philnolan3d Posted July 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Or you could turn off sub division on merge to eliminate the problem completely. also use additional extrusion as the volume is quite thin. I'm not sure I understand this actually. I'm looking at the merge for microvertex panel and I don't see anything about turning subdivision on or off. Unless you mean to change the carcass resolution to the lowest setting. I'm afraid to use additional extrusion, wouldn't that screw up the depth that is being baked before the retopo mesh and the voxel mesh? Edit: Just tried, choosing the lowest carcass res. does nothing about the mangled parts. Edit 2: I tried using Ptex, thinking I could bake the textures to UV if I had to. The mangled parts are still there, different but still there. In some parts worse. It's not just on thin hair strands either, it seems to happen on other parts of the character where one mesh is close to or touching another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor LJB Posted July 5, 2011 Contributor Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Phil 3D-Coat and displacements is always problematic, I guess it depends on the required final result like Beatkitano said earlier. I put it to you that the clothing like that is too thin anyhow to generate displacement. Not so much a modelling issue more a modelling decision/design issue. for best results in PTex I always use 'smooth object' and 'Dont snap to surface' this still give you a paintable geometry and still captures enough detail to generate/bake maps from on clean UV after painting. This way even if you bump up Subdivision ALOT on merge you still get minimum if any artifacting. Check my image, and remember to activate visibillity on the initial projected layer after merging this way to paint room (Sometimes it will not be active so you think something did not work right). Then when you want your displacement export the high res mesh from the paint room, and bake the maps to low res (Needs clean UV) saved out from the retopo room. Your still going have Displacment baking problems doing it this way but thats 3D for you at least you'll have painted the model BTW the reason your artifacts came back after removing in sculpt room is that its the normal projection (which is displacing the mesh) that is causing them, so when you go back to the paint room and the normal (projected layer) is still present its just re displacing the mesh. no amount of sculpt room mesh smoothing will remove it as it is a paint operation and therefore has to be dealt with there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted July 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Well I reported it as a bug with a test project file. My test project actually came out even worse than my character and it's simpler. On Mantis: http://3d-coat.com/mantis/view.php?id=297 Ptex has pretty much the same problems, just slightly different places. Leigh, I don't think your dragon has any of the spots that cause the problems, though I may be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted July 5, 2011 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I haven't had much, if any luck with merging to MV, on models with any decent level of complexity. This is why I said earlier that Andrew should double down on baking, and bring it to the point where it's a staple feature of the application...including true Ambient Occlusion. Doesn't matter a great deal if you can sculpt some wicked detail if you have baking issues that won't allow you to get the work out. PPP has proven more reliable, and thus I just add as much geometry in the Retopo Room as I need to capture the contours Normal Maps won't show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted July 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Oh I always use MV for high res stuff. I had some different problems in the past but Andrew mostly fixed those. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted July 5, 2011 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 this is a great example of the weaknesses of the current 3DC topology shortcomings. I'm not sure what to make of this statement, Bay. Trying to force this kind of complexity on a game model would be handled better elsewhere...just how? Are you talking about baking, snapping or the retopo tools themselves? Baking with MV is obviously problematic, and I hope Andrew looks into this. However, I don't see how this is a fault with the retopology tools in 3D Coat...not in this case, anyway. Personally, I would try to leave the zipper portion out (unless it was in the middle of the garment...which Normal Maps would work fine), until I got to the Paint Room (PPP). Then, I would try to use STRIPS along the edges (of a shelled mesh) to see how that would work. Phil could retopo one portion of the zipper and then use the clone function, but that's still too much geometry for a game model...no? One thing that remains missing in the Retopology toolset is a good "Shell" tool (creating depth in thin objects). I have to export the mesh out to Max, apply a Shell modifier to it, and then import back in. So, in this regard, I agree with you. It is a feature that I requested numerous times. Another approach here, would be to take a basic zipper element and use it with a scatter tool (or even particles) along a spline, inside a major 3D application. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor LJB Posted July 5, 2011 Contributor Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 ok maybe this dragon model is free, but these areas are still usual pitfalls when it comes to baking and merging any model see image. you test looks like whole bunch of crap, which makes me think theres a problem not related to model structure. Try this (if you havent already) convert you voxels to surface mode before merging. This can often help, and convert any seperate vox volumes/layers to global space (This unifies the scale). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted July 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Hmm I'll try that, hadn't thought of it. What I'm doing right now that sort of works, is going around the normal map in Texture UV Editor and using the eraser carefully on all of the bad spots. Then using the eraser carefully on the remaining bad spots on the 3D model, then any remaining spikes can be sort of cleaned up with a mixture of Sculpt room and normal map erasing. It's not perfect and it takes a long time, but it's better than it was. Edit: I don't think Surface mode worked as well as planned. This is very frustrating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor LJB Posted July 7, 2011 Contributor Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 Oooo what a mess, Bug then me thinks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted August 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 At long last I'm back to work. http://3d-coat.com/turntableID=131243525546 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Garagarape Posted August 4, 2011 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 Oh! She's nice. I like the folds on the clothes a lot. But there's something that bugs me on the head-neck junction. The proportions are good, but the head seem to be located too much forward. On the contrary shoulders may be slightly too much rear-located (on purpose for a clean bone structure?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted August 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2011 If you're referring to the spot right across the middle of the neck, I had a slight baking problem. The head was a separate voxel object with some overlap. It looked perfect in voxels, but the merged version showed a band there that I've had trouble smoothing away. So I will have to try to work more on that, maybe I can also move the head back some in the Sculpt room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor LJB Posted August 10, 2011 Contributor Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Looking better Phil Now she is in Polys if i might make a crit on the face, that should now be easier to correct. From the front she looks nice but her profil is off, go back and check the shape of her face, ev en with Mangarised features she could still look prettier from the side, Check my paintover below. Great work on Folds as Garagerape mentions you nailed those. Backs of the shoes need some work but its turning out real nice. Good job and some nice progress here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted August 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 I'll see what I can do, I don't want her to look too photo real though. It has also been suggested that I move the head back so that's also on the list. What's wrong with the shoes, I thought hey were OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted August 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 22, 2011 I've been fighting with 3DC, LW, xNormal, and even max, for about 3 days and sadly can not get a decent displacement map for this model. Here's a strange problem I've been having. http://3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=8525 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.