CGTalk > Software > Autodesk 3ds max
Login register
Thread Closed share thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-05-2013, 03:52 PM   #16
l3ftnut
Veteran
 
l3ftnut's Avatar
portfolio
G
RVK, Gambia
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 52
Hotknife:

Quote:
Decimate it first if you need to in Zbrush. Retop this model in Max to create a Low Poly - this is the only object you need to unwrap which makes life extremely simple.


Thanks for the tip. I'm thinking about just doing exactly what you said. Just to be sure though I have a few questions about this if it's okay. Wouldn't it be a lot of trouble to retopo a decimated object or would I just create a "shell" around the decimated object from scratch? Wouldn't I need to create a "cage" for the projection as well? For example with the Projection modifier in Max.





Robinb:
Quote:
I'm a bit confused about this. You don't need UVs on the high res model if you're planning to bake normal maps to a low poly model


I apologize if I didn't explain well enough or in a confusing way. My original plan was to do everything regarding the baking inside Zbrush and for that (to my knowledge) the subdivided version does require UVs since it is the same object as the low poly model. I do realize that UVs would not be required if I used some other program to do the baking, but that was not my plan at first.

One of the reasons I wanted to do this solely inside Zbrush is because I've used only 3dsm and Zbrush in the past for my organic models. Ofcourse, I don't use turbosmooth for organic models nor smoothing groups.

This helicopter is one of my first serious hard surface modeling practices and I'm still just trying to figure things out. I was trying to apply my organic workflow to it but I guess it's not the right way.



musashidan:


Quote:
And definitely bake the normals in Xnormal as ZB's normal maps aren't the best.
I'm very curious about this. In what ways are ZB's normal maps worse? Is that also the case in the latest version 4r5?



Thanks guys, I'll be redoing this with a seperate high poly model for Xnormal since that seems to be the better way.
 
Old 04-05-2013, 07:56 PM   #17
Zeddicus
Nothing is ever easy.
 
Zeddicus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 147
People mentioned Neil Blevin, but nobody posted one of his links so maybe this might help:

http://www.neilblevins.com/cg_tools...turbosmooth.htm

Particularly the part about using a UVW Unwrap modifier to break the UV's before turbosmoothing and exporting. No idea if it will help or not, but it's worth a shot. Turbosmooth Pro might be worth playing with as well, though I found it sometimes doesn't work very well with smoothing groups.

I like to use smoothing groups to control the turbosmooth modifier too by the way. I find it to be a useful means of controlling how things get subdivided, particularly when you want to create creases without having to add a ton of extra edges.
 
Old 04-05-2013, 09:27 PM   #18
hotknife
Expert
 
hotknife's Avatar
Andrew Whitney
Nottingham,
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,132
Hi again,
The decimated version is just so it's easier to create the low poly version in Max, I decimate from ZBrush into Max because the retopping tools are good in Max. I then either unwrap the low poly in Max or back into ZB. Yes essentially you create a new shell around the decimated version.
You dont need to create a cage to project, there is an option in Xnormal to use a cage I believe but I haven't used it yet.

I've then got an unwrapped low poly the same dimensions and shape as the ZB high poly version. I then write the high poly, undec' version to disk and reference that in xnormal.

Is a nice method as you can tweak both the high and low polys version independently and just resale and reproject..
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showth...2013-Sketchbook .....last image in post is similar panel work to your helicopter...
__________________
Renderfarm hire available @ www.hotknife.co.uk
 
Old 04-05-2013, 11:59 PM   #19
musashidan
Bar Stool Enthusiast
 
musashidan's Avatar
portfolio
Daniel McGrath
Dublin, Ireland
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3ftnut

I'm very curious about this. In what ways are ZB's normal maps worse? Is that also the case in the latest version 4r5?


For whatever reason, Zbrush generates very soft, blurry normal maps. They look great in Photoshop but the rendered result isn't as good. There are workaround through PS editing but it's not worth the hassle when you can just do it in Xnormal.

Here's a link to a good ZB to Xnormal workflow: LINK
 
Old 04-05-2013, 11:59 PM   #20
CGTalk Moderation
Expert
CGTalk Forum Leader
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,066,478
Thread automatically closed

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.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
Thread Closed share thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.