The International Simutrans Forum

PakSets and Customization => Pak128.Britain => Topic started by: Lord Vetinari on June 05, 2009, 09:35:37 PM

Title: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Lord Vetinari on June 05, 2009, 09:35:37 PM
As The Hood suggested in this (http://forum.simutrans.com/index.php?topic=1832.0) topic, I tried to make some bridges for the XIX century for the pak.

This one was vaguely inspired by this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2004-10-09_Bridge_over_A49.jpg) bridge on the Liverpool - Manchester ralway.

(http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/7429/simscr21.png)

Since I have to fix a couple of issues (basically I messed up with all the front images - it's my first attempt at making graphics for Simutrans), can you please give me the images for the tracks (or tell me where I can dwnload them), so that I can put them on the bridge while I'm refurbishing the graphics? As I have to remake all the front images, I also plan to make them more similar to the original bridge.

If you like this, I can make some other bridges (I'm planning to make at least another one for the roads, now that I understood how things work) or tracks/buildings, I had fun making it.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Spike on June 05, 2009, 09:53:29 PM
I hope I don't interfere with the authorities of the pak, but it seems the sources of the set (PNG and Dat) are available in the SVN on sourceforge:

http://simutrans.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/simutrans/pak128.Britain/

Edit: Tracks are in here:

http://simutrans.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/simutrans/pak128.Britain/ways/images/
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on June 05, 2009, 10:08:16 PM
Vetinari, thanks for having a go at doing some graphics for Pak128.Britain!  Starting your simutrans graphics career is a bold step - they are pretty hard, I haven't drawn any from scratch myself!.  You can download all the graphics pngs from the SVN:

http://simutrans.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/simutrans/pak128.Britain/ (look in the ways/images/ subdirectory) Hajo was too quick for me :)


Can I ask how you made them? If you use blender (preferred method for pak128.Britain), I can send you existing source models of track and bridges if you want.  

Overall, it's quite hard to say much as it's a zoomed out preview.  It looks very good for a first attempt, but I would say it looks more in the style of pak128 than pak128.Britain, e.g. the brick texture is quite sharp, and the yellow edging is bright and bold.  I don't mean to criticise, but if you want me to consider it for inclusion in the pak it would need to fit better with the pak182.Britain style.  I'm quite fussy about that, because consistency is a key part of the whole project.  So I think you would need to tone down the brick pattern and make the edging paler / greyer and thinner.  I would also consider removing the railings on the top (they don't look so prominent in the photo).

If you do want to contribute graphics (and I would love some more contributors!) the best way for consistent results is to do it in blender using existing models as a starting point - that's exactly how I picked it up off kierongreen and why my stuff fits with the stuff he did to start with.  I can let you have any of those bits if you want - just ask.  

And if you don't fancy doing that, no problem - just release it separately as an addon for people to download and use as they want :)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on June 06, 2009, 10:52:42 AM
Couldn't the graphics be made to look less sharp and less saturated in The GIMP, rather than having to re-export the blends? If one were to magic wand the actual bridges (so as to select everything but the background colour), and then turn down the contrast and the saturation, might that not suffice?

Edit: One might also use a blur filter on a low setting.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on June 28, 2009, 08:07:12 PM
Lord Vetinari,

have you made any progress with those bridges of yours? If you send me the source files, I'll see if I can get them to fit in with the graphics of PakBritain...
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Lord Vetinari on June 29, 2009, 07:18:55 PM
Not much, unfortunatly. I'm sorry that I didn't answer before. I'm a freelance graphic / illustrator; some weeks I have plenty of free time, some other I can barely sleep. June has been one of those full periods. Not that I'm complaining, given the world crysis and everything.
I'm planning to finish the job I'm working on on Wednesday, so by the end of the week I should have enogh free time to fix a couple of issues of the bridge before giving it to you.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on June 29, 2009, 07:29:07 PM
Terribly sorry to trouble you if you're busy - I know what it's like. That's very kind, thank you. If we can get the graphical consistency sorted out, the bridge might well make an invaluable contribution to PakBritain - we definitely need more bridges.

If there are any other things that you want to do for PakBritain, the easiest thing to do is to ask The Hood for the .blend files of existing items (which are all set up with the correct cameras/lighting), and then just modify those - that's what I did with the class 81. (To make a new item from scratch, you can still use the lighting/camera set-ups in the existing .blend files). Then you'll easily be able to make graphics consistent with the current style. We could certainly do with another graphical artist for the pakset, and you certainly seem qualified! Any contribution to the graphics would be extremely welcome. Thank you for putting your time into this :-)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Lord Vetinari on June 29, 2009, 09:25:02 PM
Don't worry, i'ts my fault. I should have warned when I got the job.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Isaac.Eiland-Hall on June 30, 2009, 12:03:55 AM
crysis

Mmm-hmm, *sure* you've been busy with work. I suspect video games, rather.

;-)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Lord Vetinari on July 14, 2009, 02:40:31 PM
Mmm-hmm, *sure* you've been busy with work. I suspect video games, rather.

Y is a bad letter  >:(. It always blows up my plans :-[.

Anyway, just to show that I'm not dead:

(http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/2306/simscr40.png)

(http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/3313/simscr41.png)

Basically, I remade all the front images to make them more similar to the original bridge, desaturated a bit all the colors (but I think that I should tune them down a little more - I don't know why, but in game everything seems brighter than what I see in Photoshop) and fixed some alignement issues (which is longer and harder than I thought). There are still some small problems (you can see a misaligned ramp in the first picture, and I have to add the arches to the ramps in the second picture), but I think that I can fix them in a couple of days.

About the dat, I set these parameters:

Code: [Select]
Obj=bridge
name=BrickRail
#copyright=
waytype=track
cost=50000
maintenance=1000
topspeed=80
max_lenght=10
max_height=1
intro_year=1830

Do you have any changes to suggest?

By the way, do you think that I should add the pillars?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on July 14, 2009, 04:29:12 PM
This is rather lovely :-) We really do need more bridges in Pak128.Britain, so your work is most appreciated. As to the brightness being different in Photoshop - do you have some sort of colour calibration? You mention that you are a professional graphic designer, so I imagine that you might well have. That could account for it. You could try turning it off when making things for Simutrans.

The Hood - any thoughts on how this bridge could relate to the existing brick viaduct in terms of time/cost/speed/weight/length limits?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on July 14, 2009, 04:47:55 PM
Looking good - although I still think the dark brick texture is too sharp when compared with the existing bridges - I think the thin black lines which suggest the pattern of the brick need to be toned down/removed/blurred?  I'm not sure how to make it different from the existing brick viaduct in terms of cost and limits, so I'm open to suggestions...
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Lord Vetinari on July 14, 2009, 04:52:22 PM
Thanks, I'm glad you like it.

Looking good - although I still think the dark brick texture is too sharp when compared with the existing bridges - I think the thin black lines which suggest the pattern of the brick need to be toned down/removed/blurred?

It's easy, I can tune down the contrast. I did it (not much though), but as I said, the change was more evident in Photoshop.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on July 14, 2009, 09:10:51 PM
I think that we may need a bridge research team to think about differentiation and come up with new bridges that need to be made... ;-)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on July 14, 2009, 09:30:03 PM
I am happy to announce the creation of said bridge research team, chaired by Mr Petts... :p
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on July 14, 2009, 10:54:25 PM
Continuing from the discussion in this (http://forum.simutrans.com/index.php?topic=2398.new;topicseen#new) thread above, I should be interested in the views of anyone who has knowledge about the history of railway, road and canal bridges in the United Kingdom from the 1750s to the present day. In particular, it would be helpful to know:

  • the different types of bridges available at different times in history;
  • the weight limits of different types of bridges;
  • the extent to which a bridge's structure limits the speed of vehicles passing over it, and, if so, the speed limits of various bridges;
  • the maximum lengths of various types of bridges (spanning arch types, steel girder types, suspension bridges, cantilever designs, etc.);
  • the relative costs (both capital and maintenance) of the various types of bridges; and
  • what each of the various types of bridges look like (links to pictures on the web would be particularly helpful).

I should very much appreciate any replies posted in this thread - it would greatly assist those working on the pakset to design a realistic and comprehensive bridges timeline. Any input would be very welcome :-)

Mod edit: merging topics and removing links...
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on July 15, 2009, 11:42:54 AM
Certainly as a starting point we need some more modern bridges - e.g. concrete viaducts (motorway bridges, HS1 rail viaducts) and girder bridges.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: AP on July 15, 2009, 06:27:49 PM
Finding the key examples is easy, but getting the mainenance data will be a bit of an effort I suspect. The below all from a quick google:

For rail, I'd put the key "early" precedents as:

(obviously some kind of generic brick viaduct, available since the year dot)

1849 - (Brunel/GWR) Royal Albert Bridge (http://www.squidoo.com/Royal-Albert-Bridge) over the Tamar -  long standing 15mph speed limit on it (because of severe approach curves i think though)

1859- (Brunel/Cornwall Rly) Timber "fan" viaduct (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornwall_Railway_viaducts) [Book -"Brunel's Cornish Viaducts". Link (http://mikes.railhistory.railfan.net/r017.html) to site which gives timings between stations on the line]

1890-(North British Rly) Forth Bridge [Mainenance costs given here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forth_Bridge_(railway))]

>1870/50 - Meldon /Crumlin Viaducts (Photo (http://www.meldonviaduct.co.uk/gallery.htm), Photo (http://www.crumlinviaduct.co.uk/photo.htm)) Steel Warren Truss designs.[Link (http://britainfromtherails.bradtguides.com/) refers to weight carried, slight mention (http://www.caerphilly.gov.uk/chronicle/english/onthemove/crumlinviaduct.htm) of maintenance, on the latter (earlier).

Suggest asking at uk.railway newsgroup is the best way to find people with the right books for speed limits, weight limits, and maintenance if we're lucky.

Would also suggest the dates which designs were first built is more to do with when they were needed than when the technology was available. I mean, they only built the Forth Bg because of the Tay Bg collapse - it's more about circumstance. I think we should be generous when permitting bridge types by date.

for Canals:
1796 - Longdon on Tern Aquaduct (Pics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longdon-on-Tern))
1805 - Pontcysyllte Aqueduct (Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontcysyllte_Aqueduct) has construction cost but not mainenance. Load /speed not an issue given all that water...)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on October 04, 2009, 02:34:39 PM
I needed a slight diversion from painting trucks, so here is a cobblestone road bridge.  It should make roads early in the game look a bit better (i.e. bridges without asphalt road surfaces and white lines!).  It's a simple splicing of Kieron's brick road viaduct and cobblestone roads.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on October 04, 2009, 03:45:55 PM
Very nice!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 19, 2009, 10:23:26 PM
I drew up a basic and relatively easy to do Tubular box girder bridge, like the Brittania bridge.
still a work in progress, but any comments/criticism would be appreciated
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/simscr10.jpg)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: TheMacpau on December 19, 2009, 10:31:35 PM
Nice idea, though I'm not sure about the bright green at the ends, pak britain is generally in muted colours.
Secondly, I've had a look at the bridge your trying to emulate and the  box section passes through the towers, but I'm not sure if thats replicable with the game engine.

Do you get pixel fighting when trains passthrough it, where you can sometimes see the internal train?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 19, 2009, 11:22:35 PM
That looks lovely - it's good to see some new bridges! I agree with The Macpau about the green ends, though - there also seems to be a little misalignment with the track.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 19, 2009, 11:48:25 PM
yes, the green and red won't be there in the end, they're just there to help me distinguish what is what in the graphics before the layers are flattened.

I'll look at the rail alignment again.
thanks for the comments.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on December 20, 2009, 10:03:17 AM
AEO, good work!  Great to see some more people helping out with graphics :)  I know it's a work in progress, but comments so far (other than the above) would be it is lacking in texture.  Maybe a bit of rust/grime on the metal and some stone texture on the portals and pillars would be good.  Maybe you want to use the image below as a texture (it's the one I use for stone buildings).

http://files.simutrans.us/files/get/ABuvNFUIue/stonewall-texture.jpg

(http://files.simutrans.us/files/get/ABuvNFUIue/stonewall-texture.jpg)

I've also merged a few bridge related topics together to keep the discussion in one place.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 20, 2009, 06:21:10 PM
Nice idea, though I'm not sure about the bright green at the ends, pak britain is generally in muted colours.
Secondly, I've had a look at the bridge your trying to emulate and the  box section passes through the towers, but I'm not sure if thats replicable with the game engine.

Do you get pixel fighting when trains passthrough it, where you can sometimes see the internal train?

yes, there is pixel fighting when trains pass through it. It just seems to be a limitation with the simutrans game engine. It's unfortunate, but on the bright side, if your train is stuck there, for whatever reason, it should be easier to figure out where to click.


@ The Hood
oops. :o

Yes, you're right, currently there are no textures at all on the graphics.
I've noted down to add weathering and stone wall textures.


Question, will there be elevated ways for roads, rail and water?
Reason being, lot of the bridges in britain, at least from what I've seen in pictures, shows them as multi-segmented. i.e. Medway viaduct. It's not possible to replicate how those bridges look with a single span, but is possible with the use of elevated ways and one or a few bridges attached to it.

I do have some bridges like that sketched out on paper that I can try painting after I finish up this bridge. Right now, on paper I have drawn out: T-column, V-column, double stack style column, arch and bow arch that should be possible to do in game graphics.

I don't think it's possible to show the differences, in game graphically, the differences between spans, where the roads and rails actually run, like box girder, I-beam, spanning, etc. so that's all rolled into one with perhaps minor detailing differences between them.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Isaac.Eiland-Hall on December 20, 2009, 06:25:54 PM
Currently, I have not convinced Prissi to allow for elevated ways on water (*pout, pout*). I know that elevated ways build on roads work, but I haven't personally built any on rail, so I merely assume it works :)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 20, 2009, 06:31:33 PM
Currently, I have not convinced Prissi to allow for elevated ways on water (*pout, pout*). I know that elevated ways build on roads work, but I haven't personally built any on rail, so I merely assume it works :)
I have tried out elevated rails and roads from the japanese community, they work, but was wondering if it would be used in pak128.britain with graphics that matched this pak set better.

ok, hmm, I didn't realize water had no elevated way. Well, that's less work then :)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on December 20, 2009, 10:57:55 PM
Elevated ways are planned.  The idea is at least to have one like the current viaduct and a concrete one for each waytype.  If you want to try doing these, go ahead, no-one has claimed them yet!
Title: Re: Contributing graphics to pak128.Britain
Post by: wlindley on December 21, 2009, 03:10:57 PM
How's this for the masonry roadway bridge (started with the brick bridge, replaced the brick sections with a tiling of stonework from the Pub)

(http://blog.wlindley.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/masonry-viaduct-road.png)
Title: Re: Contributing graphics to pak128.Britain
Post by: The Hood on December 21, 2009, 10:10:37 PM
Sounds good, but can't see the image - the link seems to be broken...
Title: Re: Contributing graphics to pak128.Britain
Post by: jamespetts on December 21, 2009, 10:56:33 PM
That looks good, although be careful of the road surface: in the days when that type of bridge was current, painted white lines would not have been. Perhaps you could produce tarmac, cobblestone and dirt topped varieties?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 22, 2009, 12:08:24 AM
I should note that, in the most recent release of Pak128.Britain-Ex (for Simutrans-Experimental), a number of additional bridges have been specified which are awaiting graphics. They are:

  • Short Steel Girder Rail Bridge
  • Steel Box Girder Rail Bridge
  • Supported Steel Lattice Rail Bridge
  • Steel Cantilever Rail Bridge
  • Steel Suspension Rail Bridge
  • Steel Suspension Rail Bridge (modern)
  • Steel Suspension Rail Bridge (high speed)
  • Concrete Spanning Rail Bridge
  • Concrete Spanning Rail Bridge (improved)
  • Concrete Spanning Rail Bridge (high speed)
  • Concrete Supported Rail Bridge
  • Concrete Supported Rail Bridge (high speed)
  • Concrete Spanning Road Bridge
  • Concrete Supported Road Bridge
  • Concrete Supported Motorway Bridge
  • Concrete Spanning Motorway Bridge
  • Steel Spanning Road Bridge (cobblestone)
  • Steel Spanning Road Bridge (tarmac)
  • Steel Spanning Road Bridge (asphalt)
  • Steel Supported Road Bridge (cobblestone)
  • Steel Supported Road Bridge (tarmac)
  • Steel Supported Road Bridge (asphalt)
  • Suspension Road Bridge
  • Suspension Road Bridge (improved)
  • Suspension Motorway Bridge
  • Masonry Road Bridge (Macadam)
  • Masonry Road Bridge (cobblestone)
  • Wooden Road Trestle (Macadam)
  • Wooden Road Trestle (cobblestone)
  • Wooden Road Trestle (tarmac)

Note that a number of the above rail bridges also have heavy/light versions, but I do not think that separate graphics are required for these (but, if anybody wants to draw them, then I'll likely include them if they are up to standard).

AEO's new bridge I am likely to make additional to all of the above, when it becomes available, unless anyone has any better ideas.
Title: Re: Contributing graphics to pak128.Britain
Post by: The Hood on December 22, 2009, 08:51:24 AM
Yes, I can see the image now and it looks good, but I would agree with jamespetts - I think at least a cobblestone version would be good.  Also if you feel able to attempt a winter version that would be great! Sources for the new winter graphics are in SVN.

Mod note: topic merged with existing bridge discussion
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on December 22, 2009, 04:35:08 PM
ok ... image updated (might have to refresh in your browser) with cobble and macadam versions plus snow

(http://blog.wlindley.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/masonry-viaduct-road.png)

Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on December 22, 2009, 04:36:26 PM
Awesome!  And just in time for the next release too (assuming you are happy to have these released open source) :)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on December 22, 2009, 04:51:43 PM
Yes, all my Simutrans contributions are open source, creative commons, public domain even. 
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 22, 2009, 07:09:12 PM
Very nice indeed! Although the one that you call "Macadam" is actually tarmac ("tar Macadam") - the plain Macadam surface is, in effect, the same as the "dirt" road of the normal Pak128.Britain. Is it possible to have a version in this colour/texture, too?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on December 22, 2009, 07:42:39 PM
Oh... pardon my confusion at the British words.  Never realized "tarmac"  was a portmanteau!  Then again, we say "pavement" for asphalt roads while I believe you use that word to mean what we call the "sidewalk."  Ain't linguistics fun?  (Care for a potato chip, I mean crisp?)

(http://blog.wlindley.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/masonry-viaduct-road.png) updated (might need browser refresh)

also uploaded gimp source image with layers (http://blog.wlindley.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/masonry-viaduct-road.xcf)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 22, 2009, 08:04:33 PM
Aha! Excellent work!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on December 23, 2009, 04:08:48 PM
Here's an in-game preview.  There are a couple of graphical glitches - could you look into these please wlindley? (some stray brown pixels still and some overlap problems).  I will still release as is as I am going away for Christmas soon, but if I could have a fix later that would be great.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: Fabio on December 24, 2009, 07:57:25 AM
they look very nice!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 31, 2009, 01:43:48 PM
anyone who's well acquainted with google sketchup?
I've made a few more bridges, but not fully painted or entirely sure how to make them look like a pakbritain image rather than a pak192 comic.
I'm pretty sure I set the 'isometric' viewing cube properly so it's all a matter of cutting the bridges down to a proper size for front/back images.

steel? and concrete box girder, modern
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_boxgirderbridgeconcrete.jpg) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/boxgirderbridgeconcrete.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_boxgirderbridgeconcreteb.jpg) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/boxgirderbridgeconcreteb.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_boxgirderbridgerail.jpg) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/boxgirderbridgerail.jpg)

beam/I-beam bridge.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_Ibeambridgeconcrete.jpg) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/Ibeambridgeconcrete.jpg)

steel lattice
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_steellatticebridge.jpg) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/steellatticebridge.jpg)

files here:
free for anyone to use and modify. (because I obviously can't figure out how to complete them)
http://files.simutrans.us/files/get/oyw1nO2jit/sketchup-bridges-box-girder-and-beam.rar


steel lattice wasn't the proper file, but it is now.
http://files.simutrans.us/files/get/AsWXjZp0j9/sketchup-bridges-box-beam-lattice.rar
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 02, 2010, 03:30:30 PM
The easiest way to get them to look like pak128.Britain bridges is to get them in blender and use the same blender setup as for all the existing bridges.  It is possible to import a .dae file from sketchup into blender, so I'd suggest doing it that way.  I think you already have the bridge blends, so I'd use those as a template.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 03, 2010, 02:54:32 PM
@The Hood.
unfortunately I can't quite figure out how to use blender, which is why I've resorted to sketchup.

I've made some progress with sketchup. I can now make them look like a pakbritain image, the only issue I have now is getting the slope angle correct for the ramps. I'll consult the blender bridges to try and get the angles off of those.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 03, 2010, 04:07:16 PM
What I have found easiest is to load existing graphics in Blender then modify them, rather than create things from scratch.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 03, 2010, 09:12:30 PM
@The Hood.
unfortunately I can't quite figure out how to use blender, which is why I've resorted to sketchup.

If there's anything specific you want to ask blender-wise, I can try and help, but if you're getting good results in sketchup, then that's fine too.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 04, 2010, 12:22:47 AM
thanks for the offer of help, The Hood.

I think I have figured out the scale/slopes template for sketchup.
had to look back into trigonometry to figure it out :D
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_simutranstemplate.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/simutranstemplate.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 10, 2010, 12:07:15 AM
how's this Iron Bridge? maybe a slightly different colour and better textures?
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_ironbridgeexample-1.jpg) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/ironbridgeexample-1.jpg)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_ironbridge.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/ironbridge.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 10, 2010, 12:12:06 AM
I'm impressed so far - but should be interested to see how well that it scales to 128x128 tiles. Also - best turn off the shadows when exporting.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 10, 2010, 12:32:28 AM
well, the shadows on the transparency blue can be cut out before resizing and the blue is only there so that the pictures can be scaled properly.
It just doesn't look like a simutrans isometric image with no shadows in sketchup.

I think I might have done the rotation wrong there... oh well, just a draft for now.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 10, 2010, 01:03:46 PM
Looking good, but again I'd agree with jamespetts and say take out the shadows.  None of the other graphics have such shadows, only darker/lighter shadings on faces.  Try it in game with and without the shadows next to other bridges, and you will see what I mean.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: AP on January 13, 2010, 09:14:14 PM
Hi TheHood, I see from your post in 'help' you've made an elevated rail way, just found myself curious which kind... south london type brick viaducts, Liverpool Overhead Railway (http://www.photobydjnorton.com/LOR.html), Docklands Light Rail (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2011/2250669869_66fd9d60d7.jpg) ... ?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 13, 2010, 10:09:27 PM
It looks identical to the existing brick viaduct, except you can make curves, slopes and points.  It's for heavy rail really (e.g. so you can do things like the lines into London Blackfriars or London Bridge, or Manchester Piccadilly through to Oxford road and beyond...)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: AP on January 13, 2010, 10:19:24 PM
Excellent, that will be quite an improvement for urban rail, I look forward to seeing that in-game!

Just an idea - maybe it's possible to do the clever graphical-merge-thing as with the pak-gb platforms, where adjacent tiles  alter/merge when the next is added - could a similar trick make parallel single viaducts appear as one 'double viaduct'?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 13, 2010, 10:34:24 PM
It looks a bit like this:

(http://files.simutrans.us/image/direct/70BOq48eDH/elevated-way.jpg)

I've asked before about doing something like you suggest with bridges e.g.:
http://archive.forum.simutrans.com/topic/06260.0/index.html

It's now possible with tunnels I believe, but I'm still hoping for someone to code up something similar for bridges.  Until then though, this is what we've got.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: AP on January 14, 2010, 10:19:40 AM
That still looks good, though, even like that. I like how the island platform covers the gap!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 14, 2010, 03:55:00 PM
Excellent! A major advance for Pak128.Britain!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on January 14, 2010, 08:33:48 PM
I believe this version of the viaduct file (http://blog.wlindley.com/images/masonry-viaduct-road.png) removes the extraneous bright pixels.  I'm not set up to remake the pakfile here, could someone check please?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 14, 2010, 09:00:26 PM
It doesn't seem much different to me...

There are also some remnant brown brick pixels on quite a few views that could do with being removed if you get time.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on January 14, 2010, 09:46:09 PM
OK... updated once more.  The main difference should be removal of had been partially-translucent pixels that turned into light blue.  Also reduced toward grey, most of the brown bits.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 14, 2010, 10:24:52 PM
Hmmm, still not 100% but I think I've managed to patch up the differences now.  A little tip - I usually pick a completely different colour (e.g. bright green) and replace all #e7ffff background with that, then any non-#e7ffff shows up nice and clear and you can zap them.

While we're at it, here's the snow graphics for the elevated way - showing the new style of snow graphics for rails, which I think look a bit better than the one I did before which was a 5-minute job in the gimp...
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 14, 2010, 10:32:03 PM
Lovely look!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: AP on January 15, 2010, 04:30:41 PM
Just discovered this one in gameplay.

In pak128 standard, there is a lift-bridge, for both rail and road, which works on the flat. It works over canals and also rivers.

It, or an equivalent, seems not to yet be included in pak.britain, or yet have been replaced with something else. That's a bit of a gameplay issue, I've just discovered, albeit one corrected by borrowing the bridges from standard pak128 (copying "way.crossing.all.pak" does the job).

Wanted to mention it to make sure it's on the to-do list somewhere. I assume it's a fair way down (probably right next to gated level crossings).

It occurred to me that perhaps a bascule graphic might be the best for pak.britain, since a swing bridge would probably require more space to 'pivot' than a 1x1 tile graphically affords.

It also occurred to me that if the game can distinguish between navigable and impassible rivers, there could be a different, unchanging, graphic for fixed on-the-level bridges. But that's probably more work than necessary.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 15, 2010, 05:01:49 PM
Yes they are missing, but low prioirity.  One issue in the code is that it is currently only possible to have one crossing between any two waytypes, so there is no way of distinguishing between passable and impassable rivers, or doing different points in the timeline. 

Besides, a fixed bridge does pretty well on the rivers given they are always in valleys...
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: AP on January 15, 2010, 05:26:23 PM
I understand, that makes sense.  :)

Quote
Besides, a fixed bridge does pretty well on the rivers given they are always in valleys...
Game generated auto-rivers, yes. Rivers drawn on user-made maps, only if you carve the channel for them as well as drawing them on!

Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 15, 2010, 07:21:33 PM
Here's a wooden trestle road bridge (adapted from the rail version)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 16, 2010, 12:30:31 AM
Nice!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 17, 2010, 04:22:33 PM
Didn't think it was quite worth starting a new topic just for this, and seeing as these will also be used as the basis for some elevated ways they're going here. 

I've now done diagonal roads for each of the 4 road types - not the most exciting I'm sure but a small graphical improvement for long distance diagonals!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 17, 2010, 06:07:08 PM
Actually, this is a major improvement - thank you!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 17, 2010, 06:42:04 PM
nice work.
I was going to ask about diagonal roads for the elevated ways, but seeing as it's done now my question has been answered. :)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 29, 2010, 01:50:26 PM
Some simpler to create box girder bridges.

(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/steelboxgirderbridge.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 29, 2010, 01:56:21 PM
Those look nice! Do you have any idea how to get those images into the game? I must confess, I'm not sure how to do bridges yet - I understand that they can be a bit tricky.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 29, 2010, 02:12:01 PM
Those look nice! Do you have any idea how to get those images into the game? I must confess, I'm not sure how to do bridges yet - I understand that they can be a bit tricky.

I made things easier for myself, after I converted the blender files into sketchup files.
You can't see it, but the bridges are already made to fit inside a standard tile, which just needs a backdrop to make it look like a simutrans tile.

The slope was a bit tricky to figure out, but some trigonometry gave me a 22.25deg angle.
Incidentally, I don't recall how I got this number.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_simutranstemplate2.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/simutranstemplate2.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 29, 2010, 03:24:32 PM
Gosh! That looks complicated. Are you able to cut the tiles into their required segments?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 29, 2010, 03:31:56 PM
yep, once the view has been corrected, that rectangle turns into a near perfect square that is ready for cutting. The only hard part is getting the zoom correct. The only bothersome part is cleaning up the image. ;)

As long as the proper steps are followed, and everything is inside that colourful cube, anything will fit perfectly in simutrans.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 29, 2010, 03:36:04 PM
Fascinating! May I ask - why do you use Sketchup instead of Blender for these things when export from Blender is rather easier?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 29, 2010, 04:00:20 PM
unfortunately, I just can't get used to blender controls and functions.
Blender is a good program, but it's only as good as the user.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: greenling on December 29, 2010, 04:11:32 PM
The pictures from the bridges looking be good out!
greenling
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 29, 2010, 04:24:43 PM
Are you planning to try it in game any time soon?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 29, 2010, 04:40:37 PM
Yep, I'll try making them into pak files later today.

First I want to add some handrails and walking planks. Then I want to remove the check rails, which don't seem visible even at this scale.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 29, 2010, 05:15:16 PM
Ahh, yes, the lesson sadly often learned is that much of the beautiful detail that goes into the models in the 3d application rarely is visible in the tiny 128x128 pixel graphics. Once that lesson is learned, however, graphics production can greatly increase in rapidity!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on December 30, 2010, 01:40:35 AM
Question on Blender which two years of searching has found no answer:

I have a floor plan blueprint.  With ancient AutoCAD I could sit down with graph paper and type something like: LINE 50,50-100,50 ...to draw a straight line.  You cannot control the mouse with the precision of just typing numbers.  So -- How do I enter coordinates like that from a command line -- or through any means -- in Blender? 
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 30, 2010, 07:01:14 AM
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_simscr72.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/simscr72.png)
seems like I'll need to fix a few things to the template to make it fully functional with the blender renders.

the ramps to the snow images are not set correctly, so that's another thing I'll have to fix.
The pillars offsets are going to be a bit tricky with this bridge.
I'm only posting these for a comparison.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_BoxGA.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/BoxGA.png)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_BoxGA_snow.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/BoxGA_snow.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 30, 2010, 11:10:45 AM
That looks good! I do wonder whether the colour saturation on the brick could be turned down slightly, though?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 30, 2010, 11:23:01 AM
certainly.

the brittania imitation bridge has some problems of its own.
I'll need to trim down its height slightly, as it pokes through the top of the tile, even with offsets.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 30, 2010, 11:26:26 AM
When you've done all of that, you couldn't post a tutorial on how others might do it, could you? :-p From what I've been told, making bridges is hard work and we could do with some more in the set (including really quite simple ones such as short, non-supported girder types, and basic supported concrete types, intermediately complicated ones such as steel lattice spanning types and fantastically complicated ones such as suspension bridges).
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 30, 2010, 11:58:23 AM
sure, I could do that.
I was intending to make a template for myself to make future projects easier.
I can only make one in sketchup, but the same rules apply to all 3d programs and it's possible to import sketchup files into blender.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 30, 2010, 12:05:14 PM
That'd be very helpful! Presumably, there comes a point in the process when the Blender and the Sketchup instructions become one and the same?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 31, 2010, 02:05:54 AM
Okay, I've gotten them working in game.

I can't quite figure out the pillars for the I-beam bridge (can also be classified as a plate girder), but these bridges are generally very short and don't need pillars unless they are long. The snow images should work, since they have  exactly the same positioning as the normal images, but I'm not sure what the commands should be for the dat files.

what they look like in game:
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_simscr73.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/simscr73.png)


(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.png)
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_Bridge_rail_boxtubular.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/Bridge_rail_boxtubular.png)

dat files.
Code: [Select]
Obj=bridge
name=Tubular_Box_Girder
copyright=AEO
waytype=track
cost=1
maintenance=1
intro_year=1850
intro_month=1
topspeed=120
max_length=7
max_height=2
pillar_distance=2

#pillar_asymmetric=1
#0 or 1, fixes draw height

cursor=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.2.1
icon=> Bridge_rail_boxtubular.2.0
BackStart[N]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.0,0,32
BackStart[E]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.1,0,32
BackStart[S]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.2,0,32
BackStart[W]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.3,0,32
FrontStart[N]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.0,0,24
FrontStart[E]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.1,0,32
FrontStart[S]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.2,0,32
FrontStart[W]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.3,0,24

BackImage[EW]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.4,0,32
BackImage[NS]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.5,0,32
FrontImage[EW]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.4,0,32
FrontImage[NS]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.5,0,32

FrontRamp[N]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.6,0,-6
FrontRamp[W]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.7,0,-6
FrontRamp[S]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.8
FrontRamp[E]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.1.9
BackRamp[N]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.6
BackRamp[W]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.7
BackRamp[S]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.8
BackRamp[E]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.0.9

backPillar[S]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.2.3
backPillar[W]=Bridge_rail_boxtubular.2.2
--------------------------------------------------
Obj=bridge
name=Beam_Bridge_Heavy
copyright=AEO
waytype=track
cost=1
maintenance=1
topspeed=120
max_lenght=3
intro_year=1880

cursor=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.2.1
icon=> Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.2.0
BackStart[N]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.0,0,32
BackStart[E]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.1,0,32
BackStart[S]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.2,0,32
BackStart[W]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.3,0,32
FrontStart[N]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.0,0,32
FrontStart[E]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.1,0,32
FrontStart[S]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.2,0,32
FrontStart[W]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.3,0,32

BackImage[EW]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.4,0,32
BackImage[NS]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.5,0,32
FrontImage[EW]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.4,0,32
FrontImage[NS]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.5,0,32

FrontRamp[N]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.6
FrontRamp[W]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.7
FrontRamp[S]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.8
FrontRamp[E]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.1.9
BackRamp[N]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.6
BackRamp[W]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.7
BackRamp[S]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.8
BackRamp[E]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.0.9

backPillar[S]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.2.3
backPillar[W]=Bridge_rail_beam_hvy.2.2
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: kierongreen on December 31, 2010, 06:14:50 AM
Can  sketchup export to blender (or blender import sketchup)? Rails look quite different when omparing renders produced by the two programs...
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 31, 2010, 07:02:32 AM
yep, sketchup can be imported into blender if exported as a collada .dae file.
To do the opposite, blender needs to export as 3ds or collada file.
http://www.katsbits.com/tutorials/blender/import-google-sketchup-kmz-models-advanced.php

The tracks and alignment should be exactly the same, since they are directly from the blender files. I think it's just the material properties, colour and textures, which don't work too well under sketchup. There are no metallic or shiny face settings, so the rails appear dull. The textures were missing entirely from the blender to sketchup conversion, but I think that might have to do with me not knowing how to do it properly.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17111233/steel%20rail%20bridges.rar
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 31, 2010, 01:15:00 PM
some modern high speed concrete road bridges. No footpath.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_Concreteroadbridges.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/Concreteroadbridges.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 31, 2010, 01:19:36 PM
Very nice! Do you think that you could eliminate the gaps between the segments so that the road appears smooth?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 31, 2010, 01:21:35 PM
yep, I could do that.
I was hoping they would look like expansion joints, but I guess it doesn't fit in too well.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 31, 2010, 01:24:43 PM
It'd probably look better without them, I think. Lovely otherwise, though!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: sdog on December 31, 2010, 07:42:06 PM
Are the yellow dots at the left side of the bridge barrel impact attenuators?

I think the expansion joints would look quite good, but they are too wide and there should be less, which is probably difficult to make? Perhaps you could try how it looks if you leave them away at the ramps and use them only on one side of the tile, so they become a 1 px line.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 31, 2010, 08:00:23 PM
Would it be better to use a solid white centre line for the ramps? Usually sections where it's difficult to see, like the crest of a ramp to bridge, there is a solid white to indicate no over taking.

Are the yellow dots at the left side of the bridge barrel impact attenuators?

I think the expansion joints would look quite good, but they are too wide and there should be less, which is probably difficult to make? Perhaps you could try how it looks if you leave them away at the ramps and use them only on one side of the tile, so they become a 1 px line.

Yes, that is what those yellow and black bits are.

Expansion joints are a bit difficult to do less than shown and there are almost always expansion joints at pillars and ends. Making them thinner is easier, but the ramps exist for both sides, so it's a bit difficult to omit them at ramp ends.

It's best if the deck is kept symmetrical, because they are repeated as the bridge is spanned. The ends can be asymmetrical, but objects on it might seem out of place when you rotate the map.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on December 31, 2010, 08:43:43 PM
Would it be better to use a solid white centre line for the ramps? Usually sections where it's difficult to see, like the crest of a ramp to bridge, there is a solid white to indicate no over taking.

It would be a double white line for no overtaking.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on December 31, 2010, 08:48:05 PM
of course! double white, what was I thinking...
I should retake my driving exam.  :police:
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on January 01, 2011, 05:00:29 PM
Isn't the International standard (which the USA more-or-less follows) that yellow lines separate lanes in opposite directions, while white lines separate lanes in the same direction?  Or how do you tell which lanes you can drive in, without smacking head-on?  What is the concise rule, or a reference thereto, please, google is letting me down here.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 01, 2011, 05:10:55 PM
I don't know about the US, but the UK has its own individual lane markings. A dashed centre line separates traffic in two directions on a two-lane road; short dashes indicate a faster road than long dashes. A pair of solid white lines indicates no overtaking; one solid line next to a dashed line indicates overtaking is only permissible from the dashed side, not the solid side. Chevrons are a whole other matter (and it is significant whether they are bounded by a solid or dashed line). Yellow lines are only ever used at the edges of the road to indicate parking restrictions: only white lines are used in the centre of the road.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: sdog on January 01, 2011, 06:01:41 PM
there doesn't even seem to be a european harmonization in regards to surface markings. However most EU countries have white markings now. Single dashed lines are the centre line of the roads, when overtaking is not allowed solid lines are used. Only case for double centre lines is one side solid and one side dashed to indicate it is allowed to be crossed from the dashed side but not from the solid. Lanes on roads with more than one lane in one direction have dashed lines. All lines are white. Yellow lines are temporary lines that override the white ones at construction sites in some countries some use orange lines. A while ago austria changed from yellow lines to white lines to increase visibility. (most people think to reduce costs, using only one colour, which is also bought by the much larger germany is much cheaper.)

It's quite funny since i always thought the yellow double line is very peculiar for the US. Haven't seen it anywhere else but in north america. Everywhere else (including japan) it looked more similar to continental europe.

Btw, i'm a bit confused, here in toronto cars cross the double solid yellow line all of the time. They just turn left into other streets regardless of this line. How is a "do not cross" line marked here?
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on January 01, 2011, 07:50:22 PM
So if a single dashed line is in the center of the road, how do you tell that from the single dashed lines separating lanes in "your" direction?

USA rules are are that you may turn across any line, single or double of any color, into a driveway.  "No left turn" signs must be placed where turns are prohibited, and at every single driveway... there is no designation or sign that means "no left turn along this entire stretch of roadway."
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: sdog on January 01, 2011, 08:54:37 PM
for major roads with more than one lane in each direction is very often a strip of grass seperating both directions. If not there's a solid central line. There should be also double solid lines, that are even stricter prohibiting crossing. But those are rare where i come from. It's quite a bit different here in america anyways, where even city roads have two lanes in each direction. (I always wonder why with such gigantically wide roads so many people relying solely on cars are so upset on bicycle lanes and trams.)

Oh yes, i forgot that you can turn from four lane streets into driveways. In germany if it is a four lane street it's for high throughput and you can only leave it at designated places, usually with trafic lights unless it is built for speed and has the equivalent of on ramps. (How do you call it in america if the highway is not elevated and it's not a ramp but an even way leading into the highway?)

So it's very tedious to prevent left turns? I usually tend to suggest to prohibit left turns in Toronto downtown altogether. It's a square grid, three right turns lead get you always to the same street and direction and the crossing traffic and right turns are fast at traffic lights. Only the left turners slow everything down. Especially the streetcars, for some reason the left-turners are allow to stand in their right of way when waiting for a chance to turn left. I always feel so terribly german when i watch the traffic here, with apparently less regulation but much less efficiency. I always have this very german notion comming up to tell everyone how to do it properly. I very much dislike when that happens.

(Oh and i hate american indicators, hardly visible! No bright amber light blinking, just a blinking backlight, or some inconspiciuously weak light at the front side difficult to discern from the headlight. Got some nasty surprises more than once here. Perhaps that's the reason why hardly anyone accelerates only after leaving an intersection if they do it at all.)

Quote
[james on uk roads] short dashes indicate a faster road than long dashes
This is quite surprising and counterintuitive, since with higher speed the perceived length of the lines shrinks. (e.g. high speed german autobahn has 6 m dash with 6 m gap.)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 02, 2011, 02:00:44 AM
Btw, i'm a bit confused, here in toronto cars cross the double solid yellow line all of the time. They just turn left into other streets regardless of this line. How is a "do not cross" line marked here?
Hmm, in Toronto, most of the roads with double yellow lines down the center are on higher speed roads, and usually they have a center dividing island.
Are you sure you are not mistaking them for left turn only lanes?

Then again, Toronto isn't exactly a place with good drivers.
I'd say 60% of the drivers have no idea what the road signs and markings mean, or don't see them altogether.

--------------------------------------

some truss parts and a lower speed bridge with footpath.
Don't mind the roads, they are just graphical errors and the pillars are poking through when they shouldn't.

I'm open to colour suggestions.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_Bridge_parts.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/Bridge_parts.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: wlindley on January 02, 2011, 04:04:54 AM
You think two lane roads are wide? This intersection near me is typical of city streets in Phoenix, which are often three lanes each way, plus at intersections two left-turn lanes and a right-turn lane.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=scottsdale+and+mcdowell,+scottsdale+az&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&hq=&hnear=N+Scottsdale+Rd+%26+E+McDowell+Rd,+Scottsdale,+Maricopa,+Arizona+85257&ll=33.465709,-111.926249&spn=0.001577,0.002114&t=k&z=19

Yes, that is an average city street here.  Speed limit, even in city with driveways, 45mph. Makes using a bicycle most difficult.  Amazingly, bicycling is permitted on sidewalks!  Which is illegal in most other places, surely... as endangering pedestrians.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: sdog on January 02, 2011, 05:13:37 AM
hehe, if i'd ever go to phoenix, i think i'd need to know it two years in advance to get a drivers license.

AEO: You're very much right there! I've fell into the trap of my own memory. When i arrived here i was quite surprised the drivers cross the solid single yellow line all of the time, which i thought was forbidden. In my memory only this part stayed and when i learned that the double line mustn't be crossed i also applied it to my memory and memorized the streets outside as having double, instead of single lines.

However i've seen the double line crossed a few times at Queens Park. And frequently from the bus outside of Downsview station, on the extension of Dufferin, Allan Road. (Checked it in street view, double line is there.)

Do(n't) laugh, but i also had a bus driver with a full bus turn around the trafic sign at the beginning of the centre dividing island in this streetview image (http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=google+bloor&ie=UTF8&hl=en&t=h&sll=43.767883,-79.466747&sspn=0.000801,0.001106&rq=1&ev=p&split=1&filter=0&radius=0.03&hq=google+bloor&hnear=&ll=43.768322,-79.466871&spn=0.000801,0.001106&z=20&layer=c&cbll=43.768258,-79.466856&panoid=W5MxUFM4Yh1b4oCSIpiZ8A&cbp=12,171.32,,0,33.14). This happened when the driver got the bus hastily back to it's route, after he u-turned ten minutes earlier at the intersection (180 degree from point of view), parked on the pavement and went to the "on the run" shop to buy a large cup of coffee. I'm not sure but it didn't seem very much like an allowed turn. It was quite impressive though how well he could force his way into the dense traffic.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 02, 2011, 05:41:33 AM
@Sdog
sounds like good old TTC  ;D
the public transport do get special treatment with special exceptions granted by law, because they have to keep their schedule. Not that I've ever seen TTC on time.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: sdog on January 02, 2011, 06:05:01 AM
The TTC depends on diesel and Tim Hortons*, consequently will the city pressure ontario to make Tim also an essential service?

*Extremely ubiquitous canadian coffee shop** with at least one shop for every 10th canadian.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 02, 2011, 11:13:11 AM
I'm liking the look of the truss parts! I'm hoping that they can also be used on road bridges with different surfaces and also for rail bridges? As for colour suggestions, I suggest mid grey, dark red or dark green; lighter blue can be used for more modern (1970s onwards) bridges. This set of bridge additions is just what the pakset needed!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 02, 2011, 01:47:42 PM
@james
with all the parts made, it's just a matter of mixing and matching, and they can also be used for the rail bridges.

Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 02, 2011, 02:16:46 PM
Excellent!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 02, 2011, 05:59:18 PM
Nice to see some extra bridges being drawn.  My big reservation is similar to kierongreen's though - the renders from sketchup don't give a consistent look with what's already there (excellent as they are).  I've done some conversion from sketchup to blender, but it's never as easy as you think it ought to be even once you've got them in blender.  I can't help thinking it would be better to do bridges in blender from scratch and re-use existing rails and roads blender parts for consistency.  Another option for consistency is to use something like the GIMP to copy in the rail / road surface images onto an "empty" bridge rendered in sketchup (similar to how I did the canal bridges and tunnels).  Not sure how you fancy either of those ideas but I'd not want good worked going to waste simply for not being consistent with the rest of the pak graphics.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 02, 2011, 06:11:05 PM
The roads look all right as far as I can see - it's just the rail that is a little less shiny. The GIMP option might work. Alternatively, does Sketchup export to dxf, stl or VRML? Blender can import all of those formats.
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 03, 2011, 01:51:46 AM
@hood
the road bridges should be a lot easier from the perspective of cutting and pasting the existing graphics than the rail bridges. Although I think the road bridges won't suffer as badly from the differences in renders, because they're flat and matte, where as the rails and ballast are 3D with mixed surfaces.

I've found a free plugin for sketchup so it can export as dxf or stl.

Do these work?
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17111233/Bridges_test_dxf_stl.rar
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: ӔO on January 04, 2011, 10:26:31 PM
I found a neat photostream on flicker. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bridgink/


Some more concrete arch parts, a remake of a steel lattice and an above deck plate girder.
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/th_bridge_parts2.png) (http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa131/AEObikes/simutrans/bridge_parts2.png)
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: jamespetts on January 04, 2011, 11:18:40 PM
I love the new steel lattice bridges!
Title: Re: Pak 128.Britain bridges
Post by: The Hood on January 06, 2011, 08:26:35 PM
I really like the bottom left one - looking forward to seeing some of these in game sometime.