What's the correct way of unwrapping a trapezoid onto a brick texture without distortion? (and only one seam)
This is obviously the wrong way. Just to illustrate the problem: Like this the texture would be distorted on all 4 faces.
Use this addon:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcFEdK5TQv0Download link in the description.
>>619836Also, if that is not what you wanted, try the cube projection unwrap method.
It's not possible to unwrap with only one seam
you can easily project paint these parts without unwrapping on image like a savage
projective texture mapping is a solution.
>>619829would it even look real, i mean the brick layout to get that shape, i don't think you could do it with a texture
OP has made something in Blender. It's not supposed to look real or good.
>>619924This. It would look as bad and be as impractical in reality as you might expect, so if it looks bad in 3D, it's not your fault as much as the fact that you're attempting it.Such an object should look like a stair-step, with each row of bricks being upright, but gradually narrowing towards the top.
>>619924Real masonry is perfectly capable of doing this for thousands of years. You just have to shape individual bricks for the slopes/corners.
>>619934It works in reality, but case-dependentt. anon who built his own house
>>619936>You just have to shape individual bricksJUST
>>619938In rl, anon...obviously not in your 3D model.
>>619937The thing is that in your examples it's not bad because 1. They only slope on one axis, which is much easier to make 2. The bricks are still upright in the left picture, and 3. In the right picture there is a clear separatation in the brickwork as you might expect on an arch, which is a valid way to make bricks slope.These are all ways of solving the problem, just not the one OP wants to solve, if they simply expect the unwrap to do all the work for them.
>>619934technically you can just cut the bricks into a slope, ending up with what OP is going for.It's not common but it works.
>>619977It's not common because it's stupid and stupid expensive.
>>619983What do you know about masonry, 3D pleb
You could try using 3d textures and/or AI but that isn't an unwrapping problem.Otherwise, this assignment is impossible since surfaces in 2 dimensions don't just project unto surfaces in 3 dimensions without distortion.I wish there was some mathematical proof to demonstrate this.
>>620031Triangle inequality maybe?
>>619829jaysus, stop unwrapping alreadysubstance painter exist for a reason
>>619829not only impossible but also meaningless
>>620719Aye, it exists for the reason to be uninstalled and replaced by Mari
>>620772It's good to see that you are growing. I'm proud of you.t. Autodesk
hot shit just project from view at the correct angel of the brick texture. so like just hit fucking go to the x,y,z axis grab the faces that "point" that way and unwrap via project from view. shit you could probably get away with stacking your textures if you didn't give a shit.
>>620887I like this style. We need more eXtreme tutorials.
>>619829unwrap before scaling the top edge.
>>619829unwrap the faces one at a time, line them up, and adjust the vertices (the top ones preferably) on each end equally to close the gap. your unwrap will be straight so you can project any material onto it instead of making a special texture map that follows weird directions or seams if you unwrap it any other way like this >>619832
or just torrent xrayunwrap or something if you dont want to do any manual labor
>>621546>without distortion?>without distortion?>without distortion?What do you think happens when you take a square with a texture mapped to it, then scale down one edge, anon?
>>621586you get smaller bricks.everybody knows that.
How's the new UI as an old user? I've gotten used to THE OLD WAYS and haven't updated since 2.78, I'm pretty interested in the new real time viewport thing but not really enough to learn a new UI right now