[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



How viable is this?
Blender's tools for stitching clothing seem rudimentary at best, but they're as good as the tools I've seen in software for this specifically.

Also, I can't seem to use UV unwrap in Blender anymore, seems like it'd be a useful tool for making clothing since it converts a shape into a flat pattern.
>>
>>538583
have to enter edit mode and select the faces you want to unwrap

also uv unwrapping isn't guaranteed to be 1:1 the size of the faces, you'll have to look for the option to make it so

don't forget to mark your seams before uv unwrapping
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvuUGz385ds
>>
>>538591
UV unwrapping doesn't seem to give me an unwrapped mesh as an image anymore.
It doesn't seem to do anything.
>>
>>538592
Rendering clothing and designing clothing are two very different things.
For rendering you have to figure out how to make realistic creases, and for designing you have to make clothes that have a way of translating between unstitched 2D patterns and stitched 3D patterns.
>>
>>538600
Have you tried marking the seams on your mesh first?
>>
>>538976
Yes.
Where is the output of unwrapping?
>>
>>538601
you dum shit you design in MD
>>
>>539177
>using acronyms which almost no one understands which are impossible to look up
>>
>>539294
Oh gee that was so hard, took a whole 4 seconds
>>
File: 1475364859520.png (82 KB, 654x525)
82 KB
82 KB PNG
>Blender's tools for stitching clothing seem rudimentary at best

wait, what?
what stitching and sowing tools
>>
>>538985

uv editor
>>
>>539324
It's in cloth settings.
You can have a bunch of bare edges in a vertex group which tightly pull together when the cloth animates.

>>539325
Ah, I had checked there before, but it seems that stuff only appears if I unwrap while I have that panel open.

>>539319
>didn't even look up MD
>literally what you did was do a search and blindly recommend the first program you came across, then use the name as an acronym as if it was common knowledge
This is the second most retarded use of acronyms I have ever seen, and is also the worst case of poor software recommendation I have ever seen.
If you knew anything about MD, you'd never recommend it.
It's complete shit, stupidly expensive, and worse than Blender in every way for clothesmaking.
One problem for example is that during the stitching part of simulation, you can't turn off gravity, which can produce bad results.
In Blender you can turn the gravity off then on again which is exactly how it should be done.
>>
>>539328
maybe you forgot to close render result
>>
>>539329
Huh, that works too.
>>
>>539324
Don't bother, it's garbage. It's an extremely hack-ish feeling and unintuitive process that requires you to manually create a weird mesh (mesh pieces joined by edges without faces everywhere you want them to join together) to then create an ultimately unconvincing result. And it doesn't help that Blender's cloth collision detection and overall simulation speed are awful, making everything a massive headache.

Don't ever bother with Blender's cloth simulator, or soft-body sim either for that matter, unless you are trying to accomplish something extremely simplistic. They are both like... I can't even think of an apt phrasing... I guess "complete waste of time" will have to do.

Hopefully this stuff gets replaced for 2.8.
>>
File: stemen.jpg (7 KB, 200x210)
7 KB
7 KB JPG
>>539328
Ah a Blender fag, that explains everything. Nevermind.
>>
>>539328
Md is literally a godsend to professionals everywhere.
Blender user calls it shit heh.
>>
>>539294
I SAID IT BECAUSE THAT WAS WHAT WAS IN THE VIDEO YOU DAFT RETARD
>>
>>539338
>actually paying attention to video links on /3/
Only people who need babby tier handholding even acknowledge when a video is posted
A true professional uses self hypnosis to filter videos out of their vision when browsing /3/
>>
>>539328
>It's complete shit, stupidly expensive, and worse than Blender in every way for clothesmaking.
Seriously, what? Marvelous Designer is used all the time in the industry along with Maya, and those two are really the only ones mentioned for cloth. I've never heard Blender mentioned outside of fucking 4chan.
>>
>>539336
desk fag
>>
OP here, I haven't been able to figure out a certain problem of the pawsocks.
I'm able to use UV unwrapping to turn 3D models into flat patterns right now, but it seems it's impossible to make the socks as a signle piece pre-sewing because of the toes.
But I don't know what would look and feel best when making the socks as multiple pieces.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.