Correct workflow for exporting scenery object ?

[btronquo]

Hello,

I made some cube in 2 different collection "LOD00" , "LOD01" I have a Env collection which contain a sun and a camera'

I click on the Multi-Export Panel, and I click on Reload LODs but it takes all my object even those who are invisible in the viewport. I have the error 'Cube' Can't be selected because it is not in View Layer 'ViewLayer' when I click the 'Export' button

Can you clarify what the correct workflow is for exporting an object with 2 (or more) LODS, including generating the xml, please?

[realModsWanted]

Count me in pls! :-)

[pepperoni505]

Hi @btronquo!

To better assist the error, is it possible for you to attach a .blend file?

This is currently how the multi-exporter works: if an object starts with x(LOD NUMBER)_ or ends with _LOD(LOD NUMBER) the multi-exporter picks that up as in an LOD group. There isn't any check for visibility, but an option can be added to hide invisible objects.

If Generate XML is enabled, the exporter will create an xml file with the LOD group name, and will look something like this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<ModelInfo guid="{ba05ebd3-e41d-4838-9dcf-cbf40d8b8fa0}" version="1.1">
    <LODS>
        <LOD minSize="0" ModelFile="Cube.gltf"/>
    </LODS>
</ModelInfo>

For all the LODs in the LOD group, they will be added to the LODS element of the XML with the minSize as set in Blender. We currently do not have any checks for if an object is in a collection, however if you think that would be useful we can add it.

We are also discussing proper documentation for the exporter, which will hopefully answer further questions.

[Losco-Nosciuto]

I'd personally prefer a "per collection naming" LOD option added, mostly because of it being how Vitus' Exporter Worked and it's a workflow many users are accustomed to :) but I am just a drip in the sea so, let's hear what others have to say! :)

[pepperoni505]

I click on the Multi-Export Panel, and I click on Reload LODs but it takes all my object even those who are invisible in the viewport.

Fixed in #52, as well as a few other small fixes

[btronquo]

Thanks @pepperoni505 ;)

[pepperoni505]

@btronquo Can you send a blend file that experiences the error you were referring to?

[pepperoni505]

To export based on collections, use the Presets tab of the exporter. The Objects tab is explicitly for objects. This behavior is almost identical to the 3ds Max multi-exporter, which you can learn about here: https://docs.flightsimulator.com/html/Asset_Creation/3DS_Max_Plugin/Multi-Exporter.htm Let me know if you have any further questions.

[btronquo]

@btronquo Can you send a blend file that experiences the error you were referring to?

As you can see, we usualy have our work (plane or scenery building) with some environment setup (lights, cameras etc) As the collection is disabled we should not have the option to export them

test.zip

I think the majority of the blender user original plugin by Vitus (maybe some of fbw team ;) ) will agree on the fact that the actuall workflow of the community blender plugin is more usable and fast than the ui/ux of the 3dsmax exporter. The use of blender is not thought in the same way as 3ds max so I think it would be logical not to try to reproduce exactly the same multi exporter ui/ux but rather something more practical and fast as the Vitus is. But this is my 2 cents :) Maybe I'm alone on this fact ;)

[pepperoni505]

@btronquo Can you send a blend file that experiences the error you were referring to?

As you can see, we usualy have our work (plane or scenery building) with some environment setup (lights, cameras etc) As the collection is disabled we should not have the option to export them

test.zip

Fixed in #52

I think the majority of the blender user original plugin by Vitus (maybe some of fbw team ;) ) will agree on the fact that the actuall workflow of the community blender plugin is more usable and fast than the ui/ux of the 3dsmax exporter. The use of blender is not thought in the same way as 3ds max so I think it would be logical not to try to reproduce exactly the same multi exporter ui/ux but rather something more practical and fast as the Vitus is. But this is my 2 cents :) Maybe I'm alone on this fact ;)

I'll bring this up internally

[pepperoni505]

I'd personally prefer a "per collection naming" LOD option added, mostly because of it being how Vitus' Exporter Worked and it's a workflow many users are accustomed to :) but I am just a drip in the sea so, let's hear what others have to say! :)

This has now been added in #52, and will be present on our 1.1.0 release

[pepperoni505]

Everything in this issue should have been fixed - let me know if you have any remaining issues