Please help!
I have a 20 mil ploycount model subdivided at 4. Polypaint looks beautiful. I exported the texture map at 8162 and applied to model in maya that was also subdivided or smoothed but the texture does not render out well. Almost all the details did not carry over. Any ideas out there? Thanks for any advice!
Jv
It might depend on what subdivision level you were on when you created the texture map, how efficient the UVs are laid out to take advantage of the texture space, and if Maya has a default setting which lowers the maximum texture resolution for a realtime viewport (a lot of programs tend to have an initial limit well under the 8162 mark)
makes sense. I think my problem might be that even at an 8k output for the texture maps, the details cant reproduce due to the size of the model itself. I may have to split the model up and out put each section at 8k to get the details when I re-assemble it in Maya. Does this make sense?
JV
I think my problem might be that even at an 8k output for the texture maps, the details cant reproduce due to the size of the model itself. I may have to split the model up and out put each section at 8k to get the details when I re-assemble it in Maya. Does this make sense?
The size of the model doesn’t matter. An 8K map should be more than enough to capture the polypaint detail from a model of 20 million polys, unless your UVs only occupy a small part of the map. (An 8K map has roughly 64 million pixels, so your UVs would need to be occupying less than a third of that area before you’d lose detail.)
You could check the map you are exporting in Photoshop or another image editor. You should then be able to see the detail you’re capture. If the detail is missing then perhaps you are not creating the map from polypaint at the highest subdivision level. If the detail is there, then you’ll need to check your settings in Maya. As Cryid says, perhaps Maya is not displaying the map at full resolution.
thanks guys for replying to this thread. I think I may have cracked what actually happened because the model I have in question has a few sub tools such as teeth. Now those teeth at 8k look great and detailed in Maya and I’m thinking this is because those teeth don’t have to be shrunk down to share the same Squarespace. But when I have to bring in the entire body at 8k it is such a large model that by the time it comes to fullsize it blurs out.I decided to try to cut or divide the model in various sections which will turn into I suppose sub tools in ZBrush. So my plan is toflatten and prepare the UV’s for poly paint but each sub tool section of the body will then have a chance to have more space especially if I use the density tool for each 8 K UV Square. I’m a bit new to this but with the teeth another small sub tools originally came with the model it makes sense.anyone out there that doesn’t agree and has experience as to maybe why what I’m saying does not make sense please let me know!
Would you be willing to post what your model and it’s UV’s currently look like? As said above, 8K is a LOT of texture space and should be able to hold tens of millions of vertices worth of detail even with a inefficient UV layout. To use several color textures all at that massive resolution, all for a single model seems like it would be completely unnecessary for most models.
well unfortunately this particular model is attached to a nondisclosure agreement so my hands are tied in that regard.but for example when I have a head to toe so to speak UV map of the entire body at 8k in Photoshop at 100 percent it’s still very small in size so if I go beyond that size it starts to pixelate which is why I believe I have nothing but blur and lack of detail in Maya. Once again the teeth of this model has its own UV space at 8k and they look gorgeous because just one sub tool shares the same amount of UV space and they look extremely detailed. So what I’ve been doing is I’ve been splitting the model into sections. Each one of those sections I plan to assign the poly painted textures at 8k of space for each one of those sections hoping that the details will hold then. Thank you for the inpu t on this challenge…
Are you absolutely sure you are outputting 8K maps from ZBrush? The attached images show an 8K map at 100% with a 100 pixel red border around what is visible on my screen, then a view showing the whole of the map (at 10.3%). There is no way I would describe an 8K map at 100% as small in size.
How are you setting up ZBrush to export 8K maps?
Hmmmm. that Photoshop image sample shows different than what I get in Photoshop! My texture at 8K barely goes outside of my window frame at 100%, so now I am confused : (
First off, I have 4R6 Zbrush with all the plug ins. I use the multi map exporter to export texture maps, displacement maps, etc. In that export section, I have the option to output up to 8162 I believe it was, or 8k. I hope I am doing something wrong to get the scale that you are showing with your Photoshop example! Is there a different or better way to export a “true” 8k?
EDIT : The model was subdivided to level 4 before I began the sculpting and poly painting process. That subdivision level was at 4 when I tried to export the maps at 8K…
Thank you,
Dutchart
What is the map size slider in MME set to? Can you show a screengrab?
8162 is exactly where that slider you show is at. I would do a screen grab but zbrush is chewing on a test at the moment : )
Any of you experts have any ideas on this?
Try creating the maps the old way instead (texture map sub-pallete, for example)
Please show a screen grab of your full interface, without any cropping. That will help us determine what’s wrong.
