Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 29, 2014 Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 I am unable to get decent Autotopo results in version 4.1 and I don't understand why. The polycount of the retopo mesh isn't anywhere near what I specify I want it to be and the qualilty is drastically reduced. Here's an example of a mesh I retopoed with v4 and keeping the same edge guides I've retopoed it with v4.1 and the results are very different. Both were supposed to by 8K meshes. What is different about retopo in version 4.1 and what do I need to do to get it to reproduce the same quality it did in 4.0? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javis Posted March 30, 2014 Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 I'm reading another thread with similar results. It sounds like a big. I would file a formal mantis report for this so Andrew can squash it asap. Sorry for the inconvenience! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted March 30, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 I don't know why, but Auto Retopo does not like thin objects. It would be good to report that on Mantis and see if Andrew can look into it. On many object types, it works remarkably well and saves a lot of time. But keep in mind, overall Auto Retopo aims to produce evenly distributed quads. There is some level of adaptive density, but if you are looking to use it for a game model, you'll still have to clean it up a bit (usually with "Delete Edges" and w/Edgeloops selected in the toolbar) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 30, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 What is Mantis and how do I do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlosan Posted March 30, 2014 Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 Do you know Mantis? 3D Coats bug reporting / feature request website Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 30, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 Thanks. And on a side note, when I was 3 years old I caught a bunch of grasshoppers and put them in a jar to take to Sunday School for show and tell. My one uncle was staying with us because he had a job on a tobacco farm and he caught a Praying Mantis and said I should take it to Sunday School too because it looked really cool. By the time I got to Sunday School I had a jar full of decapitated grasshoppers and one very full, happy Praying Mantis. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor Tony Nemo Posted March 30, 2014 Contributor Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 The images in the Editor windows appear identical and the 3D 4.1 version doesn't resemble the unwrapped Editor image (the 3D version doesn't show the breast contours). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 30, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 Ignore the UV Map. It's showing the UV Map for the v4.0 retopo. I didn't bother unwrapping the v4.1 since auto retopo did such a poor job on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Shu Posted March 30, 2014 Member Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 I don't know if this works for you, but I have experienced more or less the same issue (plus a major slowdown while using AUTOPO) and Andrew's note in your Issue on Mantis ( http://3d-coat.com/mantis/view.php?id=1464 ) has solved the problems for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 30, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 That actually made things much worse. Now the mesh is only 100 polys instead of the desired 8000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 30, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 Here's the result I'm getting now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 30, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 This is frustrating. I thought setting my target polygon count to 10 times what I want might produce the results I'm after but I still end up with a mess. I hope I didn't delete 4.0 or I'm screwed because 4.1 is clearly not compatible with my computer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted March 31, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted March 31, 2014 Watch these two videos and maybe they will help provide helpful pointers. That is to create downgraded version of the model, smooth it some and maybe turn the decimation option off in the Autopo dialog. You might also try to voxelize it and right-click the layer > Extrude, to give it a little more thickness. As I said before, it really struggles with thing objects. I do agree that it can be very frustrating, and I hope Andrew can spend a little time tweaking this feature so they user doesn't have to keep jumping through so many hoops just to try and get a decent result. People who are trying the application out, or new to the app will quickly get frustrated with it and stop using it...making 3D Coat lose a big part of it's appeal. It's not all that user friendly. There are too many work-arounds...and try this/that. People want a tool that is straight forward and easy to use. Not one that fights them to get the result they want. That being said, Auto Retopo is just another option/tool in the toolbox, to do the same thing. Sometimes, especially on thin objects like this, you have to use a better tool for the job. The Strokes tool. It might take just slightly longer than using Auto Retopo, but it is an Auto Retopology tool in it's own right. You make some guide loops + one cross-section > ENTER and you get a mesh. It gives you nearly explicit control and you don't have to worry about so many darn settings. Many times, it's actually faster and cleaner than Auto Retopo. This is why I choose it 75% of the time over Auto Retopo. Nontheless, there are times when I use Auto-Retopo and I am just amazed how well it works. So, it's a little finicky at times and on certain types of objects, but on things like secondary objects, it works a real treat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted March 31, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted March 31, 2014 EDIT: I meant to say that Auto Retopo doesn't like thin objects (not thing). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Shu Posted March 31, 2014 Member Report Share Posted March 31, 2014 (edited) @Ghastly: I am pretty sure that this is not about your OS. I am using Mac OS and I got the same issue. First, I thought the problem was solved but I only used a simple sculpt. When sculpting more complex, I get exactly the same problems you have. The quality of the resulting mesh is bad and the polycount is way off. @AbnRanger: I doubt this problem is about thin objects. You can take a look at the images I uploaded here: http://3d-coat.com/mantis/view.php?id=1464#bugnotes The hands are a problem in 4.0 and 4.1. They are very thin. But when you take a look at the rest, the resulting mesh is way better in 4.0. Also, the 4.0 mesh has 3998 of the 4000 desired polys. Even at decimate 200, the mesh has only 3204 quads left in 4.1. EDIT: A little addition to the thought about thin objects: When you look at the pictures, the 4.1 versions (especially at decimate 200) will even have a little better result in thin areas (hands). Edited March 31, 2014 by Shu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 31, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 31, 2014 Like I said. v4.0 I never had any trouble with broken or lack of detail autopo. Basically the only thing I had to do was tell it the number of polys I wanted to retopo set up the guides and it did the rest. Version 4.1 I cannot get autopo to work on anything. Even using a model which produced a very nice mesh on 4.0 is producing garbage on 4.1 The reason I've been working with this bathing suit model is because I've already produced a very nice retopo mesh in 4.0 and since it has been saved with the guides I should be able to reproduce the same or similar retopo in 4.1. But no matter what I've tried I cannot. I've tried higher values, lower values, smoothing on, smoothing off, pre vox on, pre vox off, decimate on, decimate off, hard surface on, hard surface off. Always I'm getting the same result in 4.1. A very low resolution mesh (I'm asking for 8000 but getting a mesh of only a couple hundred) that poorly captures the original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlosan Posted March 31, 2014 Report Share Posted March 31, 2014 is your object empty ? or is a solid volume ? ------------ Andrew asked at Mantis if you could send the model to Email: support@3d-coat.com to test it do you ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 31, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 31, 2014 I've sent him the file, hopefully he'll be able to figure it out. However I was just using that file as an example of the autopo problems I've been having with the new version. Testing it out on other files it seems to be a problem with only some of the files I made in 4.0 not autotoping in 4.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted March 31, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted March 31, 2014 This appears to be a particular oddity of some files that were saved in 4.0 and not others. Weird. I tried to autopo the default voxel bust and it did fine. I autopoed the genesis goo files I have and it worked fine too. But the different clothing files I made with 4.0 won't autopo in 4.1. Doing a really quick and dirty mesh that is similar to the swimsuit I made in 4.0 produces a decent retopo result. So it has to be sometime to do with certain files saved in v4.0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 1, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 This appears to be a particular oddity of some files that were saved in 4.0 and not others. Weird. I tried to autopo the default voxel bust and it did fine. I autopoed the genesis goo files I have and it worked fine too. But the different clothing files I made with 4.0 won't autopo in 4.1. Doing a really quick and dirty mesh that is similar to the swimsuit I made in 4.0 produces a decent retopo result. So it has to be sometime to do with certain files saved in v4.0 Try to voxelize the model > right-click layer > Global Space > right-click layer > Fill Voids. If there are pockets/bubbles within the object, it can cause major issues in the Auto Retopo routine and when baking. I once had a gator tail, I sculpting for a Southern Comfort display, and I had nothing but trouble, just like you're having. Andrew looked at the file and saw all these little internal voids/pockets (usually occurs when merging two objects together) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted April 1, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 Nope that still doesn't work. For some reason certain files made with v4.0 just won't autopo with v4.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor digman Posted April 1, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 If you can share that file even though you sent one to Andrew I will be happy to test as well.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted April 1, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 Here you go. Have at it. Swim Suit v4_0.zip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 1, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 Nope that still doesn't work. For some reason certain files made with v4.0 just won't autopo with v4.1 Try this one last trick...as there seems to be something funky going on with that model, itself. Drag and drop that layer into the Model's Pallet > decimate it (in the dialog that pops up) the lowest amount you think would keep it's main shape and contour > create a new surface mode layer > click on the thumbnail of your newly created obj in the Models pallet > APPLY. Now try and Auto-Retopo this version. Make sure any other versions, on different layers, are hidden. Uncheck the Decimation option in the Auto Retopo dialog...to avoid that step. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor digman Posted April 1, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 (edited) I looked at your file and count yourself lucky that auto-retopo worked well on other models as you broke the cardinal rules for how to place your guide strokes for the new auto-routine that Andrew made several months ago.. You have intersecting guides and guides on both sides of the symmetry line, numbered "1" and "6" in the picture guide Those guide strokes are a big no-no for the new auto-retopo routine. Look at your suit guides and then look at the picture and read the guideline that Andrew gave us on "How to place guide strokes" using the new auto-retopo routine... The picture guide was made my Andrew... Run some test using correct guides and see what results you get... I will set some on my own later but it is late here... EDIT: I just noticed too that some of your green guides start on one side of the symmetry plane and end up on the other side, that as well is not good... Now I am not saying there are no problems but first guides strokes must be put down correctly so when a bug report is made then you know that is not a user created problem. Edited April 1, 2014 by digman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted April 1, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 That may be but even with no guides at all my 4.0 clothing sculpts simply will not autopo in 4.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor digman Posted April 1, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 (edited) That may be but even with no guides at all my 4.0 clothing sculpts simply will not autopo in 4.1 "Now I am not saying there are no problems but first guides strokes must be put down correctly so when a bug report is made then you know that is not a user created problem" The above is from my post, just saying it as Andrew will see the guides and say something about it or think well the guides are just placed wrong. I agree with you there are still problems with the auto- retopo routine even before version 4.1. Place one curve here, ha that fixed this area but oh wait, now this is other area is screwed up... LOL Painting density is still buggy, well last time I checked, I gave up using it... Vertices diving into the mesh in random places that you have to fix manually. Some areas get too many polygons and other areas that need them do not get enough. Painting density is meant to help here but it is buggy as stated above. Takes too long to figure out just the right curve placement and correct problems might has well manual retopo it... Andrew stopped working on the Auto-retopo routine hopefully he will return soon make it better or add the new routine he said he thought of. I will add some information to your bug report in a day or two, busy right now... Edited April 1, 2014 by digman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Shu Posted April 1, 2014 Member Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 (edited) @Ghastly: When I read about your guess that only files that have been created in v4.0 will cause those issues in v4.1, I did some doodling and I have to say, even after creating a file in v4.1, I still run into problems. I did two tests. The first sculpt has done pretty well in v4.1. Only the polycount is sort of high for what I requested. When I tried to autopo another sculpt, I ran into the slow-down problem again. After waiting 8 minutes on the first try to autopo and 3 minutes on the second try when testing the second schulpt, I quit the application without any result. When using autopo in v4.0 in the v4.1 file, there was a result after about 17 seconds. Here are some images that show the whole testing: Edited April 1, 2014 by Shu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted April 1, 2014 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted April 1, 2014 You guys might be onto something. It very well could be a nasty bug, introduced somehow. But what Digman said is correct. You want to adhere to the general rules mentioned for using stroke guides in the process. Intersecting lines (in most cases, anyway) and crossing the symmetry plane is not good. I hope Andrew does find out what the problem is and also revisits the toolset, to refine it, so it doesn't require so many hit and miss attempts, to get a good result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Ghastly Posted April 5, 2014 Author Advanced Member Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 Here is what Andrew had to say about it. Hi! I discovered file. It seems that just decimation does not work well for this file because at 50K it leaves dense curvy details and makes big polygons over the rest. But there is solution that gives really nice result So, check "Voxelize before quadrangulation", set 40 K for decimation, then run with symmetry. But, it is better to clone suit because volume will be voxelized and you may loose details. Remove most of strokes, 4.1 is more sensitive to strokes because it tries to follow them exactly: - leave strokes only on one side of symmetry - remove too close strokes - it will not improve quality - never intersect strokes There is good guide: http://pilgway.com/files/guidesexample.png Andrew 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.