Dan Frederiksen wrote:veegie, the material has nothing to do with smoothing groups. but a shiny material will more clearly show perturbation in a surface. you have to render it.
as for smoothing, just set the smoothing angle high enough until it takes. try 45 degrees for instance. or even 60. that's less important with regards to the vertex precision issue.
Dan, I am quite familiar with modeling applications and their workings. I had only mentioned because it seemed that you were insinuating that the appropriate material was the end-all solution.
Though it may just have been a misinterpretation on my end.
The autosmoothing doesn't do any better with higher angles, it just spreads the issue to more areas.
The issue is not a lack of smoothing with autosmooth, the issue is incorrect smoothing, a direct derivative of the incorrect geometry.
As you know, autosmooth simply assigns smoothing groups and tells the program, "This is smooth. This face is not.".
The problem is that when they creased their edges to smooth them out (from a geometry standpoint), the inaccuracy issue that we're facing is messing up the edge loops that go throughout that crease. This in turn causes the smoothing to mess up. No matter how you go about it, if you assign any
combination of smoothing groups to those trouble-regions, it will look incorrect (as pictured previously).
We're just going to have to wait until the issue is cleared up.
revelation wrote:i currently don't have any data available to me other than the BMW files posted earlier in the thread, would it be possible to get some more sample files? i am trying to validate more of the things i have found so far.
Thanks in advance.
I can put a few more files on my server when I get home from the office if you'd like.