]

Thanks for this information Tom.

 

I personally prefer modelling in 2.6x, making full use of the new bmesh modelling system (allowing for n-gons). But I have found the original export scripts by Mr Harris to be far more reliable than those by Sam256 for 2.6x. I haven't started in the world of manipulators yet so I have had no problems so far. Model and texture in 2.6x and then open in 2.49 to animate and export.

[ryancz]

How can you tell which script you have?

I know I'm using 2.6, but I don't know which script.

[Kieran]

Currently only Sam256's scripts work with 2.6.

[Dozer]

It probably wouldn't hurt to learn both!

 

As someone who's attempted to learn to use Blender 2.49, I can heartily contest that statement

[ryancz]

I might, but I have a started project in 2.6, but I could restart. Maybe my next project...

[ksgy]

Thanks for the info Tom!

 

These days I'm getting closer and closer to animating cockpit objects on L-410, but still not decided which export script will I use. Maybe try out both and see which is more reliable.

Back, when done exterior animations, 2.6 scripts was much more unrealibe.

 

Any chance of releasing Laminars scripts and let the community figure out how to use and let them make tutorials?

[tkyler]

Any chance of releasing Laminars scripts and let the community figure out how to use and let them make tutorials?

I'll ASK if I can make them available here.  I need to get an OK from BenS.   In the meantime, I have a "guideline sheet" I wrote a few days back and will post it later today.  This guideline sheet it kind of "biased" to my preferences....I even call it, "the x-scenery way", but it's battle tested on Laminar aircraft, the MU2 and the IXEG 737 and has shown to be very reliable on projects of any size and it also is very conducive to collaboration and open source contribution becasue of it's standardization of many things.   It's an evolution of processes given every headache I've ever had in development and is now to the point where there really is no more headaches   or pretty close anyhow.

 

This guidline sheet will set you up for using the scripts but doesn't limit you should you not choose to.  Call it, "best practices".   I'll try and get that document up later today.

 

As far as letting the community make tutorials, I certainly wouldn't care, but at the same time, when the community goes after something "free for all", it's usually chaos, one-offs and not as much gets done as could be done with a organized effort.  Lots of folks make tutorials for exposure or self-gratification reasons and a lot of time, do more damage than good by leaving out pertinent or incomplete info.   I expect that will happen as folks like to tinker and that's fine of course.  What I am after myself though.....is to eventually establish an organized "guild" membership where projects are managed and organized, tutorials are linear, structured and organized and projects will therefore have consistency and predictability and steady progress and yield the best results IMO. 

 

TomK

Edited January 10, 2013 by tkyler

[tkyler]

I talked to BenS and the answer is, "not yet".  Here's why.   BenS is trying to merge Ondrej's (Sam256) 2.49 work into these scripts to kind of provide a "super 2.49" strain.   The XA strain by BenR and Ondrej's scripts both have limitations for various valid reasons because as Ben Supnik says so well...."it's just a tough damn problem that demands time".

 

We're not going to release half-baked scripts out there, it would cause more headaches.  We think we're in the "few more weeks" range though so its coming.   I will say the difference in workflow is amazing!   In 2 hours, I took all the loose collections of my old RV6 project...all the texture files, photoshop files, disorganized folder structure, blender versions and had it highly organized with current, proven dev standards and exported out the entire aircraft (7 objects) in one quick export.  Threw on some new V10 lights, tweaked a thing here and there and all the sudden, a project with too high maintenance costs just got viable.    I really hope we can develop an open project guild here, there are several technical and logistical issues to think about, but I'd consider it darn near developer utopia to have common projects with team contributions...everybody on the same page and stuff like airfighters Avanti the result.   Development is just fun!

 

TomK

[andyw248]

Thanks Tom, great insight into the genealogy of the scripts! Personally since I'm only doing scenery I'm fine with Marginal's script, and editing the resulting .obj files manually. Yes, it's archaic, I know ... 

[ksgy]

Thanks for asking and the info!

 

I'm waiting (im)patiently for the new export script

[Redfisher]

*bump*

[guym-p]

I use AC3D.  The scripts aren't up to date for that either (they lack the latest lighting effects in v10) but extremely useful, also with the ability to preview animation smoothly.  As a result I'm continuously passing geometry between AC3D and Blender:

 

AC3D:

• Basic modelling, but only because I started in AC3D;
• 99% of all unwrapping, because I can select multiple components and see them on the UV map at the same time;
• Animations;
• Manipulators;
• Dynamic lighting.

Blender:

• Unwrapping that involves a convoluted shape, like a hose or a pipe run;
• Reflective textures;
• Shadow baking.

Transfer between AC3D and Blender has to be with Blender 2.49 (or earlier).  Shadow baking gets better all the time, so I use the latest version of Blender for that (whatever that might be).

 

Guy.

Edited February 1, 2013 by guym-p

[Redfisher]

*bump*

[JazAero]

I also use AC 3-D

 

I do all my modeling in 3-DS Max and export to AC 3-D I then do all my animations and texture maps.

 

AC 3-D almost feels like the forgotten stepchild it gets little mention and very little support or at least it seems that way. It is way easier to use than blender and I feel is underrated considering its abilities to get tasks done simply and with a low learning curve.

[Redfisher]

*bump*

[Redfisher]

*bump*

[airfighter]

I would like to see Laminar going to 2.6+, since blender is getting better and better. But, since for Laminar has other more important issues to address, I don't wait anything like this before 10.30 final.  

 

I use Sam256's script and is working nicely (I use it with 2.64), only may be few minor glitches. It's a great job and I want to say to Sam256 a very big THANK YOU. I also would have a perfect script like TomK has, but yes developing is fun and very rewarding when you see your accomplishments fulfill your expectations or get great feedback from people who have tried your work. Also developing needs, from time to time, thinking outside the box to overcome some shortages.

 

@TomK, since you mentioned my avanti, do you think is good work? I would like to have an expert's opinion. 

[tkyler]

Hey Airfighter, yea I do think its good work.   One thing that has not quite taken off in the shareware community with x-plane is widespread adoption of new technologies like manipulators, 3D interactive cockpits and the like.   I really like that you have endeavored to provide a complete "addon" with 3D, texturing and custom programming where everything isn't "flat".  I'd like to see more of that in the community and good scripts / training are part of that of course and still needs to be done.

 

TomK

[Redfisher]

**bump**