Jump to content
3DCoat Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Percevan's Achievements


Neophyte (2/11)




Community Answers

  1. From what you describe, it has a bit less to do with your original texture, the one you're using to paint/for the SM, and more with the intended for output texture resolution. The one(s) you're making. So, you can create a larger texture (even if you later reduce its size) and/or optimize your UVs so as to maximize their coverage of texture space.
  2. Percevan


    Awesome indeed. And nice renders too!
  3. not that I know of, sadly. I do Skyrim assets too, often from 3D coat, but I still has to send my stuff to another DCC software which has a nif plugin (Maya, in my case).
  4. Percevan


    I love it. Even though I'm usually not that fond of this style, I just... love it.
  5. Percevan

    Raven Flying 02

    Very nice! I love the design. very creative, and convincing at the same time. Well done.
  6. Percevan


    Wow... this is nothing less than jaw dropping. I'm usually not into military stuff, but color me impressed!
  7. the answer is in the question, as they say. You're missing a little step to get your intended, final, result, yes. But first allow me to humbly point out how and why it behaves as it does... which is as it should. it's not bugged or anything don't worry. Except that as your own use of quotes imply, you actually did NOT "cut out" anything from the original layer, where everything still exist, yes. So, when you did 'Objectify Hidden', a new layer with a _copy_ of the hidden was just pasted in, rather than a cut/paste equivalent, as everybody instinctively assume when first using vox hide (I swear, everyone make the same assumption, I did too at first ). So, after you get your objectified_new_part, mouseover the original layer, press 'h' to select it easily, and then go back to the geometry menu to use 'delete hidden'. You can then check, by using 'unhide all' that it worked as intended. On a side not, I'm venturing a guess here... but what may be leading user to this confusion when using VoxHide, IMO, is the fact that the new objectified object(s) get the suffix name "_hidden", as is they where cut/pasted from the original, while they're not, just copy of some still hidden part of the original, until explicite deletion by the user.
  8. In my experience, it works even on complex uv islands. That being said, I'd advise to recheck the topology, if you can't stack UV island by copy/pasting, it's generally because of split components, or too differing triangulation. In Nivellen's case, for example, I'd bet on the later. Having the same triangulation should let the usual UV stacking works, after rotating some of those differing edges (select / edge /CW or CWW spin command). Or, since it's so similar, delete one UV island, select the other and clone it (*), position the cloned retopo parts,and easily copy paste their Island. Might be faster than picking incorrectly rotated triangle edges edges and rotating them one by one. (*) / edit: Still in the Retopo room of course; And 'clone' "appears" in the Commands tab if you're first in Select mode, Faces.
  9. Percevan


    Wow, impressive. And there's even the Oblivion symbol from the Elder Scrools universe.
  10. It's definitely possible, and as easy as you'd want it to be, dare I say check this:
  11. Lumberyard is a fork from CryEngine 3.8.xxx , so it's lacking a lot of the development CryDev brought in their most recent versions. And Amazon didn't bought the "right" to benefit from any upcoming CryEngine development. On the other hand, it has a relatively decent update rhythm, not very fast but... okayish, which can even bring a couple of features not yet present in CryEngine V. For example, even though I didn't dig deep into it when I briefly tried it, Lumberyard has a component approach not unlike Unity, which might help new users and speedup things... maybe. Personally, I still prefer CryEngine, but to each its own I don't have issues exporting models from maya to CryEngine V (didn't try with Lumberyard) even though, granted, you have to be careful as the whole process involves a bit more preparatory steps that I like, so the user has to be methodical and... not in a rush :).
  12. La question déborde un peu (beaucoup ) du cadre de 3D-Coat, et concerne surtout tes buts, méthodes et moteur de jeu utilisé. Mais quelque soit ce dernier, en règle générale si la taille globale du terrain est imposante, même une texture 4k peut aisément donner cet effet de flou pixéliés, surtout pour un close-up caméra. Si, dans ton moteur de jeu tu n'envisages pas de couvrir le terrain avec des éléments de végétations, roches, etc. il faut soit viser une texture 8k soit utiliser plus d'une texture, si tu as la possibilité d'utiliser plus d'un terrain - ce qui n'est pas toujours faisable facilement - ça dépends, encore une fois du moteur de jeu (unreal, unity, cryEngine, autre?), de l'aproche visé ("faux" terrain réassemblé, ou streaming de terrains?), etc. Et si tu envisage de couvrir au moins en partie ce terrain, ne serait-ce qu'avec un système d'herbe, généralement la texture n'a pas besoin d'être trop détaillée, elle sera alors surtout visible de loin, par LOD.
  13. excellent creation, from a very original and well thought concept. I saved the final image.
  14. well, I am using windows 7, no issues with this tool so far.
  15. Split works as expected here, 4.7.07 An old version's preference xml issue maybe?
  • Create New...