(Some) Placed items on map appears as white blocks to client

[seycyrus]

Good morning,

I created a map using the stamp tool to line up two maps. These two maps are some of madcowchefs tiles.

I then created a couple more painting layers, and use the stamp tool to place some object, such as crates, barrels, tables etc, dirt, hay etc. I put down walls.

Things look good from my DM view, but when I connect as localhost to see how things look from the players view, things get a wonky.

Some, but not all, of the items look like white blocks. These items are all FG assets, and came from my assets folder, when I typed "crate" and such in the search bar. As mentioned, this problem is not ALL of the items on a paint layer, but only some of them. The ones that do show up, are all repeats of a certain item such as "BarrelA" There are no instance of some of BarrelA showing up and some BarrelA's being replaced by white blocks.

It is only specific items that do not show up, and then all repeats of that item do not show up. I hope I am making myself clear.

Any thoughts on this issue? Thanks!

Edit: One example of a specific item that shows up on my DM view, but not my localhost view is, Crate_1_decoration.png, it is from FG Medieval Machines War Pack.

[seycyrus]

Here are two screen shots showing these views.6245662457

[Zacchaeus]

Is the layer hidden? Or set to DM only? I'm unable to reproduce. Can you maybe screenshot the image with the right hand panel open; that might help.

[seycyrus]

6245862459

Thank you for your time.

[seycyrus]

Ok - things are fixed, but in the worst way - with no explanation.

I logged off my localhost and reloged back on, reshared the map from DM, and things were much worse, one entire map asset was a huge white block.

I then logged off localhost and client session. Restarted things back up (no updating or changing anything), and things are good. This restart took 62460place over 2 minutes.

[Zacchaeus]

I suspect it's something to do with the layer order. I don't know which layer is supposed to be the base layer but you have Line of Sight occluders on top of the layers which I assume the objects are in. So try moving the object layers above the Line of sight layer.

[pindercarl]

Ok - things are fixed, but in the worst way - with no explanation.

I logged off my localhost and reloged back on, reshared the map from DM, and things were much worse, one entire map asset was a huge white block.

I then logged off localhost and client session. Restarted things back up (no updating or changing anything), and things are good. This restart took 62460place over 2 minutes.

Can you share a copy of your campaign?

[seycyrus]

Apologies for not paying proper attention during the umpteen posts that I have read where users have been asked to do this, but, as a zip file? The campaign even when zipped exceeds the file size limitation.

[seycyrus]

As a possible side note (could be very relevant perhaps), as I was looking over the files in the campaign, I realized that the map images that I had placed using the stamp tool are over the recommended limit in terms of file size. I usually create my own maps using CC3+, and pay pretty close attention to the file size, but this time it escaped me.

I opened the maps up with Gimp and exported them as webp, which drastically cuts down their file size.

My question is, can I easily swap out these two files in the images folder and FG will just place them as the background in relation to the items and walls that I have already placed? Or will I need to start over because FG pays attention to the file extension. I think the answer is the latter, but just wanted to make sure.

Edit: Just created another painting layer and placed down the webp files using the earlier painting layer as a guide - easy peasy.

[Moon Wizard]

If your campaign exceeds the limit; it is most likely due to large images/tokens being imported/added to the base campaign. You can zip up your campaign folder; and share via a link from DropBox or Google Drive.

Regards,
JPG

[Zacchaeus]

As a possible side note (could be very relevant perhaps), as I was looking over the files in the campaign, I realized that the map images that I had placed using the stamp tool are over the recommended limit in terms of file size. I usually create my own maps using CC3+, and pay pretty close attention to the file size, but this time it escaped me.

I opened the maps up with Gimp and exported them as webp, which drastically cuts down their file size.

My question is, can I easily swap out these two files in the images folder and FG will just place them as the background in relation to the items and walls that I have already placed? Or will I need to start over because FG pays attention to the file extension. I think the answer is the latter, but just wanted to make sure.

If the filenames are exactly the same then you could replace the new one with the old in the images folder inside your campaign. (The exact same means also the same file extension as well - so .jpg isn't the same as .webp even if the name is the same). However if you export the map that you currently have using the small export icon at the bottom of the map panel you'll get an xml file with the same name as the map. Replace your existing image your new one (keeping the name the same) and then re-import your new image into your campaign (make sure that the xml file is in the same folder that the image is in before you import it). The xml file will tag along and your occluders will remain. Note that whatever layers you added within FG won't be preserved (apart from the wall occluder layer of course) since you'll be replacing the original image only.

[seycyrus]

I believe that this is the correct way to share via google drive, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_XxwP3hhXLpFaVOQdri5t7r2SkGQp1bT/view?usp=sharing

[Zacchaeus]

I believe that this is the correct way to share via google drive, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_XxwP3hhXLpFaVOQdri5t7r2SkGQp1bT/view?usp=drive_link

You need to enable the file to be shared with anyone who has the link.

[seycyrus]

You need to enable the file to be shared with anyone who has the link.

I believe that I have done this now. I put the link back in post #12

[Laerun]

I believe that I have done this now. I put the link back in post #12

The maps are large dimensionally. File size is one aspect of image size, dimensions are a consideration too. Most of the maps exceed 4K dimensionally.

In case you are not aware, the link below are guidelines and suggestions for image formatting and dimensions.

https://fantasygroundsunity.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/FGCP/pages/2037547009/Developer+Guide+-+Product+Guidelines#Development---Product-Image-Guidelines

[seycyrus]

The maps are large dimensionally. File size is one aspect of image size, dimensions are a consideration too. Most of the maps exceed 4K dimensionally.
...


Thanks for looking things over!

In your opinion then, this was the cause of the white blocks - items not being properly placed as shown in my original screenshots? I had thought that large dimensions and/or file size would cause performance issues like lag for my players, not the white block/placement issues.

[pindercarl]

Thanks for looking things over!

In your opinion then, this was the cause of the white blocks - items not being properly placed as shown in my original screenshots? I had thought that large dimensions and/or file size would cause performance issues like lag for my players, not the white block/placement issues.

I haven't had a chance to look at the campaign yet. However, the white squares suggests that there is an error drawing the image on the client. If you are using a lot of very large images, you could be running out of memory on the GPU. Especially when testing using localhost as each image will count twice on the GPU, once for the host and once for the client.

[seycyrus]

I haven't had a chance to look at the campaign yet. However, the white squares suggests that there is an error drawing the image on the client. If you are using a lot of very large images, you could be running out of memory on the GPU. Especially when testing using localhost as each image will count twice on the GPU, once for the host and once for the client.

Very interesting! Thank you for your time.