Problems with texturing objects with Zspheres.

[Le Discot]

Hi all!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;) :)

I've some problems with the result of textures made with "Texture Master" on objects generated with ZSpheres.

Look at the result on screen in ZBrush 1.5.1:
-The texture on object simce to be great,but the result on texture is very baaaaaaaad!!!!

Look at this under:
http://www2.zbrushcentral.com/zbc_uploads/user_image-1032168846xob.jpg

The texture's render:

http://www2.zbrushcentral.com/zbc_uploads/user_image-1032168915gpo.jpg

And more on another ZSphere's object:
http://www2.zbrushcentral.com/zbc_uploads/user_image-1032168944lbb.jpg

This result do not appear on textures generated on basic objects like sphere on tool's buffer.


Please,help. ;) :)

Olivier.

[aurick]

Check out this thread (http://www.pixolator.com/zbc-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=007648), Olivier! It explains the new UV Tiles mapping method, which was introduced in version 1.5 and is the default mapping method for ZSphere models. It also explains other options that are available to you, and how to take advantage of them.

[Nemo]

I believe the question was :

Why is only one third of my texture space used by UVTiles?
If i wanted a higher resolution texture (e.g. 1024x1024) would i have to create a texture 3 times bigger because only one third is used?
Or is it just a display problem where the texture preview is messed up and the UVTiles in fact do use all the texture space?

A little clarification would be appreciated (the 1/3 texture issue - not the info on textureset layouts).

---> Well at least that is what troubles my mind now ;)

[aurick]

My understanding is that the percentage of space used is determined by the number of polygons in the object. The more polygons, the more space will be taken up in the texture.

Like with any other UV mapping method, the larger the texture, the more detail you will be able to put into the texture.

I know that when you look at one of these maps, it looks like a lot of wasted space. But when you compare it to most other UVW mapping, it's not. Most texture maps have a huge amount of wasted space surrounding the geometry. This particular method simply distributes that same space differently, making it actually look like there is more waste than you're used to.

And remember: because UV Tiles unwraps every polygon separately, there is virtually no distortion in the texture when you wrap it back onto the model. That's the real beauty of this technique. The down side is that only a computer can make sense out of the texture.

[Nemo]

Thanks Aurik,

i believe UVTiles are a great new method to texture - just was curious about the space issue.
Maybe a little more in-depth discussion on the whole UVtile topic would help me and others to understand.
Most significant is the question about file size here i guess.
But please share with us what knowledge you got.

Thanks again :D

[aurick]

Without getting TOO technical, look at UV mapping as being like trying to get the peel off of an orange and laid out flat. You can cut the peel up a bunch of different ways, and some will be more successful than others at keeping the peel from breaking. Basically, the smaller the pieces, the less chance there is of breakage.

Same goes with a UV map. You're taking the surface of the object and stretching it out flat so that you can paint color onto it with a paint program. Groups of polygons are put together and stretched out onto the texture map -- in short, every point on the surface of the model is assigned a corresponding place on the color map.

But like the orange peel analogy, it's not perfect. Where the peel would split, the UV texture map will stretch.

When mapping an object, you're continuously trying to find the best middle ground where you have large enough pieces of the model to be recognizable when they are unwrapped without them being so big that the texture gets stretched and distorted when it's wrapped. Or at the very least, mapped so that the worst distortions are hidden away on parts of the model that aren't likely to be seen.

Of course, all of that is based on one fundamental premise: The artist must unwrap the texture in order to be able to paint on it. TextureMaster (and more expensive programs like Body Paint or Deep Paint 3D) throws that premise out the window by allowing you to paint your texture directly onto the 3D model and let the computer deal with the issue of unwrapping it. So when you have something like TextureMaster, you don't need to worry about how broken up and disjointed the texture map might be -- your only concern is with how the texture actually looks when it is wrapped onto the model.

UV Tiles takes this to the ultimate extreme. Every single polygon is given its own square on the texture map. This is the smallest possible unit that the texture can be cut up into, which means that the texture will have the least amount of distortion while it is wrapped onto the model (and the maximum amount while it is unwrapped onto a flat surface!). The unwrapped texture may look like garbage to the human eye, but it still makes perfect sense to the computer -- and that is regardless of whether the texture is being used in ZBrush or another app (since the UV coordinates are saved as a part of the OBJ format, and can therefore be read by other programs).

Of course, the other standard rules regarding textures do still apply. The biggest one being that the larger your texture, the more detail you can put onto it. But that is at a cost of computer resources. For determining the size of your texture, you still want to consider what it will be used for. If you're texturing a snake that will appear hidden among the grass in the background of the image, a 4096x4096 map is going to be major overkill. But if you want to get a closeup of the snake's head as it looms in front of the camera, then that large size is merited. Even so, 1024x1024 is the absolute minimum that I usually recommend for TextureMaster work. Anything smaller than that tends to lead to distortions as the computer tries to figure out what to do with large amounts of color and detail being pushed into a very small area. Most of my own texturing is actually done at 2048x2048 unless I'm going to be using the texture in extreme closeup where I'm going to want a lot of extra detail.

[Zendoftheworld]

Hi Aurick,

I am glad I'm not the only one with this problem. The UV mapping suggestions you made in the thread you have refered to simply do not work for me.

I am exporting the OBJ into Maya. I have turned off Mipmapping and I still get each polygon looking very ordinary (as per my examples).

Do you have any other suggestions?

Regards,
Zendoftheworld

[Le Discot]

Thx for these explanations Rick. ;) :)

[Nemo]

omg

the flood of threads made me loose this topic ;)

Now i found it again and wanted to thank you Aurik for this explanation.

I hope you will be able to straight out the issue with Maya and texture export too since this is a major issue for many users i'd guess.

For now i am very happy with this new, innovative and powerful mapping technique :)