Jump to content


Photo

Merge down and Smooth surface


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 lowedennis

lowedennis

    Neophyte

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.K.
  • Interests:VFX, Film Making, Painting, Scupture (stone carving),CGI -when I have the time to fudge!

Posted 25 February 2010 - 03:06 PM

I've now got to the stage where I need to merge down a layer I have been modelling to the original volume (Volume 1) in the screen grab: (Before Merge)

Is there a way to get it to smooth out without affecting the original model during it's process ? (so the original model's detail stays the same)- see screen grab: (After Merge)

I say this because I am scupting the detail in stages and if I work with the smooth tool it also smoothes everything I've done before with it.

Attached Thumbnails

  • Before merge.jpg
  • Before merge.jpg


#2 spacepainter

spacepainter

    Apprentice

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 637 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 February 2010 - 04:59 PM

I don't understand the problem. Could you explain it a bit more clear please?
Artis Natura Magistra

#3 artman

artman

    Expert

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,019 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:quebec,canada
  • Interests:Henri Corbin
    Brian Wilson
    Hikaru No Go
    Noah23
    and 3DCoat.

Posted 25 February 2010 - 05:12 PM

I've now got to the stage where I need to merge down a layer I have been modelling to the original volume (Volume 1) in the screen grab: (Before Merge)

Is there a way to get it to smooth out without affecting the original model during it's process ? (so the original model's detail stays the same)- see screen grab: (After Merge)

I say this because I am scupting the detail in stages and if I work with the smooth tool it also smoothes everything I've done before with it.

I cannot answer your question I dont understand it clearly enough.
I understand you want to merge but you also want to smooth the spline layer without affecting the one underneath.
It is contradictory.
Once it is merged it is merged....
Also the spline layer is SO lowres that any smoothing can literally destroy the voxels.

But,instead of answering your question... :) I can tell you how to reproduce the painting you are using.

-Start over using the voxel base you had before(the global structure)
-Split that structure using "Split tool" and lasso from E panel into 4 layers(press E to make the various selection mode appear and choose lasso).
(choose good angles so "viewer" do not see where you splitted the structure.)
-Increase those 4 parts to approx 3-5 million polys
-Redo your work with the painting as mask ,except now you will have a much better details to work with.
-then use "clone space density" on any of the 4 hires layers to create an empty hires layer.
-On that new empty layer Try a quick test with splines and press Enter---- if spline looks ok: fine
if not : undo and increase res of the layer and start test again until spline merging gives a sharp result and not garbled
splines like you got right now.
-Now,do your spline work.

Merge layers only when everything is perfect like you want and only if you really need it.
when i look at the picture it seems to me you could keep everything as layers without merging.
It will gives you more control to keep background shape unaffected and mostly it will allow you to keep everything to a high polycount....which you will need,because this is a very highly detailed painting.

Also if nevertheless you choose to merge always merge from the highest to the lowest res otherwise the highest will
"degenerate" to the lower resolution.(maybe it was your question :unsure: )
Lest limbs be reddened and rent--I spring the trap that is set--As I loose the snare you may glimpse me there--For surely you shall forget
"The Wind In the Willows", Chapter 7 "The Piper at the Gates Of Dawn"

#4 lowedennis

lowedennis

    Neophyte

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.K.
  • Interests:VFX, Film Making, Painting, Scupture (stone carving),CGI -when I have the time to fudge!

Posted 25 February 2010 - 05:19 PM

I don't understand the problem. Could you explain it a bit more clear please?

Sure, I'm using a layer in the voxel setup to paint on the original model some snakes to produce those ribs and when I merge it down to the original model it is triangulated too much (probably due to my resolution of the model.
My answer is to smooth the resulting merge with the smooth brush but the underlying model also becomes smoother thereby destroying it's texture that is already there.
I wondered whether there was a way to have it smooth during the merge transformation so I don't have to touch the underlying model when the merge has done it's business.
I've tried smoothing the layer first but it reduces it's size and disappears under the model (loosing it's height).
At the moment I'm experimenting with the extrude brush (giving it the barest minimum of height)as it has a smoothing capability and it seems to be the right way to go so far.

#5 spacepainter

spacepainter

    Apprentice

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 637 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 February 2010 - 05:50 PM

Sounds like you will find out soon, with the help of artman and some more trying different approaches. You have to chose which resolution of the base model you need before you merge, to keep enough detail.
Unfortanately i think you can't see at what level of resolution you are working and res can be different in each layer.
Artis Natura Magistra

#6 lowedennis

lowedennis

    Neophyte

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.K.
  • Interests:VFX, Film Making, Painting, Scupture (stone carving),CGI -when I have the time to fudge!

Posted 25 February 2010 - 06:08 PM

Sounds like you will find out soon, with the help of artman and some more trying different approaches. You have to chose which resolution of the base model you need before you merge, to keep enough detail.
Unfortanately i think you can't see at what level of resolution you are working and res can be different in each layer.

OK, I thought that by increasing the resolution of the main model the layers would follow so I need to do the same to the layers seperately.

#7 artman

artman

    Expert

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,019 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:quebec,canada
  • Interests:Henri Corbin
    Brian Wilson
    Hikaru No Go
    Noah23
    and 3DCoat.

Posted 25 February 2010 - 06:17 PM

OK, I thought that by increasing the resolution of the main model the layers would follow so I need to do the same to the layers seperately.

Even if layers are parented,they are all individual volumes with individual resolutions and symmetry planes.
The only advantages of parenting is if you use "Transform" tool you can scale,rotate,move the whole family .
Also using "delete" on the parent will get rid of all childrens which is good when you got big voxtrees.
Lest limbs be reddened and rent--I spring the trap that is set--As I loose the snare you may glimpse me there--For surely you shall forget
"The Wind In the Willows", Chapter 7 "The Piper at the Gates Of Dawn"

#8 spacepainter

spacepainter

    Apprentice

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 637 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 February 2010 - 06:23 PM

Yes that's a nice hidden feature aint it? :)
Artis Natura Magistra

#9 lowedennis

lowedennis

    Neophyte

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.K.
  • Interests:VFX, Film Making, Painting, Scupture (stone carving),CGI -when I have the time to fudge!

Posted 25 February 2010 - 06:33 PM

Even if layers are parented,they are all individual volumes with individual resolutions and symmetry planes.
The only advantages of parenting is if you use "Transform" tool you can scale,rotate,move the whole family .
Also using "delete" on the parent will get rid of all childrens which is good when you got big voxtrees.

It is slowly becoming clearer, I think I can just scrape by with my existing resolution and am keen to get through the quadrangulation thingy and into the paint room to try out the goods on offer.

#10 artman

artman

    Expert

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,019 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:quebec,canada
  • Interests:Henri Corbin
    Brian Wilson
    Hikaru No Go
    Noah23
    and 3DCoat.

Posted 25 February 2010 - 06:41 PM

It is slowly becoming clearer, I think I can just scrape by with my existing resolution and am keen to get through the quadrangulation thingy and into the paint room to try out the goods on offer.

You need to feed quadrangulation good res to base from.Your background layer is ok.
But you need to redo your work with "snake" brush on a higher res voxel layer,its too low.
Quadrangulation out of it will gives ugly result.

(note:Btw you can press "increase res" even on an empty voxel layer. :)
3DCoat will tell you it needs 0 megs of memory to do it but it will still do it 8)
you just need to somehow remember how much times you've pressed the "increse res" button otherwise you can get a 50million voxel layer without knowing it)
Lest limbs be reddened and rent--I spring the trap that is set--As I loose the snare you may glimpse me there--For surely you shall forget
"The Wind In the Willows", Chapter 7 "The Piper at the Gates Of Dawn"

#11 lowedennis

lowedennis

    Neophyte

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.K.
  • Interests:VFX, Film Making, Painting, Scupture (stone carving),CGI -when I have the time to fudge!

Posted 26 February 2010 - 08:56 PM

I've now got the model in it's basic sculpt, before I go to hi res I want to check it in Max first to make sutre I'm getting similar results that are predictable.
I need to make a bump map I think (a displacement is going to be too much for my computer as the mesh I've got from quadrangulation is quite large) - so can I get a bump map to capture those fine lines from this voxel sculpt?

see screen grab:

Attached Thumbnails

  • Derelict-voxel-basic stage.jpg


#12 Tony Nemo

Tony Nemo

    Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,298 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Humboldt County, California

Posted 26 February 2010 - 11:20 PM

I've now got the model in it's basic sculpt, before I go to hi res I want to check it in Max first to make sutre I'm getting similar results that are predictable.
I need to make a bump map I think (a displacement is going to be too much for my computer as the mesh I've got from quadrangulation is quite large) - so can I get a bump map to capture those fine lines from this voxel sculpt?

see screen grab:


You will get all the detail ( with a normal map) that doesn't need to deform the edge or contour. To be visibly deformed on the edge, you would need to merge for Microvertex and export a Deformation map which gives you added geometry.

8 core 2.5 Xeon /12 gb RAM DX 64 Cuda / 560GTX-Ti. I always use the latest build.


#13 lowedennis

lowedennis

    Neophyte

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.K.
  • Interests:VFX, Film Making, Painting, Scupture (stone carving),CGI -when I have the time to fudge!

Posted 27 February 2010 - 12:24 AM

You will get all the detail ( with a normal map) that doesn't need to deform the edge or contour. To be visibly deformed on the edge, you would need to merge for Microvertex and export a Deformation map which gives you added geometry.

Thanks, I realize now more about Normal Maps (I've just done a crash course on them today) and understand their benefits - I come from the old 'Bump Map School' and need to get back in the loop again.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users