Texture Bake Bercontile and Multitexture?


Hi guys

Anybody have a solid step by step workflow (or script), to texture bake bricks (made from bercontile and multitexture)?


What is there to bake? Render orthographic view or cam. with passes you need and you have texture/s.


I need it a little more intelligent than that, IE, I need to then replace the bercontile textures with the new baked textures, taking into account it should still be accurate scale


I think you need just a little more thinking about that…
If you give material with some texture to plane and render that plane, than replace orig. tex. with rendered it must fit to your plane. Just default tilling (and other options).
Or just drag and drop texture from some folder to plane in viewport.

There’s no scale in any image!
All “scaling” is taken from mapping.


Rend. settings:
Area to render
Crop, auto region selected

Select plane and render


not if your mapping is set to real world scale and you set the size in the image (yes an image can have scale)


All “scaling” is taken from mapping.


There’s no scale in any image!


Are you trying to bake a tiling texture or whole textured objects?
Assuming it’s textured objects, the real world scale would not apply any longer and you’d need to make a unique unwrap for each object in a second UV channel (which can be a bit wasteful). You’d basically have either a texture for each object or a sheet with all the objects on it. You only need to pay attention that you have enough resolution. When baking you can determine if Max replaces the original material or creates a shell material and in which map slot the resulting texture should be put. (Assuming the renderer of choice supports baking the maps in question.)

I assume you are asking to have an automated way to replace one real world scale texture with another one, though. Never did that, maybe someone knows a script. In this case you’d have to render a tiling texture and it’s you who determines its tile size (how often it repeats as opposed to your current texture) and you’ll have to adapt the real world scale of your maps accordingly and want an automated way to do that. Correct?


Yes I want to basicvally flatten any procedurals and other complex texture setups etc into a simple png. I want to do that for the diffuse, bump, glossy, roughness etc for all objects in the scene, so that I can use those new PNG’s in a new simple material that can easily be exported via FBX into other apps


Edit: Wrong info, see below:


What are you talking about? Can you, please, give some example so i can check how hard converting is?

Real world scale isn’t Max thing, it’s mapping type for Autodesk materials and theres Autodesk apps without uv mapping options. It’s Max Design default mapping so you can imagine what kind of apps go with that.
BTW it was my way to Max some years ago and before 3D options in them


My bad. I was assuming that the UVs were scaled internally according to the real world scale set in the map and the object size which didn’t seem to be preserved when collapsing the stack. However it just sets the general size for the UVs and the tiling is handled by the map like usual.


Baking is perhaps the wrong terminology. I just want to flatten the textures into PNG’s.
Baking materials to specific objects is a totally different thing

Typically we have large spaces, imagine a 300metre X 100metre floor space. Baking that texture to the object will need to result in a HUUUUUUGE texture to cover the entire object while preserving the detail and quality up close

So I just want something to flatten the bercon into a 10metre X 10metre texture of say no larger than 8K textures, that can be tile-able over large surfaces. I could just stick it on a plane and render the plane from above and extract the render elements from that, but that’s a very inefficient workflow. Imagine having to do that for 10 or 20 textures in a scene, that’s just nuts!


So you think you need to tile 8K image about 300 times to achieve solid render result?
And how would that be simpler than tile 1k image 2400 x?

You have wrong assumptions about all that matter, sticking to that just holding you back.


because an 8K image of 70 pavers across by 70 pavers wide, tiled to cover a large area, will look better up close than a 1k image with same content