Digital Art Zone

 
     
Why I loose the gizmos ?
Posted: 16 July 2012 06:56 AM   [ Ignore ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2008-03-27

Win XP Pro 32. All memory that XP can handle.

I have an object with around 40 shadow domains. I use planar proyection of textures for great part of them.

With a few gizmos there are no problems. But with the most part of them created, ( and saved ) I arrive to a point where I can’t continue. Because the creation of a new gizmo, or the change of a previously defined, cause the loose of other different domains previously defined ( and saved ).

I define again this loosed gizmos, and it will happens again.

What is happening ?

Javier

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 July 2012 10:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1483
Joined  2008-01-01

Just to be sure I’m understanding correctly - are you using shader domains to separately UV map parts of one mesh?  If so, are you hiding the parts that you are not busy with? 

Some screen captures of what you are doing would help greatly.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 July 2012 11:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2008-03-27

Hi Roy, I believe ... yes. Sorry, I have to translate… ( spanish ).

One form mesh with around 40 shader domains included in it.domain.

At the moment of change one of this form’s domain, some of the previous domains defined are loosed.

I send you the screens in order im1.jpg, im2, im3…

Thank you.

Javier

Image Attachments
IM1.JPG
IM2.JPG
IM3.JPG
IM4.JPG
Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 July 2012 11:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2008-03-27

Sorry my “terms confusion”. I suppose that I could say that is a FORM with different SHADER DOMAINS, and with diferent UV MAPS. At the moment of change one of this UVs, the UVs of other shader domains is loosed.

Javier

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 July 2012 04:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  250
Joined  2009-01-27

Is that a russian MIG? Looking good!
 
Anyway, it looks to me like you’re making things WAAAYYYYY more difficult on yourself then they have to be!
 
You don’t need separate domains for each sticker you have, Jav. No wonder you’re running out of room!!  LOL
 
Just make each section (for instance “fuselage”) a single domain, UV map it, and then include the lettering and stickers and whatever on your texture map.
 
I’m guessing you’re worried about distortion, but if you UV map it carefully you can make the areas that will carry markings as orthographic as you need.
 

 Signature 

For any arguments or illustrations I give, my system specs are:
Hexagon version 2.5.1.79,  XP pro 32 bit,  pentium core2 duo,  ATI radeon 3870, 2 gigs ram

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 July 2012 05:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2008-03-27

LOL:lol::lol:

Yes… you’re right. I have a tendency to look for rare and difficult roads. and be right back, at this case trying to avoid distortion. The resolution of the numbers for example is perfect including a very nearly view of them.

I understand what you say and I’ll try, but I have a special fear of doing all the work, and end up seeing (as in many video games) that fine lines are faded and smoothed to “stretch” the map to suit the surface.

Can you recommend me a good method please?  red face I see that you know how.  Not me confused

I tried to make that, but for example in the nose, the number was deformed. and the form is so complex ( wings and tails ( surfaces x / y / z )  that I don’t find how to cover it. I tried the UV unfold, but the result was so confused that could be the neural network of “proyect brainstorm”.

Thank you.

Javier

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 July 2012 06:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2008-03-27

Hi !!

Finally I exclude the tails from the main form as a new form, and all seems to be solved. Maybe too much UV s for the same form ?

The question is that at the moment of exclude the tails, they drag with them the shader domains, so I don’t need to create new ones !!

Javier

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 July 2012 10:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  250
Joined  2009-01-27
JavP - 16 July 2012 06:19 PM

Finally I exclude the tails from the main form as a new form, and all seems to be solved. Maybe too much UV s for the same form ?

 
It’s possible, I suppose. I never had that many! LOL
 
Glad it’s coming together for you!
 
But rather than waste an answer I wrote to your previous message, I’ll post that, too…
 

I understand what you say and I’ll try, but I have a special fear of doing all the work, and end up seeing (as in many video games) that fine lines are faded and smoothed to “stretch” the map to suit the surface.
Can you recommend me a good method please?  red face I see that you know how.  Not me confused

 
Heheh…not sure I know how, either! smile
 
Or at least not without having your mesh and your UV map in front of me. The main difficulty is in locating which grids on the UV map correspond to the grids of the model you want to overlay. Once you do that, there’s a number of ways of manipulating these areas so that they receive and maintain a high level of resolution.
 
I know that probably sounds like so much gobbledygook, but it would be almost impossible to give specific instructions for your particular model.
 
You can start by creating a texture map for an entire section with red blocks where lettering should be and comparing the rendered model to the texture map to find the corresponding faces on the UV map.
 
I know this sounds confusing, but I hope you understand what I’m saying. Probably best for you to just play around with it to see what I mean.
 
And now back to your latest comment…
 

The question is that at the moment of exclude the tails, they drag with them the shader domains, so I don’t need to create new ones !!

 
Not sure whether this is a question or a statement! Clarify? smile
 

 Signature 

For any arguments or illustrations I give, my system specs are:
Hexagon version 2.5.1.79,  XP pro 32 bit,  pentium core2 duo,  ATI radeon 3870, 2 gigs ram

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 July 2012 01:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1483
Joined  2008-01-01

I fully agree that this method of UV mapping is not the best way for something complex.  Just to test, I made a low-poly airplane and used that method - it worked OK, but not something I’d recommend - you can see that the wings do not get enough of the UV space - but that can be fixed by sorting out the layout.

For anyone else following this, the way to use this method is to make a shading domain for each surface, hide them all, then, one at a time, reveal, do the projection mapping, validate, put the map way to one side so that the following maps don’t overlap.  Hide that domain, reveal the next and repeat.  Once it’s all done, reveal all then pull the maps onto the grid, resizing and laying out.

Mine only had 28 domains and this was done without any problem - possibly 40+ would be too many.  BTW, this only works for projection mapping, not for unwrapping using seams.

My method for identifying parts of the UV map when texturing is to have the model and the map open in my rendering app while the 2d paint app is open.  I highlight some polys on the 3d model, which show up on the map in the 3d app, then take a look at where they are in the 2d app.

Image Attachments
plane.jpg
Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 July 2012 05:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2008-03-27

Thank you very much to both. I see now that is important to think in this step at the moment of create the forms, or later will be a spaguetti of grids. I begin my work thinking “too much work in advance to think in that now”. Well… bad done.

A new crash behind the road that I will never forget ! ohh or maybe confused ... or maybe both.

Thank you again.

Javier

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 July 2012 05:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2008-03-27

Oh, afreaginname… about your final question. Yes, I clarify this, and maybe it will be an emergency way to avoid this problem.

I remind the situation. Too much UVs in the same form, and when I touch one of them, the others UVs of that form are reseted. As you see in the screens 2 and 3, I only needed to finish the UVs of the tails of the plane. Why do this without loose the UVs maked since then ?

“Extracting” the tails of the plane from the “fuselage” form. This is, cutting them from the main mesh, converting them as a new piece apart. What I like very much and surprise me a lot, is that when I EXTRACT the tails creating them as a new form, all the UVs included in the tails are well separated too from the main mesh, and taked as UVs of the new form without have to do nothing more.

The existing UVs in the main mesh do not feel the cut and mantain right their gizmos. And seems very clear that at the moment that you work in other form, dissapear the risk of affect other UVs with your changes in other forms.

Sorry my english.

Javier

Profile