The basics are here:
http://www.pixologic.com/docs/index.php/Creating_Normal_Maps
Thanks for interpreting (incorrectly) what I wrote, that will certainly help my mood/attitude and make progress.
If you read what I wrote, I did not suggest that Mudbox was better, and in fact in other posts I THINK that I made it clear that I didn’t think it was, or that I was highly resistant to trying it.
But what I saw was this:
-
multiple threads asking where certain functionality had gone, some answered with things like ‘Yes it’s gone, but GoZ will replace pieces of it’
-
speculation that GoZ was not announced because Autodesk had some degree of influence over whether or not it happened, and would be reluctant to do it/help…Was this just speculation? Yes…but if Pixologic is not a public company, it seems like they COULD make ‘forward looking statements’ like “it’s not ready yet for Max, but it IS coming”…this they have not done.
-
all of the changes in the interface, released along with (I believe) an announcement that the manual will come later (seems a bad practice).
Where exactly did I say “3.5 must be bad”? - or is it easier to dismiss my concerns if I said that? (I’ll admit that maybe I’m not remembering my own posts well)
So…eliminating all the things that I didn’t actually say leaves one of your sentences as this:
- You’d probably get more help if your posts didn’t seem to simply start out as “It’s different and I can’t figure it out”
Well? It IS different…and I can’t figure it out…saying that and then explaining what parts (normal mapping) are different and confusing to me sounds like a good idea. I guess you disagree.
So I shouldn’t be helped because I’ve called out something I don’t understand? Or is it because I’m annoyed - NOT that they’ve made changes, as you’d have people believe - - I’m not resistant to change…I’m annoyed because they seemed to have made substantial changes, and released the product without proper documentation of how one deals with the changes…I don’t think I’m alone in this feeling.
I really wish this hadn’t gone all ad hominem, and someone would have just posted a link to a manual or a tutorial. It looks like maybe you did that next - if so, thanks.
I’m not trying to get deeper into an argument here, but do I need to read other pages linked to that page?
I ask that rather silly sounding question because I make it exactly two sentences in with that link before reading
“More advanced normal map creation tools can also be accessed when using the Zmapper plug in”…which does not exist anymore.
What problems are you having in crating normal maps? The link above seems about correct. Just ignore the reference to zmapper and the built in tools will create the maps ok. The options seem to have clear explainations. Can you give a clear example of your problem and I’m sure others can help you.
For documentation, in the download centre there is document showing the changes in version 3.12 for the mac. A lot of this is also applicable for 3.5
Richard
Thanks, Richard…much of what I’m having trouble with might just be due to the fact that I’m legitimately trying to learn the way I’m used to, which is tutorials, videos, etc.
When the instructions differ from the interface, it really throws me. Here are the ‘challenges’ I’ve had to-date, which is why I’m desperate for dox:
- Clicking on Create NM in most tutorials I’ve seen says it will put the NM in the Textures pane…it doesn’t do this, but now I THINK that this is because Clone NM does that…correct?
1a) If Cloning is right, what is the proper way to get the model into Max/FinalRender? Lots of tutorials, but I don’t know which ones I can trust (see #2)
-
The traditional tutorials tell you that you must be at such-and-such a level of detail (the lowest, then move to the highest and do…etc.)…I’m worried that this is no longer the case…is it? One problem is that once I find one major problem like a button no longer in the interface, I worry that the rest of the tutorial is no good. When I get bad results in FinalRender, I don’t know if it’s my settings in FR, or if everything I’ve done in following a tutorial was wrong…net result, not really learning anything or becoming confident in that learning.
-
Many of the tutorials tell me that in Max I have to reduce blur to 0.01, adjust the output settings to such and such…when I get bad results, I don’t know if I’ve done the wrong things in ZB because of out-of-date info, or if these adjustments they tell you to make in Max are no longer needed, or have the values changed (now make blur 0.13, change the offset to…?
-
Generally speaking, I tend to get ‘blow outs’ so far in finalRender…where the displacement occurs, but is either unnoticeable, or reduces my nice little mouse face to a giant mass of spikes - little in between - the in-betweens look rough at best. Again, with the changes I don’t know if I did everything right in ZB and just need to adjust in Max, or what.
-
(ADDED) It also LOOKS like (from that link) I am getting TANGENT space normal maps, and I THINK I should get Object space…the tutorials imply that Object is the default, but I haven’t changed the defaults and yet I seem to recall that they’ve all LOOKED like the (less ‘pretty’) tangent map in the link.
It is highly likely that I will find it easy once I know the new workflow, but I’m trying to use it with processes that were created under old versions, and I can’t get any good results. It’s frustrating to simultaneously be trying to use a new tool, then never knowing if you can’t find Button #346 because you’re not looking in the right place, or because there IS NO Button #346.
I don’t use max so can’t help with it’s specifics. Be at your lwest subd when you create the normal map. You then use the clone NM button to transfer the map to the texture window where you can then export it. The same operation is also done for displacement maps. Read the document I mentioned as this should cover how this is now handled. It is for the mac version but these changes have also been included into 3.5 There may be other changes since then but covers the basic changes
Richard
Thanks again - -will do…I’d rather deal with minor differences in look Mac to PC than the differences in approach I’m seeing.
Phloog
-
Yes, once you click on create normal map then you will need to click Clone NM to send it to the Texture Palette to export. Don’t forget to flip it in the V and MAX uses Normal Maps different then other applications so you have to flip the Green Channel before you create the normal maps. So FlipG in ZBrush before creating. I don’t know MAX but I’m almost positive that channel needs to be fixed. I would also recommend to always use a Tangent Normal Map.
-
The blow out you are having is most likely a setting in FinalRender yu have set. Your values are set too high. The displacement maps and normal maps have been re-evaluated with some great imporvements.
The maps have improved not just in quality but speed as well. To create a cavity map use the combination of the AO map with a cavity map. You can get some really great results with these two maps.
I understand that it is difficult to learn new features and not have the old ones but things will change and for the better I might add. It just takes some time and trust me once you get away from 3.1 you will never want to go back.
GoZ for MAX will be out in the near future and trust me it will complete change your workflow. You will not need any tutorials. 
Paul
Pix should probably post this in the GoZ thread that they are commited to GoZ Max. I get a lot of inquiry from nervous Max users that think they’re going to be left out of the party!
-K
You have a couple of approaches to cavity maps with the new system. One of the easiest is to just use “Mask by Cavity” and “Create Alpha” to save it out. Bluring the mask (BlurMask button) slightly may give you a good effect.
Alternately, the new AO system can create some good effects in this department. AO masks are also driven from the Masking subpallet.
You can also send a mask to texture via the “New from Masking” button on the Texture pallet.
-K
That’s incredible news! Frankly, right now ZBrush is something I like to ‘fiddle with’, but it’s not making me any money (not a complaint, just explaining that it’s more of a toy/hobby thing for me right now, in large part because I haven’t had time to learn it well).
If Goz is really so revolutionary that no tutorial will be required, and the Max version is due in the near future (hopefully meaning weeks not years), then I think I can just stop fiddling right now, and wait for GoZ. I’m really into sculpting things with Zbrush…not so into understanding how to flip Vs, flip green, place my jacket upon the eighth peg while humming a Thanksgiving carol…if you’re saying that GoZ will limit how much I have to know about tangents, UV spaces, etc…then you are my hero. I already have to know about lots of goofy things to use FR and FumeFx properly.
…
I can certainly save you time by not answering questions–that will save you time reading “every freaking forum post.” It’s not like I get paid by Pix or anything. As for normal map generation and disp map generation, it’s already in the online doc. The new buttons have some useful doc, visible by Ctrl-clicking. There is also considerable information in ZBrush Homeroom videos which cover a lot of things about the new 3.5 features.
I’m sure Pix could have delayed the release another month to prepare the documentation to a higher standard (they aren’t that big a company . . .) or maybe push GoZ out a couple months . . .
(BTW: you guys do know this forum has an “ignore” function don’t you? You click on the user’s profile and you select “ignore this user.” It can cut down considerably what you need to read from ungrateful users.)
-K
Some more tips regarding Difference Maps in 3.5:
- ZBrush can now use HD data to create normal and displacement maps.
- ZBrush natively has the ability to create projected maps. In fact, there’s a lot more control. Instead of using ZMapper to calculate the projection and being stuck with what it gives you, you use the projection features such as Tool>SubTool>Project All and/or the Zproject sculpting brush. There are new controls that give you more projection control than in 3.1. You can also use the sculpting brushes to clean up any projection issues – all before you actually create your difference maps.
- ZBrush can now natively export 32-bit displacement maps.
Good point. I hadn’t thought of using Project All that way, but it is a neat way tune a map.
-K
Phloog
It will make things easier for you but you will still need to understand a little what maps to make. That is on the artist.
Paul
Well, I’ve no problem with learning something about the tools, but I think that I can envision a world where sculpting with the computer is like sculpting with other media…can I learn the exact chemical composition of roma plastilina? Sure…but I don’t have to in order to be able to use it. It helps to know the characteristics to a degree (so you understand what it can/can’t do), but I would hope that at some point in time we would be able to sculpt on the desktop without having to understand normal maps and such.
My normal maps are turning out sucky. I can wait until goz comes out if that will help improve it.
I have tried various settings and getting a very washed out map.
I was using a model done in 3.1 -the filme imported into 3.5.
The displacement generation works great–but my normal map is washed out.
Not sure if I should add an HD layer and then make a normal map off that.
Previously I would delete the first 3 layers of a 6 subdivision level model to get the normal map in zmapper. Do I still need to do that in 3.5’s normal map process?
I assume not-since I did a test using a clean obj model and did a quick sculpt and detaling and it looked pretty good.
But I would like to be able to take the existing 3.1 model and get a new normal map off that if possible to compare to my zmapper one.
and now i am wondering how to get rid of the seams in the normal map…without Zmapper, i can’t even visualise it without baking it over and over
You say that the features of ZMapper have been implemented into 3.5? Where is the seam overpaint control, or the sampling? Where can I choose a normal/ cavity map configuration preset? How about creating a projection normal map? I don’t see any of those features anywhere.
If 3.5 can do just as good a job as ZMapper in creating normals for export, I think Pixologic needs to set up a tutorial or at least give some kind of explanation of how this can be done. Many users ( including the ones in my studio) depend upon ZMapper’s options and flexibility in getting the normals we need. Until this is addressed, we will continue to use 3.1. Yes, it’s that important!