PDA

View Full Version : How about UV mapping?


Roger Eberhart
09-18-2004, 04:18 AM
None of the demo videos show anything about the UV tools. Are they better than Lightwave? Are they anwhere close to XSI?

Finkster
09-18-2004, 04:33 AM
None of the demo videos show anything about the UV tools. Are they better than Lightwave? Are they anwhere close to XSI?
Good question. At this asking price they ought to be good. I should at least think the whole welding/unwelding business of lightwave has been sorted, as well as the whole sudD UV distortions issue. Is XSI considered the "big daddy" when it comes to UV tools?

Roger Eberhart
09-18-2004, 05:11 AM
Of the software I've used (Max, Lightwave, Bodypaint, and XSI), XSI is the best at UV mapping. It's kind of like how Wings 3D does it. You pick where the seams will be and it flattens everything out for you. I've heard Houdini has pretty good UV tools as well.

Gwot
09-18-2004, 05:36 AM
I agree with Roger. XSI has the best tools I've used too. Houdini does have some good ones though. I've seen them demoed, but never used them first hand. Everything else just seems to trail behind.

Kvaalen
09-18-2004, 12:36 PM
First of all, there is no weld/unwelding issue. :)
Second, the UV maps get generated as soon as you create a primitive and continue to get modified as you model.
It has a really good interactive UV texture guide... I suppose that is what you mean by defining the seem and it flatens it out? I think so.
It has UV relaxing tools and stuff of the sort.

I'm not a Lux guy and I don't have modo (infact I'm a LW user), but I got to try it out. The UVs are really nice. I never got to use XSI though.

Nemoid
09-18-2004, 01:00 PM
hey do u know ( Kyaleen or other guys ) if UV deformation problems with sub patches have been solved? maybe using the version wich supports n gons and edges?
but it would be fine also for the Lw similar algorythm though...

mav3rick
09-18-2004, 01:32 PM
nemoid i heard it has cool toolset for smooth uvmaps ... u dont need unweld either

and pll said me it is better than uv relax... i dunno i have to check it once they fix DATABASE with my country

pensart
09-18-2004, 01:38 PM
I agree, it really is an anoying thing to deal with (Deformation problems).
Hope we wont have to fix the UV's by hand (If i buy the software).
Please post some more uv related stuff...
Maybe even some screengrabs.
:bounce:

Kvaalen
09-18-2004, 02:36 PM
hey do u know ( Kyaleen or other guys ) if UV deformation problems with sub patches have been solved?LOL! I always get a good laugh when people type my name wrong! :)

I asked that question. The guy said that the problem was fixed and tryied to explain something about UV maps being a 2D representation of your 3D model. :shrug:
I think he just wasn't aware of the problem and was therefore not understanding the question. Maybe he was. I dunno... sorry. :)

pensart
09-18-2004, 02:53 PM
Or maybe he just act as if he does not know the problem? :hmm:
I dont see no textured models on their site either :D
I hope there's a way to stich the uv's like in XSI.
I like Xsi but i have a mac.
Please some more uv examples. (If any) :banghead:

terryford
09-18-2004, 03:47 PM
Early test seems to show that modo has the same "UV on Subdiv" distortion issue as LightWave.

pensart
09-18-2004, 03:56 PM
Thanks for the test Terryford.
Have u tried running a relax uv on it?

JacquesD
09-18-2004, 04:11 PM
Thanks for test Terryford... I haven't test UV yet but I really thought that we woudn't have the same problem as we have in LW!
Man for a new generation modeler, that's dissapointing.

I'll give it a try anyway.

The ripper.

Castius
09-18-2004, 04:12 PM
There is nothing you can do to UV's to fix sub-d distortion.
I'm no so sure that the same UV distortion. Though it does look wavy.

r3mix
09-18-2004, 04:15 PM
Hmm I am curious how the UV tools will be in modo...if comparable to XSI's toolset then it should be nice.

JacquesD
09-18-2004, 04:15 PM
Maybe you're right Castius but I'm wondering how they do in Maya not to have that kind of problems.

The ripper.

Roger Eberhart
09-18-2004, 04:15 PM
There is nothing you can do to UV's to fix sub-d distortion.
Except use Max, XSI, Maya, or Bodypaint.

Castius
09-18-2004, 04:21 PM
It's a matter of apply the same sub-d algorithm to the UV's as they do to the mesh. But UVs dont always fallow the same flow as the mesh so its not a cut and dry process. You have seams and edges you dont have in your 3d mesh.

Id like to see a planar UV projection on that head to see how it handles that.

Steve McRae
09-18-2004, 04:26 PM
terry - can you apply one of the alternative sub-division algorithms (ie. the catmull one) and see if the problem is still there?

perhaps it is just a problem with LW's 'sub-patch' algorithm (which would explain why it has never been fixed in LW)

terryford
09-18-2004, 05:32 PM
terry - can you apply one of the alternative sub-division algorithms (ie. the catmull one) and see if the problem is still there?
The images I posted earlier are using Catmull-Clark-alike subdivision.

Sorry to you guys that might have more questions, but I'm going to bow out of this thread now; the SD distortion issue has been flogged to death in the LW forums, no point in going over all that again...

Regards,
Terry

Castius
09-18-2004, 05:41 PM
I couldn't agree more. I was only stating facts I have no intention of arguing about it.

I'd like to know the answer to this as i'm sure many people do. I asumed it would not be a problem for modo. but know I don't know. This is a thread about how well modo handles UV's after all.

pensart
09-18-2004, 06:20 PM
no point in going over all that again...

If we dont then their will never be a fix!

Nemoid
09-18-2004, 08:23 PM
uhm.. i obviously don't have Modo, but maybe using the catmull-clark compliant algorithm and also some relax features of Modo could fix the distortions?


@ at Kvaalen : Sorry. actually it's ages that i somewhat mispell your name. i am so sorry !
i was truely convinced it was kyaleen :eek:

Para
09-18-2004, 08:35 PM
uhm.. i obviously don't have Modo, but maybe using the catmull-clark compliant algorithm and also some relax features of Modo could fix the distortions?

The SubD algorithm in LW (and respectively in Modo) is Catmull-Clark compliant. I have absolutely no idea how it can be fixed, but it's not impossible since others have done it. Heck, even Blender has the problem solved.

lwbob
09-18-2004, 08:59 PM
The SubD algorithm in LW (and respectively in Modo) is Catmull-Clark compliant.
The one in Modo is, I'm not so sure about LW's though. Remember LW can't used n-gons for subdivs.

SOPLAND
09-18-2004, 09:12 PM
When you render your models in LW, do the textures get warped like the earlier pictures or is it just in modeler?

Para
09-18-2004, 09:27 PM
The one in Modo is, I'm not so sure about LW's though. Remember LW can't used n-gons for subdivs.

Neither can pure Catmull-Clark.

pensart
09-18-2004, 09:41 PM
I have been playing with it for 10 minutes, i love it.
Uv has some tools, anyway better than the lw ones!
Have to research some more but it looks promising.

private
09-19-2004, 09:25 PM
Early test seems to show that modo has the same "UV on Subdiv" distortion issue as LightWave.
:( Has everyone else found the same thing?

rebo
09-19-2004, 10:09 PM
I dont see how they can expect people to pay 800$ when this bug still exists. Other software have fixed it why cannot a new application like mojo fix it ?

JacquesD
09-19-2004, 10:29 PM
I have to agree with rebo on that one... I really hope they're working on it... that would really be too bad not to have that kind of problem solved.

The ripper.

c-g
09-19-2004, 10:37 PM
I dont see how they can expect people to pay 800$ when this bug still exists. Other software have fixed it why cannot a new application like mojo fix it ?
Same reason you can't get the app name right.

jamesvanderbeek
09-20-2004, 12:59 AM
Yep, for me the major reason for getting modo would be if it had good uv's. I think this would be similar to other people coming from lw since it is a major weakness and frustration in lw, hopefully in the next update.

private
09-20-2004, 02:37 AM
For such a new forum and speed of response in all threads, Mr. Peebler and Mr. Burgoyne's absence in giving a response is scary, especially with the number of posts and an important, known issue, going back a few versions (if you count their other software production background) That coupled with a lack of a demo and a premium price tag in addition to an unknown upgrade path gives an shaky impression to potential users.

Some videos on this matter and an explanation are needed. If a solution is planned for upcoming versions, then oversight and a huge mistake would be an understatement. So, what's the answer? I would love to hear an explantion from Q and A or the president himself.

CB_3D
09-20-2004, 02:50 AM
:wise: Its not a bug, its a problem inherent to non-quad-only subdivision topology. Tris to reduce or augment or reduce mesh density cause it.

As i understand it the problem exists in all the subdivision apps, its just worked around by emulating a tighter fit through relax commands. As soon as you change the model the relax has to be adjusted to conform to the new topoly. So saying that the problem has been fixed in all the other apps is a mistake. It hasnt. The use of real edge weights (as opposed to LWs additional loops) alone should lessen the problem, though.
Correct me if im wrong.

Dion Burgoyne
09-20-2004, 03:08 AM
Doh! It's pretty hard keeping up with every website...

As far as I know there are no SubD programs that make perfect lines on imperfect geometry, as sub'ds are naturally pulled geometry. It also depends on how you unwrap your UV's. A quick list of the ways that modo deals with UV's

Standard unwraps
Spherical
Cylindrical
Planer
Atlas
Barycentric

From any 3D viewport you can also create a projected UV, which will allow you to unwrap your UV's by whichever viewport you click on

For simple geometry you can select a few edges and peel them, modo will treat those edges as the seam

While you're creating your UV's modo can show you exactly where the seam is, the caps are, and exactly how the model is being unwrapped graphically, you also have a tri-handle on the object so you don't have to set the uv's by numeraguess you can interactively see the position rotation and stretch of the UV's as they're being created.

After you've laid down your UV's you can

UV Align to align a row of uv's to an arbitrary point
Relax UV's to spread the UV's within a border
Rotate UV's to keep a UV contiguous while spinning the reference to the image
Flip UV's to flip how the UV(or part of the UV) relates to the image
Mirror UV's to mirror the image over the UV
Fit UV's to expand the UV to the 0.0 - 1.0 range

The Falloffs work with the UV editing

And this is just for version 1.0 :thumbsup:

yinako
09-20-2004, 03:16 AM
Relax UV's to spread the UV's within a border

The Falloffs work with the UV editing

Oh theres no relax algorithm thats not restricted by uv borders?!?! Like the ones in DeepUV/Blender..that relx algorithm is extremely imported to me :/
You can't make dense mesh uvs with just projecting and manually cut and sew :/

CB_3D
09-20-2004, 03:19 AM
Sounds good. I hope there will be plenty of training material regarding UVs, since this a major headache for me, be it in LW or Bodypaint.

private
09-20-2004, 10:28 AM
Doh! It's pretty hard keeping up with every website...

As far as I know there are no SubD programs that make perfect lines on imperfect geometry, as sub'ds are naturally pulled geometry. It also depends on how you unwrap your UV's. A quick list of the ways that modo deals with UV's

Standard unwraps
Spherical
Cylindrical
Planer
Atlas
Barycentric

From any 3D viewport you can also create a projected UV, which will allow you to unwrap your UV's by whichever viewport you click on

For simple geometry you can select a few edges and peel them, modo will treat those edges as the seam

While you're creating your UV's modo can show you exactly where the seam is, the caps are, and exactly how the model is being unwrapped graphically, you also have a tri-handle on the object so you don't have to set the uv's by numeraguess you can interactively see the position rotation and stretch of the UV's as they're being created.

After you've laid down your UV's you can

UV Align to align a row of uv's to an arbitrary point
Relax UV's to spread the UV's within a border
Rotate UV's to keep a UV contiguous while spinning the reference to the image
Flip UV's to flip how the UV(or part of the UV) relates to the image
Mirror UV's to mirror the image over the UV
Fit UV's to expand the UV to the 0.0 - 1.0 range

The Falloffs work with the UV editing

And this is just for version 1.0 :thumbsup:
Thanks for the information. However, I read this as, "Better tools than Lightwave has/had but the same problem still exists." Statements like version 1.0 don't fly on something so important, especially with 2 years behind it. I'll have to trust you on the new UV tools until a demo is available.

pensart
09-20-2004, 10:53 AM
I got rid of the distortion...
I tried out an object with serious distortion!
expect some pics later on this week since i have to go to work.
Modo rocks!!!

Roger Eberhart
09-20-2004, 02:48 PM
Hopefully this doesn't require the same convoluted steps that are required in Lightwave.

I got rid of the distortion...
I tried out an object with serious distortion!
expect some pics later on this week since i have to go to work.
Modo rocks!!!

Roger Eberhart
09-20-2004, 02:51 PM
As far as I know there are no SubD programs that make perfect lines on imperfect geometry, as sub'ds are naturally pulled geometry.
Maybe not, but other programs have provided adequate solutions, unlike Lightwave and apparently Modo.

Para
09-20-2004, 03:02 PM
Hopefully this doesn't require the same convoluted steps that are required in Lightwave.

Well, if you can map the fix to a macro... :buttrock:

Chaz
09-20-2004, 04:59 PM
I'm still learning modo, so I haven't delved too much into UV editing, but from just poking around, they appear to be more comprehensive than Lightwave's. Mainly, you can create a projection in UV space based on a user-editable perspective. Very handy. It also has a UV relax feature similar to Maya's. Here's a bit from the manual about the UV Peeler tool:

"the Peeler tools spreads UVs out perpendicularly from a user-defined seam....useful for tedious, manual-style atlas mapping, or other cylinder unwrapping tasks."

In addition, you can switch the program easily from your modeling layout to a pre-defined UV editor layout, which is really handy.

Griffon
09-20-2004, 05:09 PM
Maybe not, but other programs have provided adequate solutions, unlike Lightwave and apparently Modo.

What are these solutions? I've looked at Maya and apparently it does this by adding UVs at a higher subdiv level then you are working at. I can imagine that XSI does the same thing. These are not solutions that would generally transfer well between apps (not impossible mind you). How would you expect a solution to work?

kamil_w
09-20-2004, 05:52 PM
>>I've looked at Maya and apparently...

You are talking about HSDS in Maya.

Look at polySmooth - it has smooth UV`s option.

Roger Eberhart
09-20-2004, 07:33 PM
What are these solutions? I've looked at Maya and apparently it does this by adding UVs at a higher subdiv level then you are working at. I can imagine that XSI does the same thing. These are not solutions that would generally transfer well between apps (not impossible mind you). How would you expect a solution to work?
Not sure how you can fix this. I'm just looking for an artist-friendly ap. I leave the complicated solutions to the programmers. That's why they get paid the big bucks, right?

CGTalk Moderation
01-19-2006, 07:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.