I have this point of view on the lack of documentation:
People probably will just copy the settings of any existing plane or part with the desired properties; so they don’t have to understand how it works (at least not in detail)… So far, so good, but it keeps the variations low, and possibly bugs may not be found early using this approach (If everybody does the same thing, only that has to work)
So: Documentation inspires creative power!
(And from my personal point of view: Sometimes developers find their own bugs once they start to document how things (should) work ;-))

Steve, keep in mind that I wrote my reply before I read your reply that was still waiting for moderation, where you said:
“That’s fair, and a perfect parallel.”
And my reply was in line with this, because it wouldn’t make any sense for LR to hold everyone by the hand and teach everyone to do texturing in common tools that are used for artwork in any platform.

Maybe I couldn’t express myself properly but basically I was echoing what Ben said next. It’s perfectly fine to expect support for X-Plane specific processes to get stuff in the sim. For everything else, “we” have to do “our” homework.

Cheers.

+1. Precisely.

My post was couched in the well known X-Plane paradigm of wide reaching, free support for freeware/payware development.

LR provides Planemaker for just that purpose, along with everything else, all the free (open source) tools, support for plugins, the SDK… the list goes on and on. To use these tools and to take advantage of all of the goodness X-Plane provides, one needs docs. And I did pay for it, sortakinda, when I bought X-Plane. 😉 I continue to pay for it by providing assistance to others in the community, and I support it by developing products that expand the appeal of the sim.

I would doubt we have a language barrier thing, but perhaps a misperception of the world of X-Plane or perhaps even cultural bias applies. Hard to tell, when we all come from all points of the compass to this happy little spot on the web. No harm, no foul. I know where I stand. 🙂

“I wouldn’t even be surprised if LR provided its API’s and documentation for a fee.”

We have ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION of making access to X-Plane, both getting the SDKs and accessing the docs to them, pay-ware.

We _want_ people to make stuff for X-Plane – it would be very short-sighted of us to put a pay-wall in front of this.

This is where that line between general technique and platform docs comes in. There are indeed both payware and freeware educational materials on very general tools like photoshop.

But for platform specifics, whether it’s using the Mac API, MSDN, coding for SteamVR, or writing the x-plane plugin, the norm in the industry is clearly that platform access is free when the platform provider’s goal is wide adoption.

Not sure how I missed the point.

Documentation/instruction is generally “payware”… There are “payware” classes on texturing/using Photoshop or what have you.

I read Steve’s post again and my opinion holds. Steve asks for links to documentation or tutorials for these tools, etc. We live in the age of the internet, where there’s a lot of knowledge available for free, but this is a privilege, not a right. There used to be a time when people had to pay for classes for whatever it was they wanted to learn… Be it playing a musical instrument, painting, or even… texturing and making 3D objects.

I wouldn’t even be surprised if LR provided its API’s and documentation for a fee. Expecting to have LR’s support on how to do bump/specular mapping, etc, is beyond me, unless if it’s different from “standard procedure”, as you mentioned…

Maybe there was a language barrier here somewhere…

Legacy plugins definitely will not be.

I’ll look into plugins that can adopt the new 3.0 APIs for windows.

Indeed. It would be nice to use freeware tools, but Ben is correct. And I am willing to put in the time, money and effort to learn, if need be. I own a number of pricey payware tools already, and have attained the pro level in terms of plugin development.

X-Plane has never been better when it comes to producing the sorts of things sim enthusiasts want and need – either in the sim or to help develop products for it.

Documentation has never been X-Plane’s strongest suit, but as a developer myself, I know that after the gee-whiz fun of getting something to work as intended, writing the docs is rather anti-climatic.

I can see projects on my near horizon where it will be good to be able to develop realistic metal surfaces. So I’m being pro-active and want to find the best sources to learn the nuances of X-Plane development. The old school approach of bang-your-head-into-the-wall and trial-and-error might be fine for amateurs, but aren’t exactly cost efficient for someone with a livelihood to maintain. 😉

Wait what??! Bruno, Steve’s entire request is for documentation/instruction so he can make stuff…I think you totally misunderstood his post.