Mudbox display Vs. Render


#1

it’s been bothering me for a while. the Display of materials in mudbox looks marginally different than how they render in Max (scanline and mental ray)

i usually go back and forth to find the correct settings but it is a pain.

i wonder do other users here have solutions and/or approaches to work this out?


#2

back and forth thats the way you do it with mud…

if you have done one asset do the others the same way…


#3

yeah that’s my usual approach. it would be nice though…the idea that you can see the finished product as you go is powerful.


#4

you could setup a connection to the shader in max…
just use the export texture feature and save the file…

like i have done here with maya…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TE0in9xgEuE

in the video im using the export selected feature in the layer tab…
but there is also the export option in the file menue…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nISkrd0I0GY


#5

an interesting approach. i can see how it would be helpful.

i usually export fbx’s. this tends to work since i usually have multiple geometries. e.g. 20-40

i wonder how other sculpting programs deal with this? is there always a difference?


#6

for mari and substance there are custom shaders they should be really close to the target render… just goolge for something like “mari arnold shader”…


#7

do you know what’s going to be in Mudbox 2017?

for one…i’d like to see a way to organize objects in the object list. Make our own folders, rearrange the order by hand, etc…

obviously an even tighter approach to matching the final look (as we discussed here)

something like dynamesh

a faster display of materials. gigatexel is a drag and the default is so, so

a way to save the color history