Do you mean inside of [a/your] resource pack? If so, it's not needed unless block models were included... so if you want to add them, you will need to create this folder yourself.
And nitpicking here, but the folder should be named 'block', there is no s in the name.
So If I wanted to create models myself, I would need to MAKE the json files?
Yes. Well, either that or use a model editor (such as Opl's model creator or MrCrayfish's model creator that are both here on the forums) to 'create' the files for you (though you're still making the elements, just visually instead of by hand using text).
This differs from editing models, for instance if you want something similar to the default anvil/hopper but you want to change it (or even just the UVs!). That's when you wouldn't 'create' the file from scratch.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
As you can see, instead of mapping the texture normally, the texture is shrunken onto the top face, with bits of the cactus and egg textures are also present. The yellow working ones are cocoa_age1
<-- the texture, which is on a 64x64 canvas. (ignore the white, that's just imgur)
It may be worth noting that the textures for the other cocoa stages are on 32x32 canvases.
As you can see, instead of mapping the texture normally, the texture is shrunken onto the top face, with bits of the cactus and egg textures are also present.
It looks to me like your UVs are defined incredibly incorrectly. For instance [0, 0, 8, 8] is using the top 1/4th of the image (exactly as the screenshot shows!)... not sure if you're aware, but UVs SCALE to your texture size, like how [0, 0, 16, 16] uses the entire texture even with 64x... naturally this makes HD UV mapping a bit annoying (and messy sense you'll need to use decimals) and there is no UV scale option.
You'd be better off making the top and bottom textures dedicated (since they're 16x16!) and then the front/side faces on a 32x32 image (easier math, especially since they split in the vertical middle perfectly!). You're also wasting less space this way (unless maybe you were using that as an atlas tile for other blocks?).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Because both of the malfunctioning models I posted above load properly when I replace '135' degree rotations with '45'...
Unfortunately, no.
It's an intentional restriction, one of the devs has even told me basically the equivalent of 'if you want it to be easier to make models, use an editor' which is very silly considering the free model editors didn't support rotation competently and I'm fairly sure that they STILL don't...
and no, paying is not the answer... it's stupid that, depending on when you bought Minecraft, you would pay 1/3rd the price (of current) or half price (of beta) or EQUAL PRICE (of alpha) for a 3rd party tool FOR the game (by someone who probably makes a living on their ad money ALREADY, no less).
It's a big mistake RELYING on the community to provide for themselves IMO. Sure it's great when the community does something YOU DON'T EXPECT, but when something is free or very technical there is no guarantee that the community will solve the issue. And it's been almost what, A YEAR? Users are still without a free competent editor (you will see users all over the forums having issues).
Such a small feature like this isn't asking for a red carpet, just that you have some basic usability in one spot of the system while you're fine with working in the text editor in most other aspects. It SHOULD be able to work just fine (I mean you ever hear the phrase 'man, rotating things 90 degrees is hard to program'? I can only assume (based on what one of the developers has said, and until proven otherwise) that this is the product of willful apathy mixed with justified laziness.
Justifications include preconceived notions of how things "should work", what is "worthwhile" to do for vanilla (though it can be labelled "not worth it" now and then bragged about later if it is done anyways), and keeping the model format "simple".
The solution here is to edit your from/to setting by 90 degrees (90 + 45 = 135), change what faces the textures and UVs are on (I think changing texture UVs/rotation will be needed for the top/bottom face), and set rotation to 45 degrees.
At least if this is your final model. If this was you testing the rotations out, I'm perfectly aware that it can be frustrating to toggle between rotations. Wanted to make a writable book model with an open cover... open the cover just a litttle more? Haha nope, no logic here.
I suppose the "easy" workaround here for testing would be to have 2 elements, one 0 and another 90 on the same axis. The one you're working on has the texture, when you switch to the other give it a transparent texture instead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
The last 2 elements have improper directions for their shape, the need the up and down faces.
If you're confused, you need to dupe the top 2 elements and switch their axis to y and you'll have a fully symmetrical block... although it looks a bit better IMO with rescaling set to true (I know false makes it look 'leafier', it just looks odd to me... maybe it'd grow on me I dunno).
Also you could've used -45 rotations and it would've been a bit easier, less need of swapping from/to coordinates around.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Woah there son, you think you can just rotate by 20 degrees?
This ain't a democracy, use 22.5 degrees or get out.
Also, did you forget about this:
? Because the game output would have pointed this out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Ok I have read about as much information on models, blockstates, and json files as I possibly can in the past week and if I don't find or get an answer I think I am going to go stark raving mad. I have scoured the web just trying to find out how you can make connected glass textures without having to use forge, a mod, mcpatcher, ctm, or optifine to no avail. I know that it can be done somehow as this person is working on a proof of concept without mods or optifine: After reading this thread I can tell that there are some really intelligent people here that can either tell me: you can't do it, how to do it, or point me in the right direction. I have no working knowledge of how all this mess works and it is going to royally tick(substituted word for what I really wanted to say) me off. Please could someone tell me how it can be done?
As far as I know it doesn't involve any metadata, but some fancy articulation of the model and blockstate json files. However, I could be completely wrong in this matter, but it does seem that LapisDemon was able to accomplish this task without the use of any mods and create it in vanilla only.
You've specified 2 models without telling Minecraft which variant it is for, each model must be inside an object or list (if multiple models) referring to a variant in a blockstate file.
So If I wanted to create models myself, I would need to MAKE the json files?
Yes. Well, either that or use a model editor (such as Opl's model creator or MrCrayfish's model creator that are both here on the forums) to 'create' the files for you (though you're still making the elements, just visually instead of by hand using text).
This differs from editing models, for instance if you want something similar to the default anvil/hopper but you want to change it (or even just the UVs!). That's when you wouldn't 'create' the file from scratch.
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
too complicated for someone stupid like me XD
I was able to do alternate blocks for bookshelves but I've had no success with vines or carved sandblocks.
Here's what I have for sandblocks
assets\minecraft\textures\blocks[/b]
sandstone_carved.png
sandstone_carved2.png
[b]models\block\sandstone[/b][/b]
sandstone_chiseled.json
{
"parent": "block/cube_column",
"textures": {
"end": "blocks/sandstone_top",
"side": "blocks/sandstone_carved"
}
}
sandstone_chiseled2.json
{
"parent": "block/cube_column",
"textures": {
"end": "blocks/sandstone_top",
"side": "blocks/sandstone_carved2"
}
}
assets\minecraft\blockstates
[/b]
sandstone_chiseled.json
{
"variants": {
"normal": [
{ "model": "model": "sandstone/sandstone_chiseled", "weight": 5 },
{ "model": "model": "sandstone/sandstone_chiseled2", "weight": 5 }
]
}
}
Alright, so I'm having trouble with three different models at the moment.
These two just show up as the magenta cubes:
This one has the right model shape, but the texture is applied incorrectly (see image below spoiler):
As you can see, instead of mapping the texture normally, the texture is shrunken onto the top face, with bits of the cactus and egg textures are also present. The yellow working ones are cocoa_age1
<-- the texture, which is on a 64x64 canvas. (ignore the white, that's just imgur)
It may be worth noting that the textures for the other cocoa stages are on 32x32 canvases.
Can anyone help me?
Can't see anything wrong, but then again the model itself is only part of the picture.
Have you looked in the game output for errors?
It looks to me like your UVs are defined incredibly incorrectly. For instance [0, 0, 8, 8] is using the top 1/4th of the image (exactly as the screenshot shows!)... not sure if you're aware, but UVs SCALE to your texture size, like how [0, 0, 16, 16] uses the entire texture even with 64x... naturally this makes HD UV mapping a bit annoying (and messy sense you'll need to use decimals) and there is no UV scale option.
You'd be better off making the top and bottom textures dedicated (since they're 16x16!) and then the front/side faces on a 32x32 image (easier math, especially since they split in the vertical middle perfectly!). You're also wasting less space this way (unless maybe you were using that as an atlas tile for other blocks?).
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Do models not support more than one rotation?
Because both of the malfunctioning models I posted above load properly when I replace '135' degree rotations with '45'...
Unfortunately, no.
It's an intentional restriction, one of the devs has even told me basically the equivalent of 'if you want it to be easier to make models, use an editor' which is very silly considering the free model editors didn't support rotation competently and I'm fairly sure that they STILL don't...
and no, paying is not the answer... it's stupid that, depending on when you bought Minecraft, you would pay 1/3rd the price (of current) or half price (of beta) or EQUAL PRICE (of alpha) for a 3rd party tool FOR the game (by someone who probably makes a living on their ad money ALREADY, no less).
It's a big mistake RELYING on the community to provide for themselves IMO. Sure it's great when the community does something YOU DON'T EXPECT, but when something is free or very technical there is no guarantee that the community will solve the issue. And it's been almost what, A YEAR? Users are still without a free competent editor (you will see users all over the forums having issues).
Such a small feature like this isn't asking for a red carpet, just that you have some basic usability in one spot of the system while you're fine with working in the text editor in most other aspects. It SHOULD be able to work just fine (I mean you ever hear the phrase 'man, rotating things 90 degrees is hard to program'? I can only assume (based on what one of the developers has said, and until proven otherwise) that this is the product of willful apathy mixed with justified laziness.
Justifications include preconceived notions of how things "should work", what is "worthwhile" to do for vanilla (though it can be labelled "not worth it" now and then bragged about later if it is done anyways), and keeping the model format "simple".
The solution here is to edit your from/to setting by 90 degrees (90 + 45 = 135), change what faces the textures and UVs are on (I think changing texture UVs/rotation will be needed for the top/bottom face), and set rotation to 45 degrees.
At least if this is your final model. If this was you testing the rotations out, I'm perfectly aware that it can be frustrating to toggle between rotations. Wanted to make a writable book model with an open cover... open the cover just a litttle more? Haha nope, no logic here.
I suppose the "easy" workaround here for testing would be to have 2 elements, one 0 and another 90 on the same axis. The one you're working on has the texture, when you switch to the other give it a transparent texture instead.
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Alright, I'm still having troubles with that leaves model.
What is the reason that the two lower elements don't appear in-game?
The last 2 elements have improper directions for their shape, the need the up and down faces.
If you're confused, you need to dupe the top 2 elements and switch their axis to y and you'll have a fully symmetrical block... although it looks a bit better IMO with rescaling set to true (I know false makes it look 'leafier', it just looks odd to me... maybe it'd grow on me I dunno).
Also you could've used -45 rotations and it would've been a bit easier, less need of swapping from/to coordinates around.
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Damn Drazile, back at it again with the broken models
Why doesn't this model work? Is it just that there are too many rotated elements? If so, what is the limit?
Woah there son, you think you can just rotate by 20 degrees?
This ain't a democracy, use 22.5 degrees or get out.
Also, did you forget about this:
? Because the game output would have pointed this out.
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Ok I have read about as much information on models, blockstates, and json files as I possibly can in the past week and if I don't find or get an answer I think I am going to go stark raving mad. I have scoured the web just trying to find out how you can make connected glass textures without having to use forge, a mod, mcpatcher, ctm, or optifine to no avail. I know that it can be done somehow as this person is working on a proof of concept without mods or optifine: After reading this thread I can tell that there are some really intelligent people here that can either tell me: you can't do it, how to do it, or point me in the right direction. I have no working knowledge of how all this mess works and it is going to royally tick(substituted word for what I really wanted to say) me off. Please could someone tell me how it can be done?
As far as I know it doesn't involve any metadata, but some fancy articulation of the model and blockstate json files. However, I could be completely wrong in this matter, but it does seem that LapisDemon was able to accomplish this task without the use of any mods and create it in vanilla only.
Thank you for this tutorial. It's beautiful! I can't however figure it out, haha. I have my files set up for a dragon egg like this:
{ "parent": "block/block",
"ambientocclusion": false,
"textures": {
"particle": "dragon_egg",
"all": "blocks/dragon_egg2"
},
"elements": [
{ "from": [ 6, 15, 6 ],...etc (very long model mapping)
dragon_egg is in the block folder, and dragon_egg2 is in block/dragon_egg
And blockstates are:
{
"variants": {
{ "model": "dragon_egg" },
{ "model": "dragon_egg/dragon_egg2" }
}
}
And this is what I get.
http://imgur.com/a/ZMcu6
As far as texture's go, I have them both in textures/blocks/dragon_egg (and dragon_egg2)
Thank you so much for the help. This would be of tremendous help!
The reason it isn't working is because of your blockstate file.
You've specified 2 models without telling Minecraft which variant it is for, each model must be inside an object or list (if multiple models) referring to a variant in a blockstate file.
The blockstate file should look like this:
I do tutorials all about values encountered within block modelling on my website
#1
{
"variants": {
"normal": [
{ "model": "sand" },
{ "model": "sand", "y": 90 },
{ "model": "sand", "y": 180 },
{ "model": "sand", "y": 270 }
]
}
}
...
my edit
{
"variants": {
"normal": [
{ "model": "sand/sand", "weight": 32 },
{ "model": "sand/sand1", "weight": 5 },
{ "model": "sand/sand2", "weight": 5 },
{ "model": "sand/sand3", "weight": 5 },
{ "model": "sand/sand4", "weight": 2 }
]
}
}
how do i list these for the new variants i have with "weight": ?
{ "model": "sand", "y": 90 },
{ "model": "sand", "y": 180 },
{ "model": "sand", "y": 270 }
#2
{
"variants": {
"facing=north": { "model": "lit_pumpkin" },
"facing=south": { "model": "lit_pumpkin", "y": 180 },
"facing=west": { "model": "lit_pumpkin", "y": 270 },
"facing=east": { "model": "lit_pumpkin", "y": 90 }
}
}
and how do i set the "weight" for lit_pumpkin when its got { "model": "lit_pumpkin", "y": 90 }
lit_pumpkin
lit_pumpkin2
lit_pumpkin3
{
"variants": { [
"facing=north": { "model": "lit_pumpkin" },
"facing=south": { "model": "lit_pumpkin", "y": 180, "weight": 32 },
"facing=west": { "model": "lit_pumpkin", "y": 270, "weight": 32 },
"facing=east": { "model": "lit_pumpkin", "y": 90, "weight": 32 },
"facing=north": { "model": "lit_pumpkin2", "weight": 5 },
"facing=south": { "model": "lit_pumpkin2", "y": 180, "weight": 5 },
"facing=west": { "model": "lit_pumpkin2", "y": 270, "weight": 5 },
"facing=east": { "model": "lit_pumpkin2", "y": 90, "weight": 5 },
"facing=north": { "model": "lit_pumpkin3", "weight": 1 },
"facing=south": { "model": "lit_pumpkin3", "y": 180, "weight": 1 },
"facing=west": { "model": "lit_pumpkin3", "y": 270, "weight": 1 },
"facing=east": { "model": "lit_pumpkin3", "y": 90, "weight": 1 }
]
}
}
Hey, why this isn't worcking with pumkins ?
{
"variants": {
"normal": [
{ "model": "pumpkin" },
{ "model": "pumpkin2" },
{ "model": "pumpkin3" }
]
}
}
Can someone explain me please ? Thanks !