Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

Problem converting voxels to mesh


simmsimaging
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

I'm finally getting some time again to play with 3DC for sculpting (use it mostly for painting) and I'm having a lot of problems figuring out how to use the voxel sculpting, and get the mesh back out again for use in Max/modo etc.

It seems really hard to get nice clean hi-res details in voxels, they always appear a bit... chunky? and smoothing problems seem to be regular. However, upping the res a few times certainly helped. Is lowering the density supposed to help that problem too?

Anyway - having gotten a moderate level of detail I thought I would sculpt the higher res details in the paint or sculpting rooms. The problem is the mesh comes in with really poor detail when I use quadrangulate for per-pixel. When I tried using the micro-vertex mode I got better detail in the key areas, but other parts of the mesh are totally screwed up. (see imagaes - the one shows the voxel model and the other the MV exported version). What am I doing wrong? Is there an easy way to get a nice clean version of the voxel sculpt over to the paint room without losing all the detail?

btw - I did try just exporting straight out of the voxel room, but the resulting mesh was a 10,000,000 poly monster - a bit cumbersome to work with :)

Any advice or help would be appreciated as the docs are a bit thin on the ground for this stuff.

b

mv_mesh.png

voxel_mesh.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

If you are using the quadrangutlate feature, I recommend using from the vox tree only the quadrangulate feature.Your voxel sculpt will then load in the retopo room only. Turn off symmetry if it is on and check to make sure that the quadrangulate covered all areas of your sculpt. In the retopo room use the retopo menu at the top, choose per-pixel with normal map or merge with microverts as that bakes a displacement map on your sculpt.

Increasing resolution helps for higher detail voxel sculpting. Think of voxels as a pixels. The more pixels you have the greater the detail in your painting.

I start out at a lower resolution of voxels to quicky build major forms of my sculpt.( like a base undercoat in painting to get the forms down).

I then start increasing my resolution for higher details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

If you are using the quadrangutlate feature, I recommend using from the vox tree only the quadrangulate feature.Your voxel sculpt will then load in the retopo room only. Turn off symmetry if it is on and check to make sure that the quadrangulate covered all areas of your sculpt. In the retopo room use the retopo menu at the top, choose per-pixel with normal map or merge with microverts as that bakes a displacement map on your sculpt.

Increasing resolution helps for higher detail voxel sculpting. Think of voxels as a pixels. The more pixels you have the greater the detail in your painting.

I start out at a lower resolution of voxels to quicky build major forms of my sculpt.( like a base undercoat in painting to get the forms down).

I then start increasing my resolution for higher details.

Thanks for the help. I have been trying this approach and running into the same problem of my mesh falling apart. As soon as it hits the retop room you can see the mesh is a mess (see image below), and short of manually redoing it I can't seem to get a decent result. Is it always necessary to manually retopo a voxel sculpt, or is there likely something wrong with my approach/file?

I have uploaded the 3DC file if anyone has a moment to look at it and see if they can get a decent quadrangulation out of it I would appreciate it.

b

File:

Filename: Splash_Sculpt_01_04.zip

Filesize: 14.3 Mb

Download Link: http://www.simmsimaging.com/xfile/3o7xqwmwe07z

Image of problem:

retopo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Thanks for the help. I have been trying this approach and running into the same problem of my mesh falling apart. As soon as it hits the retop room you can see the mesh is a mess (see image below), and short of manually redoing it I can't seem to get a decent result. Is it always necessary to manually retopo a voxel sculpt, or is there likely something wrong with my approach/file?

I have uploaded the 3DC file if anyone has a moment to look at it and see if they can get a decent quadrangulation out of it I would appreciate it.

b

File:

Filename: Splash_Sculpt_01_04.zip

Filesize: 14.3 Mb

Download Link: http://www.simmsimaging.com/xfile/3o7xqwmwe07z

It looks like two quadrangulations together. Return to Voxels and increase the res and I think the quad process will do a better job of finding the edges of the cube.

Image of problem:

retopo.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Hi Brett,

while Quadrangulation works pretty well on organic shapes boxy stuff also in my

experience often ends up in unsuable results. If you only need this shape for

rendering you could try one of the latest Beta versions.

Lately Andrew has added a cool poly-decimation feature which should help

shrinking your 10 mio poly mesh quite a bit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Thanks Polyxo and Tony.

Tony - almost missed your reply, pretty subtly tucked away in there :) I am not sure what is happening there, but it does looks like two objects, and, oddly, when I zoom into the object in the retopo window I can actually find another copy of the whole mesh inside it, but it's about 1/3 the size. The voxel model is a single object, and does not have anything inside it that I can see. Very weird - any idea what that is about?

Polyxo: thanks, I will grab that beta and give it a try.

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

So I tried to increase the res, but it just resulted in a much slower process and arrived at the same problem. I also tried the newest build and exporting with poly reduction, but it crashes instantly everytime I tried so I may have to wait for another build for that ??

In the interim, I just created a voxel primitive cube, upped the res once (to 35mb - not sure how to really gauge the res using MB, but that's what it said) and hit quadrangulate. The result is below - Polyxo is right, there is an issue with retopology and regular shapes. This seems to be way off IMO, and if this is what happens to a simple cube isn't it reasonable to expect some pretty wild results with more complex shapes?

This one was done quadrangulated with the options at 4,5,and 3 million polys and smoothing at 1,10,and 15. They all produced various versions of this problem. Is there a better way to get a clean mesh or do you have to manually retopologize to get it?

Thanks /b

cube_retop.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Still getting a messed up mesh but by exporting the voxel model for MV painting I was able to get the best case (much like the first pic posted in this thread, but the outer edges that are chewed up don't really show and I can fix them later if necessary). However, trying to get some decent detail in the depth map via painting and/or sculpting is just not happening very easily.

In the end I exported the mesh and reimported it for DP painting and then made a much higher res map (8K) so I could get some even moderate detail in the depth map. It's still not great IMO, but it's okay for this model. However, now I'm getting this weird faceting happening along the edges of the mesh whenever I try and paint with depth. See the pics below - one shows the wire so you can see how the flow is. There are a couple of 5 point poly's in there, but this problem happens wherever I paint on this model. Any idea what this problem is?

Right now I'm feeling pretty disappointed with the modeling/sculpting aspects of 3DC. Painting is awesome, but this is getting a bit crazy trying to build anything with any kind of detail and get it back out again in one piece. Maybe it's just me?

b

New smoothing (?) problem when painting with depth only, DP mode:

Faceting_Problem.png

Faceting_Problem_wire.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

The retopo tools are a breeze, use em! Strokes tool is your new best friend if you have a tablet. It's the best way to get clean meshes out of voxels. That is, if the mesh isn't too complex to retopo of course.

In your first example I would start drawing out retopo in two groups, one for the box, and one for the blob. Make them both as low res as possible, with as many even quads as possible. Resort to triangles and poles before ngons. The tools will make it faster than you think.

The reason I suggest doing these in separate groups is because they are of different detail. With 3d Coat's retopo, when you subdivide, the poly's vacuum to the voxels. This allows you to only have to focus on your basic edge flow while making a super low poly cage. Then just let 3d Coat do all the work ; ) Although it takes some effort, don't think that you have to actually lay it all out point by point.

So you could do an extra simple mesh over the box part, and a tad more complex mesh over the blob. Then subdivide the box mesh until it's of similar density to the blob. From there just select the mesh of one group, copy it into the other, and connect the two. Even in one group you can build onto areas separately and connect them, but they will subdivide together.

At first, the voxel > poly thing was tricky, but I quickly learned that there are more than enough tools to make them compatible with any work flow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The retopo tools are a breeze, use em! Strokes tool is your new best friend if you have a tablet. It's the best way to get clean meshes out of voxels.

I clearly have to differ here.

There's no good reason to manually retopo a HiRes mesh unless you want it to appear inside Games or specifically animate that very part.

Another good reason for using manual Retopo I see - but this is probably not what most people here are after - would be preparation of a Low Poly cage

for later Nurbs-conversion via Tsplines.

It's very cool to have the powerful Retopo toolset available - but using it for static scene members is a way too time-consuming process - this really should work automatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Thanks for the input James. I gave it a try for a couple of hours last night, and I guess it will come easier with time :) I'm not a modeler so the tools are probably more comfortable/fast for someone who can poly model, but my hope with 3DC was to avoid poly modeling. Perhaps one of the commercially available vids would help clarify the process, but I'm not really into paying for that until I have a better sense that it will get me the results I'm looking for.

In any case, I have to agree with Polyxo that auto-topology would be better for cases like this, where I don't need a "perfect" mesh for manipulating later. I'm sure there is a very good reason why it behaves as it does (works well on complex shapes, but kinda rough on simple shapes) and hopefully it is something that can be remedied.

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

It's very cool to have the powerful Retopo toolset available - but using it for static scene members is a way too time-consuming process - this really should work automatically.

Depends on the workflow. For me, having clean geometry when possible is good because I often manipulate the mesh outside of 3d Coat.

There are automatic options though. Decimation is great, but only in certain situations for me. Quadrangulation is cool, but you'll still need to clean it up using the retopology tools, as it produces ngons, etc. Still mostly automatic and quicker than doing it by hand. I would really dig in and study those some more to figure out how to make them work for you. My guess is quadrangulation will eventually make it click-of-a-button as it develops.

Remember that how hard an object is to retopo isn't dependent on how hi res the mesh is, but rather how complex. For instance, if you have wires and everything going all over the place on a low res mesh, you will not want to retopo! Yet if you just have a simple, super hi res shape, it's easy. You just block out the cage w/ edge loops and subdivide, viola.

Here is an example of a test mesh I made to study workflows where you won't want to retopo. The voxels are simply exported as an obj, decimated in ZBrush, and rendered in modo. It's the first time I've tried decimation, and look forward to experimenting with 3d Coat's in house option asap.

So take note that you have to look at your sculpt, and decide what meshing option is the path of least resistance for your workflow. In this case, I think even quadrangulation would have made my computer explode! Either that or I would have lost a ton of detail. What I learned is to keep the voxel objects that will need different meshing approaches in separate layers. Then you can export them separately and bring them back together.

krazy_sphere4.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Thanks for the input James. I gave it a try for a couple of hours last night, and I guess it will come easier with time :) I'm not a modeler so the tools are probably more comfortable/fast for someone who can poly model, but my hope with 3DC was to avoid poly modeling. Perhaps one of the commercially available vids would help clarify the process, but I'm not really into paying for that until I have a better sense that it will get me the results I'm looking for.

In any case, I have to agree with Polyxo that auto-topology would be better for cases like this, where I don't need a "perfect" mesh for manipulating later. I'm sure there is a very good reason why it behaves as it does (works well on complex shapes, but kinda rough on simple shapes) and hopefully it is something that can be remedied.

b

No problem ; ) Just keep experimenting with different approaches and you'll find what works best for you. I would continue to try different settings in quadrangulation as well. I've only used it a few times, but I've never had a mesh blow up like that. Aside from n gons and random edgeflow, it's generally worked really good. Maybe it's the nature of the beast, dunno. Haven't tried it on a mesh like yours, only a couple heads.

Good luck and keep at it! You'll figure it out ; )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

No problem ; ) Just keep experimenting with different approaches and you'll find what works best for you. I would continue to try different settings in quadrangulation as well. I've only used it a few times, but I've never had a mesh blow up like that. Aside from n gons and random edgeflow, it's generally worked really good. Maybe it's the nature of the beast, dunno. Haven't tried it on a mesh like yours, only a couple heads.

Good luck and keep at it! You'll figure it out ; )

The problem with experimenting with the quadrangulation methods is that it takes a really, really long time to run each one on this mesh (like 10-15 minutes sometimes) and I just don't have enough spare time to test many options :) In any case, I found your gallery thread on modo for the image above, and I tried this method and it worked great! Zbrush decimation got my 10 million poly mesh down to something like 500K and it looks great. This is probably the way to go for now - much appreciated!

I think the 3DC poly reduction may be a good route later, but for now it just crashes out. I'll try it again when that bug is ironed out a bit more.

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

The problem with experimenting with the quadrangulation methods is that it takes a really, really long time to run each one on this mesh (like 10-15 minutes sometimes) and I just don't have enough spare time to test many options :) In any case, I found your gallery thread on modo for the image above, and I tried this method and it worked great! Zbrush decimation got my 10 million poly mesh down to something like 500K and it looks great. This is probably the way to go for now - much appreciated!

I think the 3DC poly reduction may be a good route later, but for now it just crashes out. I'll try it again when that bug is ironed out a bit more.

b

I found solution to your problem.

You need to use Increase Object 2x(Decrease Density) from voxtree rmb menu 3 TIMES

(until you get 1X space density instead of 8X)

Now the objects quadrangulate properly.

Also I degraded your sculpt to 2mil and there was not a noticable difference...there really isnt 10million worth of topology here.

The only mystery problem I add to solve is why you would get a smaller duplicate of the quadrangualted model inside.

For solving this I exported the sculpt and remerged it in voxels to a new file (I suspect it was some invisible junk leftovers from previous quadrangulation attempts because there was alot of layers in paint room)

I will post your corrected file in a half an hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Still getting a messed up mesh but by exporting the voxel model for MV painting I was able to get the best case (much like the first pic posted in this thread, but the outer edges that are chewed up don't really show and I can fix them later if necessary). However, trying to get some decent detail in the depth map via painting and/or sculpting is just not happening very easily.

In the end I exported the mesh and reimported it for DP painting and then made a much higher res map (8K) so I could get some even moderate detail in the depth map. It's still not great IMO, but it's okay for this model. However, now I'm getting this weird faceting happening along the edges of the mesh whenever I try and paint with depth. See the pics below - one shows the wire so you can see how the flow is. There are a couple of 5 point poly's in there, but this problem happens wherever I paint on this model. Any idea what this problem is?

Right now I'm feeling pretty disappointed with the modeling/sculpting aspects of 3DC. Painting is awesome, but this is getting a bit crazy trying to build anything with any kind of detail and get it back out again in one piece. Maybe it's just me?

b

New smoothing (?) problem when painting with depth only, DP mode:

When you get your exporting and quadragulation problems fixed...

Direct paint ( per-pixel) has no smoothing routine {except for how a game would smooth a model) That is why no sub-division is your first choice in the dialog menu. Per-pixel is great for painting Low polygon game models (with normal map if you made one) . It's intended use. It was a much requested feature to be included in version 3 of 3DC. The reason you get the bad looking depth is because of the above reason.

Choose mircovertex painting. Select a high carcass mesh. plus choose somewhere around 6 millon polygones or more as this is used for your normal map or displacement making(depth painting map). Now you can use depth painting which is really creating a normal map (on the fly) on the surface. For true polygon vertex sculpting use the scuplting room. It still a fav of mine even with voxel sculpting included in 3DC. It great for fast sculpting or just getting ideas... for your voxel sculpt. If you use the sculpting room, use the texture baking tool to get the correct normal and displacment maps.

Most of your problems (not all of course) are from just not understanding how 3DC works. Now does 3DC have some bugs yes but which Andrew is fast to fix... He has now fixed the reduction crashing bug. :}

Edit: You can though import up to a 1 million polygon model into per-pixel painting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Also I degraded your sculpt to 2mil and there was not a noticable difference...there really isnt 10million worth of topology here.

I think you're talking about polys ^here^ but...

Random question, is there a way to decrease voxel resolution? I think I read about a way some time ago that decreased the resolution, but you lost the higher res for good. Could've been seeing things again though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I think you're talking about polys ^here^ but...

Random question, is there a way to decrease voxel resolution? I think I read about a way some time ago that decreased the resolution, but you lost the higher res for good. Could've been seeing things again though.

Clone and degrade from voxtre rmb menu. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

Here is your file:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/agcjo3

I included 2 files one is only cleaned up file + quadrangulated model.

Second one is full baked model in per-pixel painting.

(Microvertex gives you better highres exports but you need manual Uvs to get perfect baking with it)

Per-pixel painting endure auto-mapping much better.

There is not a single artifact and the splash is pretty clean but the edges of the plane are kinda lowres..

maybe you dont intent to show the border of the plane anyway...

Good news is that poly reduction tool works fine on the cleaned file so you can also go that way!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I found solution to your problem.

You need to use Increase Object 2x(Decrease Density) from voxtree rmb menu 3 TIMES

(until you get 1X space density instead of 8X)

Now the objects quadrangulate properly.

Also I degraded your sculpt to 2mil and there was not a noticable difference...there really isnt 10million worth of topology here.

The only mystery problem I add to solve is why you would get a smaller duplicate of the quadrangualted model inside.

For solving this I exported the sculpt and remerged it in voxels to a new file (I suspect it was some invisible junk leftovers from previous quadrangulation attempts because there was alot of layers in paint room)

I will post your corrected file in a half an hour.

Thanks very much for looking into this. I am not clear on what the density increase/decrease actually does - and could not find an answer in the manual. I arrived at 8X by increasing the resolution, but noticed the density increase/decrease seems to say the same thing (i.e x2, x4 etc.) but without increasing the sculpting resolution. What is that for then?

I definitely tried these operations many times though, so it is very possible there are bits and pieces hiding in there somewhere, but I could not find them to get rid of them, but was not really sure how to move the voxels to a new file - thanks.

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

When you get your exporting and quadragulation problems fixed...

Direct paint ( per-pixel) has no smoothing routine {except for how a game would smooth a model) That is why no sub-division is your first choice in the dialog menu. Per-pixel is great for painting Low polygon game models (with normal map if you made one) . It's intended use. It was a much requested feature to be included in version 3 of 3DC. The reason you get the bad looking depth is because of the above reason.

Choose mircovertex painting. Select a high carcass mesh. plus choose somewhere around 6 millon polygones or more as this is used for your normal map or displacement making(depth painting map). Now you can use depth painting which is really creating a normal map (on the fly) on the surface. For true polygon vertex sculpting use the scuplting room. It still a fav of mine even with voxel sculpting included in 3DC. It great for fast sculpting or just getting ideas... for your voxel sculpt. If you use the sculpting room, use the texture baking tool to get the correct normal and displacment maps.

Most of your problems (not all of course) are from just not understanding how 3DC works. Now does 3DC have some bugs yes but which Andrew is fast to fix... He has now fixed the reduction crashing bug. :}

Edit: You can though import up to a 1 million polygon model into per-pixel painting.

Thanks for that explanation. I originally shifted to the DP method because I found I was having resolution/detail problems with MV painting that DP helped me avoid, but I gather I'm better to do surface sculpting in MV either way.

I fully understand that the problems are mainly due to my lack of understanding 3DC, but you have to admit it gets pretty hairy with all the various ways of doing things and the esoteric values involved. Thanks again for helping out.

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Here is your file:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/agcjo3

I included 2 files one is only cleaned up file + quadrangulated model.

Second one is full baked model in per-pixel painting.

(Microvertex gives you better highres exports but you need manual Uvs to get perfect baking with it)

Per-pixel painting endure auto-mapping much better.

There is not a single artifact and the splash is pretty clean but the edges of the plane are kinda lowres..

maybe you dont intent to show the border of the plane anyway...

Good news is that poly reduction tool works fine on the cleaned file so you can also go that way!

Thanks very much for taking the time to do this. I am currently working on quadrangulating the new mesh to see how it works out for me here. (I am choosing to quadrangulate the object from the VoxTree, and then in the retopo window choosing 'merge to scene for MV'. The process is quite slow.)

I am not really clear on what it means to have a fully baked model in 3DC. I know there is a texture baking tool that is for baking normal/displacement maps but it's not at all clear to me at what stage you do that, or what a workflow would be. I'm hoping to have more time to dig into the docs and clarify that.

One thing I did notice in your quadrangluated, and in the texture baked versions, is that the distortion of the box shape is still there, but much reduced. I'm gathering the improvement is due to the change in density(?) However, while much better, the problem is still kinda there. Is it possible to get a more perfect shape or is this a limitation of 3DC at the moment?

I will also try the straight voxel export with reduction on the 1X mesh to see if that still crashes my computer.

Thanks again.

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I am not really clear on what it means to have a fully baked model in 3DC. I know there is a texture baking tool that is for baking normal/displacement maps but it's not at all clear to me at what stage you do that, or what a workflow would be. I'm hoping to have more time to dig into the docs and clarify that.

I will also try the straight voxel export with reduction on the 1X mesh to see if that still crashes my computer.

Fully baked is just what you get in Paint Room when successfully doing the merge for perpixel or merge for microvertex.

One thing I did notice in your quadrangluated, and in the texture baked versions, is that the distortion of the box shape is still there, but much reduced. I'm gathering the improvement is due to the change in density(?) However, while much better, the problem is still kinda there. Is it possible to get a more perfect shape or is this a limitation of 3DC at the moment?

Its not distortion ,its the lowpoly underneath that we see(I subdivided it in the 100k range but its still lowpoly).

To avoid that you need to use Microvertex but...you need to make nice clean manual UVS on your quadrangulated mesh,

MV does not like automatic UVS.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

BTW you have a pretty good understanding of 3DCoat for someone who havent looked into the manual.

There is nothing you did wrong that would have come from your non-understanding.

I still dont know the true use of Increase and Decrease Density but I noticed it have a big impact on quadrangulation

and I asked Andrew about that relation a few times but I think he must not have noticed my questions.

The leftovers I was taking about were not in the voxel room(I looked inside the voxels and there was no duplicated smaller object)

But in Paintroom while there was no objects, there was like 4 "layer 0" and if I used Windows--popups--Sub-objects :there was 2 objects there.

3DCoat seems to accumulate stuff sometimes but I havent investigated that phenomenon much yet.

Anyway to get a cleaned file: I just exported the voxel sculpt with full resolution,then I used merge from the voxel left panel tools

to reimport the sculpt in voxels in the new empty file.Very Easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Fully baked is just what you get in Paint Room when successfully doing the merge for perpixel or merge for microvertex.

Ah - I see. Thanks.

Its not distortion ,its the lowpoly underneath that we see(I subdivided it in the 100k range but its still lowpoly).

To avoid that you need to use Microvertex but...you need to make nice clean manual UVS on your quadrangulated mesh,

MV does not like automatic UVS.

I did try the MV export so I could increase the mesh size, but at lower settings I had the same issue, and when I raised the settings up higher it just hung (or I gave up after 15min). I clearly need to spend a bit more time with it.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

BTW you have a pretty good understanding of 3DCoat for someone who havent looked into the manual.

There is nothing you did wrong that would have come from your non-understanding.

I still dont know the true use of Increase and Decrease Density but I noticed it have a big impact on quadrangulation

and I asked Andrew about that relation a few times but I think he must not have noticed my questions.

The leftovers I was taking about were not in the voxel room(I looked inside the voxels and there was no duplicated smaller object)

But in Paintroom while there was no objects, there was like 4 "layer 0" and if I used Windows--popups--Sub-objects :there was 2 objects there.

3DCoat seems to accumulate stuff sometimes but I havent investigated that phenomenon much yet.

Anyway to get a cleaned file: I just exported the voxel sculpt with full resolution,then I used merge from the voxel left panel tools

to reimport the sculpt in voxels in the new empty file.Very Easy.

I have gone through the manual several times, but it's not always the best for figuring out how to actually use the stuff. The tools are generally well described, but in some cases not really in much depth (i.e the density parameter in voxels) and it's not very clear how you actually use many of them (what the workflow might actually be) - at least not well enough for me to figure it out :)

I appreciate all the help though - I'm making some progress now for sure.

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I would like to know if it will be less process intensive on my system to be able to export the high detailed voxel mesh as a "point cloud" file without the meshing ( *.txt,asc,xyz). Then import into meshlab or similar for more control on meshing and decimation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
  • Member

I'm having a very similar problem. I have made a model from voxels of a hard surface/ space ship using the tinker objects and now I want to A) get a good UV so I can do a proper normal map and save geometry weight B)paint it up nicely C) get it out to C4D for animation and render. This is my first time using 3DC and I could really use some help. I'd even pay someone $50 if they can take my file, make heads or tails of it, and send it back ready to be painted and exported. I'm liking the tools, but I'm feeling really stuck. Please let me know if anyone can help me out.

 

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...