Andrew Shpagin Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 NO visible displacement in the scene?then Andrew,please don't get rid of current technology,realtime and visible displacement is what I consider the biggest difference and advantage from other texture apps.what a pity! Visible displacement is no problem to add. Anyway old technology will be preserved. But DP will be default method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member ldzywsj Posted February 27, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Wow,great!The remark gave me some relief! Andrew,you are really a superman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member wailingmonkey Posted February 27, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 In addition - no more limitations on mirrored or overlapped uv-coordinates. This will probably amount to quite a few more sales from those doing game work (save time, don't have to juggle with workarounds). good news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted February 27, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Would there be any possibility of implementing parallax mapping? steep parallax mapping? Perhaps with self-shadowing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member JamesE Posted February 27, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Of course. The only difference in (1) is that displacement produces normalmap but no visible displacement of geometry in scene occurs. Object in DP don't changes vertices coordinates.In addition - no more limitations on mirrored or overlapped uv-coordinates. AWESOME!!!! Cannot wait to play with this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member 3DArtist Posted February 27, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I can't wait for DP, i have several projects that i would like to paint on. I don't know if this has been requested for but i was thinking about how useful a deform with lattice tool would be for voxels. i requested it here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I can't wait for DP, i have several projects that i would like to paint on. Yeah me too, I started a hard surfaced model months ago expecting that that it would only be on the back burner for a little while while I waited for DP. So I'll be excited to get back on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Shpagin Posted February 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 More reports from battlefield: seams problem completely solved for DP. Seams are completely invisible and even more accurate then in current implementation. Mathematically it was most complex problem in this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Applink Developer haikalle Posted February 28, 2009 Applink Developer Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 It may be a Battlefield but knowing that we are in the same side with you Andrew it gives a nice feel of comfort. Just take your time. I'm having so much fun with the latest alpha so it keeps me busy for long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted February 28, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 More reports from battlefield: seams problem completely solved for DP. Seams are completely invisible and even more accurate then in current implementation.Mathematically it was most complex problem in this stuff. Bravo! I can't wait to see it. I've never seen a direct painting app that doesn't have significant seam problems (even those using projection painting). Can we have trajectory smoothing as well, pretty please! You can do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member rimasson Posted February 28, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 Bravo! I can't wait to see it. I've never seen a direct painting app that doesn't have significant seam problems (even those using projection painting).Can we have trajectory smoothing as well, pretty please! You can do it! Bodypaint is actually a great painting app., it don't rely on your gfx card mem and can handle much larger textures.... but it's only a painting app. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 Bodypaint is actually a great painting app., it don't rely on your gfx card mem and can handle much larger textures.... but it's only a painting app. I haven't used Bodypaint in a few years but last I saw it didn't do real-time normal maps. Does it now? I also remember being not very fond of the interface, finding it rather confusing and unconventional in some places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted February 28, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 Bodypaint is actually a great painting app., it don't rely on your gfx card mem and can handle much larger textures.... Yeah, but I can already do 4k textures in 3d coat with no lag and my machine is pretty average. Unless you're rendering for IMAX, why would you need anything higher? Even 4k is overkill for an full screen object at hd 1080p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted March 1, 2009 Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 I disagree, there have been times where I've longed for larger texture maps in 3DC. If you're working on a character who will have full body shots and closeups you need higher res, or else using a bunch of smaller image sets which I think would end up being a larger size than one or two big sets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 I disagree, there have been times where I've longed for larger texture maps in 3DC. If you're working on a character who will have full body shots and closeups you need higher res, or else using a bunch of smaller image sets which I think would end up being a larger size than one or two big sets. OK. For the sake of argument let's say you pelt-map a character in your fave app. From head to toe, that character is getting ~4kpixels in the vertical direction. For you to need more resolution with a 1080p frame you would have to zoom four times or more. That's close enough for a close-up on the face without any noticeable loss of detail (though not an extreme close up.. but you could always do the head separately with a single 2/4k texture)... especially considering that if you're going to render an and compress an animation, high frequency detail is going to either be lost or create noise. JPEG and MPEG compression functions better with a slightly softer image anyway. Too much detail and the overall image quality degrades and/or the bitrate increases to compensate. ... and that's pelt-mapping the whole body. If you cut the legs and arms off and optimize the position and scale of your UV islands, you can probably get closer to 6k pixels vertically from head to toe. Also consider that two 4k textures do not make an 8k texture. Four 4k textures make an 8k texture. Even if you use 3 of those, (big overkill, IMO), it's still less than a single 8k texture. A single 8k texture is 16 2k textures. If your character has separate materials/objects for the torso, pants, legs, head, hands and feet. You could use 6 2k textures and still only use 3/8 of the space compared to a single 8k texture. I can't see why anybody would use an 8k texture for anything other than maybe a hi-res print, IMHO, but that's just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member SonK Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 More reports from battlefield: seams problem completely solved for DP. Seams are completely invisible and even more accurate then in current implementation.Mathematically it was most complex problem in this stuff. I'm looking forward to this, i hope you focus on speed and quality of brush after DP. Yeah, but I can already do 4k textures in 3d coat with no lag and my machine is pretty average. Unless you're rendering for IMAX, why would you need anything higher? Even 4k is overkill for an full screen object at hd 1080p. For movies, you'll need multiple 2K or 4K maps this can reach hundreds of map AFAIK, this is what Dave Cardwell said when he worked on King Kong. I was shocked as the next guy when i heard those numbers and i still am! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 For movies, you'll need multiple 2K or 4K maps this can reach hundreds of map AFAIK, this is what Dave Cardwell said when he worked on King Kong.I was shocked as the next guy when i heard those numbers and i still am! Yeah, but they're also rendering 4k+ frame sizes. Even then, as you say, 2 and 4k maps were enough for King Kong. IMO, it should be enough for any 3d coat user. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member ldzywsj Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 I haven't used Bodypaint in a few years but last I saw it didn't do real-time normal maps. Yes,realtime and visible normal maps is important,but the main problem is speed and qaulity,hope Andrew will make progress in dealing with them in DP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Sethren Posted March 1, 2009 Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 This may sound silly and i don't know if it's a realistic solution but i have to wonder of image/texture synthesis might solve the matter of using mass resolution maps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 This may sound silly and i don't know if it's a realistic solution but i have to wonder of image/texture synthesis might solve the matter of using mass resolution maps? What do you mean by that? it might have already been done. Do you mean procedural textures or some mixture of image and procedural? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Sethren Posted March 1, 2009 Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Well, in the sense of, if i even knew what i was talking about. It would be texture images but would work using some type of image instancing were as it creates only parts of the image that is needed and the rest is produced with fractalizing/synthesizing parts of the rest. Might save on memory perhaps. I think imageSynth does something like this??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted March 1, 2009 Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Hmm Kinda reminds me of Content Aware Scaling in Photoshop (and a few other programs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Blender is getting something like this with texture nodes (it already has material nodes... the idea is to encapsulate build a custom texture with multiple outputs). Somebody has already used it to build a mandelbrot fractal generator. It can source images too. The target is something like MapZone or ProFX: http://www.mapzoneeditor.com/?PAGE=FEATURES You can mix procedural with image and ... well it's pretty flexible as it's node based. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Well, in the sense of, if i even knew what i was talking about. It would be texture images but would work using some type of image instancing were as it creates only parts of the image that is needed and the rest is produced with fractalizing/synthesizing parts of the rest. Might save on memory perhaps. I think imageSynth does something like this??? Resolution independence would be nice, but i'm not sure it's really possible to paint that without recording every stroke as some sort of vector graphic and generating higher res images on export (sort of like construction history, or Photoshop actions "played back" at a higher res on export)... Andrew has pulled off some pretty impressive stuff, though. I wouldn't be surprised if he could figure out a way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member SonK Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Yeah, but they're also rendering 4k+ frame sizes. Even then, as you say, 2 and 4k maps were enough for King Kong. IMO, it should be enough for any 3d coat user. :P Of course 2K-4K should be enough since 3DC does support mutilple UV tiles? the biggest issue would be seams, but Andrew is addressing that with Direct Painting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted March 1, 2009 Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Of course 2K-4K should be enough since 3DC does support mutilple UV tiles? the biggest issue would be seams, but Andrew is addressing that with Direct Painting. I heard Andrew mentions seams too, I never had any problem painting across seams in 3DC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member GED Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 the viewing of normal maps while painting textures would be really useful for game artists, Mudbox 2009 has this feature heres a video of how it works http://www.vimeo.com/3014923 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted March 1, 2009 Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 the viewing of normal maps while painting textures would be really useful for game artists, Mudbox 2009 has this feature heres a video of how it workshttp://www.vimeo.com/3014923 Uh... 3DC has had that since the beginning, it's like, the core of what 3DC is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 Uh... 3DC has had that since the beginning, it's like, the core of what 3DC is. Yeah. Voxel sculpting is just a perk (albeit it's the particular perk that convinced me to buy the program...). And you can paint the normal maps on low poly meshes too if you hit keypad 6 during paint or go to view>low poly model (just found that out... figured others might want to know). 3d coat dynamically generates displacement and normal maps as you paint and displays both in the viewport. You can even add layers like in photoshop and clone and dodge and burn, etc... If you're only using it for voxel sculpting you're missing a lot of neat stuff. It's very much a full-featured coating app. The only difference is it's internal implementation (data stored in microverteces), but this is for the most part transparent to the user. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member psyborgue Posted March 1, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 1, 2009 I heard Andrew mentions seams too, I never had any problem painting across seams in 3DC. Me neither. It's the one painting app i've never had any seam problems with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts