questions about UV mapping

1. So I'm mapping a simple glass as shown in the attached picture. As I was unwrapping the UVs to make a map, I must have separated it in too many places. As you can see in the map, there is a line of vertices straight down the middle that are separated, even though they occupy the same space. I can't think of a better way to describe it. Anyway, the other picture shows that I can grab one of the faces and pull it out and you can see that it's not connected to the adjacent face. Is there any way to weld all of these back together? I just want one continuous map going around the glass, like a label. If not, is there a way to reset the whole UV map and start over?

2. Is there a way to get Hexagon to export a higher resoultion UV map? It only gives me a 488x488 image.

glass001.jpg
1400 x 837 - 355K
glass002.jpg
701 x 836 - 69K

Comments

  • I think the problem you have has something to do with smoothing, its only a guess but I've does this myself. It seems to occur when you add a level of smoothing (just to see what it will look like) then cancel the smoothing and carry on modeling, Hex does not remove all the point (notice the dark blue points running down each side of your first arrow).

    You can weld the points, move one of the points then press the "W" key and click on the point you want to weld it to. But, it may be quicker just to start again from scratch.

    If my guess is right you can try the clone tool. You clone the object (edit menu), move one of them then add a level of smoothing, both will be smoothed, cancel the smoothing on your working object and keep an eye on the smoothed clone to see how the changes will look like.

    At the moment Hex does not save out decent map sizes, have a look at UVmapper Classic or UV Viewer.

  • KitsumoKitsumo Posts: 65

    Sorry for the late reply. I had a family issue today. Those blue points running down the line represent the vertices that have been separated. I can click on each individual dot and pull the vertex apart as shown in the pic. I was just hoping there was a way to weld those all back together at once. I could do it manually, separating each one just so I can weld them together properly, but it just may be easier to start over. I'll just have to be more careful unfolding the UVs next time. Thanks for the help. Happy New Year.

    glass003.jpg
    698 x 575 - 40K
  • Look up disassociate for Hexagon. Some how that has happened to your vertices.I don't know how to use UVmapping in Hexagon. So I don't know if it can be repaired from there.

  • KitsumoKitsumo Posts: 65

    Yep, I think I disassociated when I only should have unwrapped. I think I'll try UVmapper.

  • UVmapper is only for saving the UV,map. You unfold the object in Hexagon then save the object as a HXN and an OBJ. Then with UVmapper you import the obj and save the map out what ever size you want (square so 512*512 etc).

    There are UV tools out there which will do the job, but the free ones are not as user friendy as Hexagon.

    Unless someone out there knows better ?

    Personally, I'd wait and see if the new version of Hex has better tools for mapping (fingers crossed).  

  • KitsumoKitsumo Posts: 65

    I redid it and it worked. I was confusing unfold and disassociate on the other model. Anyway, the only problem I have now is the decal showing on the inside of the glass. I think I'll just have to make a blank copy of it just inside, to block the back of it. I don't think there's a way to make polygons only have a texture on one side. It shouldn't be hard to work around, though.

    I think I'll be ok with UV mapping in Hexagon for now. I just have to remember to be patient and save my file before I make any big changes.

    glass004.jpg
    1454 x 821 - 540K
    glass005.jpg
    1398 x 835 - 265K
  • Insert a curved billboard in the glass to cover the images and give it its own texture.

  • KitsumoKitsumo Posts: 65

    Ok. I never thought about putting it inside the glass. I just put it right outside the surface of the glass, like a real decal. I guess inside would be better. No one should be rendering it close enough to see the difference, and it's probably simpler.

Sign In or Register to comment.