[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 / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / 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] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: Untitled-3.jpg (458 KB, 2488x1218)
458 KB
458 KB JPG
Guys you have to help me please. The limitations of my knowledge are like a massive ball shackle on my heels. I have a series of questions the answers to which might help me out tremendously. In the past I spent countless hours doing frustrating and stupid methods to achieve things that, had I known the proper workflow, would have been a 5 minute job in Blender. So I come to you instead of grinding on like an autist.

1. How do I make it so that I can actually put the UV's of all objects on the same file for eventual exporting? Right now Blender is treating all of the separate 'objects' (what are they even called? The things that represent several different 'parts' of the whole model in the upper right hierarchy) as if they required a unique separate UV. However in order to save performance and memory I figured it would be best to use a single Material in unity, and thus I want to export all of the UV's in one go. How do I actually set this up?

2. How do I export my UV's in a very high resolution? Right now (check following pic for example) my UV's are so packed and low res that I cannot possibly properly hand-paint them. But I see no option to export in 2048 or perhaps even 4096. Standard seems to be 1024 and that's it?

3. Is there actually an easier way to do this? I tried a pirate substance painter version ages ago and had an incredibly difficult time getting into it, but back then my research indicated that this is the go-to package for handpainting models. I mean there has to be some application that allows me to paint 'in real time' ?

4. How are normal maps actually made? In the past I kind of got away with creating a height map in crazybump or materialize based on the greyscale painted texture (diffuse I think it's called), and then working out a normal map based on that, with a little bit of photoshop editing afterwards to smooth parts out. Is there an easier way?

Thanks in advance boyos, I love you all. Sorry to spam your board so much.
>>
File: trying.jpg (287 KB, 1352x1352)
287 KB
287 KB JPG
>>
>>673589
>However in order to save performance and memory I figured it would be best to use a single Material in unity
You can do that without merging UV's. Although I'd suggest making that gun into one object. It wouldn't be a huge performance hindering, but mesh islands are cleaner then then separate objects. You'd obviously have to weight and rig the unified object to animate it, but that's easy work when the you aren't actually painting the weights (when you are just apply 100% weighting to vertexes you don't even need to enter weight paint mode)... If you really, really want to keep them as separate objects there isn't much need to combine the UV (and I don't think it is even possible). UVs aren't like image textures. They don't take up noticeably more space by having more then one.

Programs like unity are smart enough to not load the same texture twice. If two objects use the same texture image they are just pointed at the same section of memory when their shaders request pixel information. That said, they have to be using the exact same asset. It is possible to load the same image twice if you import the same image as "image.000" and "image.001". However, that is your fault for importing the same image twice instead of importing it once and then selecting the already imported image from the asset files when setting up the second material.
>>
>>673589
>How do I export my UV's in a very high resolution?
UVs don't have a pixel resolution. They are just 2D meshes. The resolution is from the corresponding image... If you want a higher resolution then use a higher resolution image. If you can't use a higher resolution image, use two images.
>>
>>673589
>How do I make it so that I can actually put the UV's of all objects on the same file for eventual exporting?
You have to share the material in all the objects
> How do I export my UV's in a very high resolution?
You can change the texture size in substance painter
>Is there actually an easier way to do this?
you can paint in blender too
> How are normal maps actually made?
sculpt and bake normals in the low poly
Next time ask here >>672337
>>
>>673589
>Is there actually an easier way to do this?
Blender isn't that bad for hand painting. Substance painter is just better.
>>
>>673589
I think you have a fundamentally flawed understanding of how 3D things work. It seems you're confused between a texture and a UV (map), if I can pick your wording apart correctly. A texture is an image (.png, .dds, .bmp, fuck it, even .jpg). A UV map is basically a visual guide on how to project that texture/image onto a 3D surface.

>1
Don't understand your first question, so I'll try to umbrella it: UVs are tied to your objects and will stay in the space you assign to them in the image editor view. You just need one texture. If you make all your objects use that same texture, and their UV maps cooperate (aren't overlapping with each other, etc. which by >>673590 you seem to have already done), there should be no issue.

>2
Like in my intro, UVs are not textures. Though I assume you're talking about getting Blender to export textures in a higher resolution. When you click New, you get the option to change the texture resolution before you create it.

>3
>I mean there has to be some application that allows me to paint 'in real time' ?
Yes. Substance Painter, or Blender if you want to shoot yourself in the foot. Blender's texture painting system is only good for handpainted/cartoon styles, if you want anything more realistic you have to look to Substance.

>4
Through a process called baking. You take the lighting info of a high resolution (i.e high poly) model and you bake it into a normal map to transfer that lighting info onto a low resolution (i.e. low poly) model. Well, you don't bake it, the computer does. No one manually generates normal maps besides crazy and insane idiots with a lot of time on their hands.

You should go watch some proper tutorials on asset production. I feel like you've misunderstood basic theory.
>>
>>673600
FUCK, hold on, I understand what you're saying now. Jesus, you're working really primitive. So correct me if I'm wrong, but you're exporting the UV LAYOUT to paint over in gimp or krita or whatever? No one does that anymore.
Substance Painter is what we call projection painting. It allows you to paint directly onto the model. Blender's Texture Paint mode does the same. You should only ever see your UV layout when you're packing it, not using it as a texturing guide. The days of handpainting textures in 2D programs like Photoshop are long over.
>>
Jesus. This is all a bit much for me desu guys. I knew how to use ZBrush years ago... back in like 2013.

So ... shit I don't even know what to do now. How do I learn to do all this stuff? Should I get back into substance painter? I'll check out blender painting too. Brb.
>>
It's good to hear that my feeling that I was doing things waaay inefficiently was right.
>>
Right, so now I've been googling how to import a model into Substance Painter and countless posts and discussions later I still cannot seem to import any kind of format into Substance Painter.

Based on the fact that it's this hard to even get your shit into the program, the idea of then spending hours googling 'how to move my mouse and click a menu button' because the software won't work is a little off putting. I think I'd rather do it the hard way but be able to do actually do it lol.
>>
>>673624
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBn_1otOHZ8
are you mentally disabled
>>
>>673624
Is this satire?
>>
People pay money for this garbage? What am I doing wrong with my life, how am I not a millionaire...
>>
A list of reasons why Substance Painter is absolute garbage:

- the navigation hotkeys and tools are worse than steamed dog poo, zero intuitiveness. mose scrolling forward zooms out, scrolling back zooms lol.

- navigation hotkeys in the flat texture view are different from those in the 3d view LOL

- you never know if the program is just lagging or failing to register your input because it's garbage

- the pointer cursor thingy wobbles and resizes and does whatever the fuck it wants any given moment

- 'just let me fucking put down color', no such option available. You can only pile texture material upon texture material endlessly. Oh you want to apply a new material after puttind down carbon fiber? Too bad, you now get carbon fiber shaped new material.

- can't even 'fill entire texture map' because why make things easy when you can make them hard

- you missed a spot! still missed a spot. missed it again. oh you missed it again. oh again. oh you cannot paint away this little white spot haha TOO BAD

- meshes import like a complete retard and simply dissappear depending on what angle you rotate your model

It could really have been great. I'm 100% certain though that people would much rather have a robust, easy to use intuitive package over a bloated glitchy piece of garbage chock full of fluff bullshit features.
>>
>>673631
Please tell me you are pretending.
>>
>>673632
This thread was bait from the start.
>>
>>673633
Nah its thickly veiled viral marketing for substance painter.
>associate not liking substance painter with being literally retard
>???
>profit
>>
>>673637
Fucking blendlets and their conspiracies.
>>
File: 8900led-2.jpg (631 KB, 2360x1356)
631 KB
631 KB JPG
How in gods cock is anyone supposed to paint with this shit??? And why do the materials, as they stack them, all retain some of the properties of the material below them??? I don't want my 'fuzzy gay leather' to have carbon fiber pattern ffs who thought this was a good idea??? This piece of shit software didn't even import the different meshes
>>
File: 3333-3.jpg (732 KB, 1727x2397)
732 KB
732 KB JPG
I get the use of substance painter for baking normals when you have a high poly mesh into onto low poly textures and yada yada. But substance painters workflow is such that you control the distribution of your elements via sectioning of the original mesh, and mask properties. clearly the software is not meant to use actual handpainting to edit masks, because it's complete garbage and doesn't work at all.

but then you'd atleast expect the piece of shit to import your proper mesh-separations instead of turning it all into one supermesh that you now cannot possibly edit. you get to slap one material on the stupid thing and hurrdurrr that's it. Fuck this program.
>>
Like what the hell is the use of that ???? yeah maybe if I design a fancy stick I can add stripes by hand painting lines onto the mask but if you have semi complex meshes like my stupid rocketlauncher you can't do shit. jesus christ.
>>
why do people do this to themselves?

i could have been happy and have a real job. this agony is not something anyone should subject themselves to voluntarily.
>>
this was so not worth it. i want to kill myself.
>>
and FUCKING NOTHING I GOOGLE WORKS. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>>
Read the manual or follow a couple of introductory tutorials, you lazy asswipe.
>>
File: 00000001.jpg (1.42 MB, 5958x5740)
1.42 MB
1.42 MB JPG
>>673759

at some point you've got to throw in the towel. once you realise you're looking for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solutionfor a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem for a solution to a problem that was the solution to a problem ... yeah it's just time to say fuck this shit.

fuck this shit. fuck 3d. you're all gay anyway. and i never liked it either.
>>
>month later this shit looking garbage made by a literal retard will be up on Steam with zero sales cluttering up the store pages for no reason
What a world.
>>
>>673764

Yeah, no. If I had such low standards I'd have dozens of cashgrab shitty games out there already. I actually have standards though which is why I will never amount to anything and most likely kill myself in 5 years. People like me don't make it in life. The ones that make it are those that don't give a shit and just put low ambition garbage out there (which is what the average consumer wants anyway).
>>
>>673764
Playing all high and mighty you literal N*gger. Show me your games or credentials.
>>
Aaaaan what do you know... it looks like shit. Big surprise there. But atleast I was in control of the process from start to finish and didn't have to wrestle with a barrage of infuriatingly bullshit features that add zero value but get in your every click you make.

https://streamable.com/hoj6l
>>
>>673589
>How do I make it so that I can actually put the UV's of all objects on the same file for eventual exporting?
when you export the file the uv's are in that file.
you don't have to do anything special.
>>
Your average blendlet.
>>
I didn't read all of the replies so someone may have mentioned this, but there is a plugin called "Texture Atlas" which will allow you to unwrap multiple objects to ONE UV sheet. It's shipped with Blender by default, just Google it and check it out. I use it all the time.
>>
>>673589
Fucking highlight everything and Ctrl-J then fucking ctrl L a vertex from each piece in edit mode and set a vertex group holy hell don't use separate models for one model what in the fuck
>>
File: 545-1.jpg (598 KB, 2392x1290)
598 KB
598 KB JPG
I figured it out! HAHA nothing can stop me now. Unwrapping seems to be an art in itself though... and I wish somebody had told me that you really need to take your time with it, and go piece by piece, not the whole mesh at once.
>>
File: asd1.png (372 KB, 1330x1281)
372 KB
372 KB PNG
let's see how this works...
>>
it looks like absolute garbage. fuckkkkkkk
>>
Thread started out good with surprisingly helpful answers that I don't expect from this board. I have no idea what this shit devolved into. All that I can imagine is OP is 14 and is in over his head.
>>
>>673963
>All that I can imagine is OP is 14 and is in over his head.

one of those is correct.
>>
>>673976
You don't think you're in over your head?
>>
>>674001

I absolutely am. But I'm certainly not 14.
>>
>>674065
Whatever you say, 13 year old.



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.