More collada normal issues =/

#1

I have created a video here with a very simple model which demonstrates the problem:

Here’s a link to the collada model which causes the issue: https://www.dropbox.com/s/l97peuf1w0iarwr/pusherblock.dae?dl=0

0 Likes

#2

Looks like it has extra vertex data assigned to the bottom strip? I think it’s confusing Defold about what geometry to use or not.

When I import it into Blender I see this on the bottom.

I tried to delete the materials and re-export but it didn’t help.

How was the model made? Was that bottom strip intentional?

test_unassign.zip (2.2 KB)

I tested unassigning the default.001 and removing it and then exported that, and it appears to show fully in the editor now.

So I would guess Defold is getting confused by the 2 options and only using the second one. This could be related to other models you have in your project that are not fully showing right. Defold should give some warning when there is extra model data it is ignoring for some reason.

1 Like

#3

I made the model in Wings 3D since I created some models in Blender which were invisible in Defold. I made a lever and key model in Wings 3D and it accepted both of those without issue, but then this happened when I made a simpler model. All I did for this model was create a cube and then apply the bevel operation to it, then I UV mapped it. It would be nice if Defold had some way to specify a sub-object for usage if it’s just silently using one without regarding the others. It’s frustrating to have to use multiple 3D softwares to check the models to make sure they will work correctly…

Thanks for figuring out the cause, hopefully this can change in future updates somehow.

0 Likes

#4

Somehow somewhere the extra data was added to your model so at least now you know to check for that when something doesn’t display right.

You should post the original model as an issue on github and reference the dae importer. I don’t know if this case all of the data really should be used or not. Someone who knows more about 3D would be able to know.

0 Likes

#5

Ah! I figured it out. Those surfaces weren’t part of the UV map. The texture for UV mapping in Wings 3D is somewhat blurry around those areas on the top, so it looked like those faces were already UV mapped. Sigh… I wish there were a way to see which faces aren’t UV mapped somehow. Even when all faces are UV mapped the default material shows up in Wings 3D. Also in Blender, with the invisible model, I had selected wireframe and then made certain all were UV mapped but maybe there was a face that it couldn’t select for some reason that was neglected. I’ll probably just write a script to detect unmapped faces before I import them.

0 Likes