Import models with no hierarchy

[Josh]

Macklebee is being awfully persnickety today, but he’s really a great guy, and gives a lot of helpful answers in the forum.

I love you all. Please be good.

[macklebee]

The advice that was given was that models can be converted to other formats and ways to do conversions when my only concern was that I didn't want to waste time doing conversions? Like I said, Josh answered my question from his very first reply - it was all good from there.

And actually that "couple of years" is over 15 years closer to 20, but just as tinkerer/hobbyist, but thanks for being a arrogant, *******, ******,  ***************.about your credentials. Glad to have you here. Artists of your experience and skill level are few and far between around these parts as most do not want to program. You are a breathe of fresh air. We look forward to your input on all things artistry related.

Anyways - I cannot wait to use the new format. It sounds really cool and I think it will be a great addition to LE in the future as I hear it can let you export an entire scene (geometry, materials - including full PBR support, animations, and more) in one shot. Neat-O! The Windows 10 built-in model viewer sounds promising as its one of those things you don't realize that's been missing from your life until you hear about it! 

Love you all as well,

 It's called being friendly.  - macklebee

 

 

[Bolt]

On 8/31/2018 at 2:39 AM, Phodex Games said:

with the current version of the fbx importer of Leadwerks all of my models, even those with no hierarchy create a single one.  With the old importer I did not have this problem I think.

 

Nothing has changed, it has always worked like that. 

The reason why a single root always gets exported is mainly due to animation reasons, a skeleton should only have one root.  It's probably not required for static meshes, but no one has ever mentioned it until now.

 

On 9/1/2018 at 6:24 PM, Monkey Frog Studio said:

glTF is doing what .dae (Collada) was not able to do ... become a true, universal 3D format exchange.

glTF is not an exchange format.  It's a runtime format for game engines.  The model data is written so game engines can load it directly into their buffers without modification.  FBX, on other hand, is an exchange format, which is why glTF won't replace it.  It'll just complement it.

[Monkey Frog Studio]

7 minutes ago, Bolt said:

glTF is not an exchange format.  It's not for converting from one format to another.  It's a runtime format for game engines.  The model data is written so game engines can load it directly into their buffers without modification.  FBX, on other hand, is an exchange format, which is why glTF won't replace it.  It'll just complement it.

Perhaps I used the incorrect words. However, the fact is that glTF is being used to both export and import models, materials, and more, into more than just games. There is an importer for Blender and Sketchup, for example. I'm sure that more will be added. According to Khronos, the developers of glTF 2.0:

Quote

glTF™ (GL Transmission Format) is a royalty-free specification for the efficient transmission and loading of 3D scenes and models by applications. glTF minimizes both the size of 3D assets, and the runtime processing needed to unpack and use those assets. glTF defines an extensible, common publishing format for 3D content tools and services that streamlines authoring workflows and enables interoperable use of content across the industry.

So, according to Khronos, this is not just about games, but about applications. This includes everything from Facebook to games to 3D modeling programs. 

Notice the last sentence and the use of the word "interoperable":

 

Quote

 

in·ter·op·er·a·ble

ˌin(t)ərˈäp(ə)rəb(ə)l/

adjective

1. (of computer systems or software) able to exchange and make use of information.

 

 

The base idea for glTF, according to Khronos, is the EXCHANGE and USE of information. That's a two-way street - both EXPORT and IMPORT. At least that is the intention of Khronos. Whether it gets used that way or not is up to developers.

[Bolt]

Unwrap3D also has an importer for glTF files, but that doesn't change the fact that glTF is an end-of-the pipeline format.  Importers are only there for convenience, for people who want to "decompile" runtime assets.

And you won't find the word "exchange" anywhere on the Khronos glTF website, either.

[Monkey Frog Studio]

They may not have used the word "exchange", but they use the word "interoperable". That implicitly implies "exchange" as it is a part of it's definition. So, they used a better word, because Khronos described BOTH export and import by using it (i.e. going both ways). 

glTF's primary purpose may well be an "end-of-the-pipeline" format, but it's not the only purpose. It is a 3D format, like DAE, like .X, etc. It's intention is to carry 3D information (geometry, materials, lights, animations, etc.) so you can get it into another application (yes, especially game engines). Since it does this, it can be used to both import and export as well. 

As far as game engines - I know a few that are adding it for import as well as for exchange (i.e. to take the glTF info convert it into their own, internal file format). So, not quite "end-of-the-pipeline" there ... though pretty close, right?

What it comes down to is it's a better format than Collada (.dae), supports more than DirectX (.x), is free from the burden (and cost) of Autodesk's constantly changing FBX format, is not limited like OBJ, and is modern (i.e. supports PBR, etc.), unlike .3ds and others. Frankly, who the frell cares what it's intended purpose is? glTF is catching on and just about everyone is able to use it. Model in Max, Maya, C4D, MODO, or Blender? You can export to it. Want to get it in Godot, Unity, Unreal? No problem. 

[Bolt]

4 hours ago, Monkey Frog Studio said:

They may not have used the word "exchange", but they use the word "interoperable". That implicitly implies "exchange" as it is a part of it's definition. So, they used a better word, because Khronos described BOTH export and import by using it (i.e. going both ways). 

No, they used the word "interoperable" because they're describing an asset delivery system across different platforms.  There's no need to convert/exchange a glTF file into another format when it's already been optimized to load into your game engine.   I wouldn't use a runtime format like glTF or DirectX for editing purposes either.  And whether glTF lives up to the hype remains to be seen.  A lot people are pushing it, but I would rather hear who's using it.

[Monkey Frog Studio]

Sigh. glTF is not just for game engines. It is intended as a means to get 3D information into a 3D application (be it a game, a 3D modeling program, or an HTML5 website, etc.) and to get 3D information out of a 3D application. According to FileInfo.com:

Quote

GLTF files can be used to save and share digital assets between different 3D modeling tools, similarly to .DAE files. However, they are also optimized for download speed and load time at runtime, which makes them easier to use in mobile- and web- based 3D modeling programs. They are also a more streamlined format for uploading and downloading from online digital asset databases, such as Remix 3D.

So, two purposes - save (export) and share (import) 3D digital assets and optimization for download and load at run time. 

[Bolt]

13 hours ago, Monkey Frog Studio said:

According to FileInfo.com:

So, two purposes - save (export) and share (import) 3D digital assets and optimization for download and load at run time. 

Yes, it "can" be done, but that doesn't mean it should be done.  Optimized runtime formats are not for editing.  It's the job of your 3D modelling application  to save your assets in a preserving, non-destructive way.

When data is exported to an optimized format like glTF, precision is lost.  Floating point values are truncated when exported to ASCII format, precision for vertex weights is lost when they get compressed to bytes, etc... And end users have no idea their data is being truncated because someone told them to export it between tools.

File formats like FBX don't optimize your model data, because it's a true exchange format.  And glTF will never replace it, because they're not competitors playing on the same level.

[Monkey Frog Studio]

Funny thing is, I hear you and agree with you. Still, there are issues. FBX has become a universal exchange format, but it keeps changing and it's difficult for developers to keep up with (let alone a few other Autodesk related issues developers have to put up with). And in some cases, open-source software, like Godot (a game engine) will never support FBX due to licensing conflicts. Collada has turned out to be problematic, OBJ is limited, etc. So, for many, glTF is the way to go.

As far as "It's the job of your 3D modelling application  to save your assets in a preserving, non-destructive way", that's why each 3D app has it's own format - 3DSMax has .max, MODO has .lxo, etc. But these formats do more than save your assets in a non-destructive way, they also store GUI info (how the viewport was, for example, when saved) and a few dozen other program specific things that are not needed outside of that particular app. These internal file formats do a great job at what they were supposed to do, but are (obviously) not intended to be used anywhere but within the app for which they were created. FBX is an industry standard to exchange 3D assets. However, it's a huge pain in the you-know-what for most developers to support. So, what are we left with?

I do thank you for the info about data being truncated as a result of being exported to ASCII. It makes sense.

[Josh]

Interesting discussion. I pretty much agree with most everything said here.

[Bolt]

Yeah, it went a bit off topic. I just wanted to add my input on the static mesh hierarchy issue, and not get dragged into a discussion about glTF.

[Bolt]

I'll leave it to that.