Fractal Terrains 3 Upgrade just dropped...

[Mateus090985]

Try View>>Toolbars and Docking Windows>>Tool Options to bring up the Tool Options bar and it will let you set the tool options for tools as they are selected.

Thanks a lot! I would never find then there =)

[waldronate]

The algorithms for generating terrain haven't changed from FT2 to FT3. As far as the interior lakes thing goes, those are artifacts of the basic terrain generation algorithm in the sense that they are areas below the base water level (0). You can paint water to raise or lower the lakes. Tools>>Actions>>Fill Basins as Lakes will fill the terrain with lakes at all altitudes, not just at 0.

[Ramah]

Would you say that enough has changed in this version to warrant a new version number and having to pay again, Waldronate?

I guess you cannot say other than yes really but it does seem more update than upgrade. I would have thought the problems you mentioned through tackling virtual memory and paged system would be exactly the kind of thing tackled for a new version.

[waldronate]

This FT release was a little thinner than I had planned due to personal reasons that have made it a couple of years late already. As far as value for the dollar, I think that it is a fairly good ratio. It brings the FT product into line with the rest of ProFantasy's product set and avoids the issue with having to translate CC2 files into CC3 files (that's the primary justification for FT3 instead of something in the FT Pro group). It offers a number of useful upgrades and a few hidden features (for example, holding down Shift when doing Create on the Campaign Cartographer Export window allows output to SVG format - it's not fully-functional compared to the CC3 export, but it will get the basic contours out).

The textured climate shader is fun to play with and the addition of 16-bit PNG output is highly useful to certain folks. The Cosmographer export was updated (holding down Shift when picking the menu item will get you the older one, just in case). A whole lot of effort was put into making the program more stable and better able to handle low-memory conditions (something on the order of 100 user-reported issues were resolved).

A fair amount of time went into taking advantage of features of the newer compiler and windowing framework. Multiple rendering threads give a more responsive main window repaint on more capable hardware. It's compiled for SSE2, meaning what the code has crawled up the way up to the Pentium 4 era, at the cost of compatibility with some older hardware.

The $10 for upgrade isn't a bad deal and it will allow you to get the FT3 updates as they come out. I won't promise anything with regards to timing, but historically there have been significant new features that appear between paid upgrades (something on the order of ten official updates over the last ten years with a total of now two paid upgrades).

[ravells]

(for example, holding down Shift when doing Create on the Campaign Cartographer Export window allows output to SVG format - it's not fully-functional compared to the CC3 export, but it will get the basic contours out).

Wow, this alone is worth the upgrade for me! Only problem is that when I tried it, I came to this error message after going through the menu choices after pressing 'shift - create'. Any help would be muchly appreciated!

[waldronate]

Even though FT may want to install to the program files directory, it's generally been a good idea to not install it there because the system protections prevent programs from writing to that directory (it's a defect in FT from long ago that seems to have made it through the net). This particular problem may or may not be related to that, but I personally recommend installation other than in program files (or program files (x86) for you 64-bit users).

I'll put this one on the bug list. As much as I was hoping that most of the bugs were expunged before release, there are always a few after delivery.

[ravells]

Thanks Joe! uninstalled and reinstalled to the root of the C drive and it works fine now!

Thanks again!

[guyanonymous]

I'd agree that the $10 isn't a big hardship, and I'm pleased for better looking rivers, for sure. The additional climate maps etc. are also welcome. I also like the new streamlined interface.

___

I've attached a psd file showing the multi-image allignment issues I've noticed. EDIT: I couldn't attach because of file size, so I've uploaded a zip file to mediafire. It contains the .ftw, the .psd multi-layer crop which uses two .bmp exports, and four full-sized .bmp export files (6000x6000) which fit together in a square and show what I call the 'dark line' (inverse tones?) issue, and 'river-gap' issue which. Here's the link: http://www.mediafire.com/file/dbot44...20right%29.zip

For the PSD: As each image is 6000x6000 pixels, I've just taken a slice of two of them on the sides they meet. The bottom layer is on the left and includes the dark line (that's part of the saved .bmp file). The top layer is on the right. There is no space between the images.

Re: Rivers: If you scroll down, you'll find several examples of rivers that cross the border, and notice there's a 1-2 pixel game on each side of the border (the land is there). I've circled several in red to make this easy The 'river-gap' problem occurs at the top/bottom of images as well.

Re: 'Dark Line' issue: You'll also notice on the right edge of the left image (bottom layer) and on both images at the bottom most edge, there is a one-pixel line that appears to have an inverse light-dark value; the colours are correct, but what's light is dark and vice versa.

In the past, I've just moved the right image over to the left one extra pixel, to overlap the 'dark line' artifact of the left image, it tends to look better (still with river gaps), but not perfect. There is enough of a pattern that becomes apparent as you scroll up and down, as there appears to be one missing pixel. I've not tried inversing the height map for that single pixel yet to see if that's what it actually represents. I believe the bottom right pixel on every image, though, is normal, because the right line and bottom line overlap there, producing a double inverse, or normal pixel.

I saved these, originally, in bmp to avoid compression artifacts.

I'll also upload the original .ftw file I'm using. I output at 6x3, with a resolution of 5000. This, in theory, will let me make a 30000x15000px image, though it's always a couple pixels off because of the 'dark line' artifact. I think it's appearing on the right and bottom of each saved image.

Thanks for taking a look at all this...if this was fixed, it would save me a LOT of time when I merge the multi-files back together, and actually let me automate the process.

p.s., with respect to your comment about 32/64 bit saves not working in the opposite version, it's likely that anyone using a 64 bit version would only use that, and vice versa (unless you end up with a plug-in situation like photoshop with some plugins only working in 32bit and others only in 64).

p.p.s., Is it possible to feather the tools in this release? Or use a different brush (other than a circle/oval of your dimensions)? If not (and I don't think it is), please consider those features for the future if they can be worked in.

[waldronate]

The dark edge at bottom and right has been there since day one (the first bug report is from 2000). It's not to say that it's correct behavior, but it's unlikely to go away any time soon.

The gaps in the river is a buglet caused by the river hitting the edge of the map. It's supposed to be clipped at the edge, but it seems that FT is just dropping the last segment. Grids have the same issue, but in that case it can be eliminated by turning off adaptive grid resolution and bumping up the number of segments. These issues are easy enough to correct onscreen in FT, but those tricks don't work on export to CCx.

If you're using the multiple file export feature, have you tried using a bit of overlap between images (say 10% or so)? That way the rivers at the edge won't have a problem with missing their last segment and the black line can be eliminated fairly simply. Not ideal, I understand.

I would rather just export a huge single image, but the problem is that FT would have to compute a strip of the image, draw the raster overlays, draw the vector overlays, and then write out that strip. The clipping issue can cause problems with this operation, unfortunately.

A suggestion was made to have a different file format for the 64-bit and 32-bit versions that would incompatible with each other, but I am of the opinion that there should at least be an upgrade path from 32-bit to 64-bit. Making that work would result in a file format that was compatible between the two versions with the possible exception of data sizes.

The tools should already be feathered. The circular painting tools should start at 0 at their edge and rise to the user-specified value at the center. For the more advanced users who want to try something different, FT offers the brush preset file. If you save a brush preset file and then open that file in Notepad, you may find that it's a simple text field that contains a number of interesting values. If you've ever used the Edit Paintbrush Settings dialog in Wilbur and saves a preset, then this set of features will look familiar (FT and Wilbur share a brush engine). The part that might be of most interest to you is the "FileName" field that lets you specify an image file to use as a brush. I recommend setting up a brush you like in Wilbur and saving the brush preset into the FT folder. Then you should be able to use that brush in Wilbur. I forgot to port over the UI for the brush parts into FT, but the engine is there and it works the same (I think brushes are upside-down in FT realtive to Wilbur, but that's a minor thing).

[guyanonymous]

Thanks for considering things.

I'd thought about the overlap, but then I've still got to manually move the images exacting number of pixels rather than just align them beside each other. Is it possible to change this from a % to an absolute value (e.g., 5 pixels)?

Is the dark edge (bottom & right) actually a valid row of the exported image tile? Or is it an extra row of pixels that can safely be deleted? The visual pattern (an obvious line) that appears when I just delete those single rows, suggests to me that it was supposed to be a 'real' line.

I agree 100% about exporting a huge single image being the ideal.

I'm glad to hear some feathering is already there. I'll check out the brush preset file, though I've never used it in Wilbur. When using an image as a brush, does it have to be b/w, or can it be grey scale and have transparency? I'm envisioning painting on a pattern of mountains ripped from reality.