Forums

Hi Try deleting all folders related to 3DC in Program Files and Documents. If you have any personal libraries, make a backup of your own files first. Also if you have microsoft onedrive installed but you don't use it, uninstall. Sometimes it produces those crashes. And remember to execute 3DC as Administrator   Hope this help

I've been experiencing sporadic and unpredictable crashes related to my Nvidia graphic card. Sometimes just 3dCoat crashes, and sometimes my whole system crashes. These crashes seem to occur without much regard for the size of the file I'm working with, or how much strain I am currently putting on 3d-Coat. I've tried reinstalling drivers, updating drivers, and reverting to older drivers without any improvement. I've checked the box for "Vertical Synchronization" in 3DC Preferences, and tried a bunch of settings changes in the Nvidia Control Panel, but nothing has fixed the problem. I am hoping that someone here can recommend the settings (in 3dCoat and in the Nvidia Control Panel, and in Windows), which are likely to put the least strain on my graphics card so as to minimize or eliminate these crashes. My system specs are below. I can't make much sense of the information in the crash log in the 3dCoat folder, or what I find in the Windows Event Viewer, but I can provide more information if it would help. System Specs: Windows 11 Pro 12th Gen i9-12900, 2400 Mhz, 16 Cores, 24 Logical Processors 64GB RAM NVIDIA RTX A2000 12GB I hope I've posted this in the correct forum. Thanks for your help!      

the falaloff was the trick , i have the lineaar brush first of all , and it just cut straight in but the pointier falloff was alot better , just need a flatten brush that holds the normals 

That has not been my experience at all. For smaller bumps and surface deviations, it works perfectly for me. I usually pick the sharp falloff brush alpha (3rd to the right of the Default alphas) and it works really well for polishing the surface. Can you screen record how you are using it and how it peforms?

There is a lot of stuff going on under the hood that uses resources in the wrong way and I don't see a point for that, as there are no performance benefits.

I have some hard polish preset, probably from the forum. I can't find the original download link, but I can send it to you for testing. It works nicely for the most part.

no, one more thing... is there a way to get rid of the "padding" streaks at the sides of the texturee map?   AH, got it - on texture export, there is an option for that

So - after watching this strange squirrel texturing a fish... I get it now (I hope) I deleted the plane in the UV Room - AND the OTHER one in Retopo room as well (I was thinking, this was the same thing/objects - but it´s not, they´re two objects) with this out of the way, I imported the bakeplane into Retopo Room and clicked "Re-Bake Sculpt mesh changes..." and BOOM it worked well... the terms in 3DC are kind of "alien" to be honest. I really hope I can remember what to choose when. now, when there will be a fix that makes Realityscan 2.1 work with 3DC 2025 + I will be gaining hope again

You asked for the model, I attached the plane I want to bake onto   3dcplane01.obj

kind of crazy.,... 3DC bakes makes kind of "transfer texture bake" (see Layer 1) but AO - no chance in hell . just white/grey color... now I get a msg saying " Sereral UV sets same name...."     

this seems to just bake the HP´s texture to the plane. at least something... even if it´s kind of rotated counter clock wise and also mirrored along "U"

antibump just absolute destroys anything on the mesh ... not what i was looking for 

sorry - but I must assume, there is something totally broken in this version of 3DC.... can you see? now the UVs are slightly "rotated" - but I did not touch anything! And even with UVs clearly existing, the bake still does not give me the expected results. I really was expecting 3DC to become my "3D Scan all into one go-to-app".. but looks like this will not happen. Photogrammetry Tool : broken, does not work with latest RealityScan 2.1.x version RizomUV bridge script: does not work, because of "background coding stuff" changed in newer versions And now: getting a simple 2D Plane UV´d and bake out AO map seems to be an impossible task (at least for me)  At least the community is really friendly and helpful - so thank you guys

oookeeey... now this was a good explanation I think - but my brain sems to be not capable of processing it fully. maybe we try it this way: I just want to bake AO map from 20M tris highpoly to a simple 2D-Plane. the HP was imported from an OBJ, which in turn was exported from Realityscan. The "bake" plane, I did in 3DCoat. The plane faces the HP object, cage/Ray Distance should fit.... Now - what do I need to do where (in what room?) to get AO baked? this is the scene in Retopo (room): best Regards

The Retopo room has its own set of UV tools (virtually identical to the one in the UV room). That may not make much sense, but it is because internally, they are making UV's for entirely different meshes. The UV room is for PAINT objects, while the UV tools in the Retopo room are strictly for Retopo meshes. Another reason they are separated the way they are is because you will often want to set up your UV's DURING your UV process...because you would naturally want to unwrap a lower poly mesh than a medium or higher poly mesh. You can UV it before you start adding extra geometry like supporting edgeloops for hard edges or open areas of a model (ie., mouth, eyes, etc.). With the UV tools built into the room, you can do them right there without having to step into another workspace.  Once you go through the baking process, you now have a PAINT object in the Paint workspace with paint layers created from the baking process. Now, your UV's will be present and editable in the UV workspace, for this newly baked Paint mesh. I hope that explains it. I have often suggested and requested that Paint and Retopo Meshes were merged as one, so there would not be this confusion, and it would make 3DCoat less complicated. I think it is a much more difficult task to do than we users might think, because Andrew agreed it would be a good idea...however, the the time spent trying to do it must be very significant.