Is the company teasing a specific new graphics card? a new product line of superclocked variants of its current Turing lineup? or perhaps next generation gaming laptops? It’s hard to tell
Hi and welcome.
Two things: That first image has UV padding. If you don't want that, be sure to turn it off in the export.
Second thing, we'll need more info on what you're exporting, is it channel packed, are you applying the metallic map, etc., to be able to help.
i want to export the texture maps that I have made but everytime i do the come out like the first image. Aswell as the maps not coming out right they also don't carry over the metalness into marmoset as its ment to be a more orange colour. Any help would be greatly appreciated. :)
Hey guys, there's a way to move the vertices aligneds ?
Or make them snap correctly to the base line? like you know, you create a new quad, normally not aligned, its possible to create them and snap on the moment that moving or creating ? without using transform tool ?
@Innovine you can use Blender to prepare the mesh for sculpting.
Use the Ceres texture as linear environment map and bake the lighting into high res uv unwrapped icosphere. Be sure to set icosphere's material to a perfect mirror beforehand and to use linear image as render target.
Then, use this texture to displace points of the sphere using displace modifier and export the model to 3D Coat. The greater the icosphere resolution, the finer the detail you will get from displacement.
No Carlosan, I did not say that it should be the solution for 3D-Coat to copy another program.
I just used a program to demonstrate things that could be applied within 3D-Coat in a way that was improved and unique. Just a source of inspiration.
Because if you stop to think, most of the features in a 3d program already exist in various programs. If it were to think that way, there would be no other sculpture or 3D program, after all such functions already exist in ZBrush or another 3D program.
So, would not need any developers to do another program. Just as many tools that already exist do not have to exist in a certain program that does not yet have these tools.
How would things be? Would there be no competing programs?
So 3D-Coat would not need Sculpt Layers, NoiseMaker (it does not yet exist in 3D-Coat but is constantly requested here by users and exists in ZBrush), most of the tools and features that exist in Paint Room were inspired from where? Maybe Photoshop?
These few examples that I told you about are exclusive and unique creations of 3D-Coat?
I think not!
I, you and all the users know that they were inspirations from other programs, do you agree?
And being inspirations, they could be developed in a unique and different way within 3D-Coat.
But of course 3D-Coat has features and tools that have been created that are unique to 3D-Coat and have served as inspirations for other competing programs to develop.
A simple example is a car tire. The tire already exists, right?
So, do you think companies will even create a tire from scratch or will they improve the tire that already exists?
Will they create a different tire?
And even if they create a different tire, this new creation will be inspired from where?
The features and tools presented by me through Blender are just ways to explain something that could be simple, efficient and with complete user control in your work within 3D-Coat. If you think what I've shown is useless and you would not benefit from it, that's okay, that's your opinion.
I submitted a suggestion from the Tweak Room which is a Room that most 3D-Coat users ask to be removed from 3D-Coat and I also did not understand the reason for the existence of this Room within 3D-Coat. But before suggesting, I did my homework and when I went to seriously test the Tweak Room, I realized that the Tweak Room would be a possible solution with great potential for what I demonstrated in Blender, enabling us to almost complete unification of Rooms within 3D-Coat without a significant code change or anything else.
So we would be able to have the features and tools that I've demonstrated in the video as inspirational sources for even better and unique things within 3D-Coat. In my opinion, it would be fantastic.
I confess that I am not a developer, but I think with all of this 3D-Coat could win the migration of many artists who use competing programs because these artists are accustomed to an easier and more fluent and unified workflow with a single mesh.
Now if you think that everything in 3D-Coat should be Andrew's own creation and developers, fine by me. I think Andrew is going to have a lot of difficulties this way, as I've already said practically everything is already created today.
Do not get me wrong in the things I will say, but honestly, I do not understand your questions or maybe "criticism" for me, but you have every right to speak and I respect.
I particularly will not expose myself in this way.
I thought I was helping, but from what I see, no.
I'll suggest some things to Andrew when possible via email... but I've figured out how things work.