Author Topic: can Substance Painter bake normal from multi tiles UV?  (Read 12055 times)

i have a problem baking normal from substance painter,
here i have the mesh with 3 uv tiles (1001, 1002, 1003 uv spaces)



- i apply a different lambert mat, for each UV tile mesh
- i explode the mesh along with hi poly
- then making cage for the baking

then i import it in SP with check "create texture set per UDIM tile" and trying to bake the normal out of it with these setting below.



and i hit bake all texture sets.
what it came was the 1001 normal seem right, but the others (1002 and 1003) are messy.





is my workflow for multi tiles is wrong or somewhat? the only solution for this is to bake all 3 tiles in 1001 space then combine them in the shader? is there any way bake the normal all of them 3 tiles at once?

and the only tutorials for i found at substance is all of them was already bake the normal in. so no baking multi tiles normal map tutorial out there.
can anybody help me?
thanks.

Why are you exporting your weapon lowpoly as a single mesh? If you split up the model into one mesh per UV and material you will have less problems.

I am also working on a weapon with multiple textures. What I did instead was assign a different material to each part, and kept all the UV's in 0-1 space. Painter will automatically make different textures for each material, and you can choose to rebake them separately when needed.

erik.spellerberg thanks for ur reply, this is just the 1st time i use multi tiles so i have no idea the workflow, but ever cross in my mind that i must bake all in 0-1 space, then combine them in one single material... but u just make it so clear for me, now i'm more sure that im in the wrong path.

but the curiousity of mine still wonder if i can bake it outside 0-1 space or no.
the reason behind this is :
1. because if i can bake 3 tiles at a time, then i dont have to offseting the UV anymore in maya shader when i just wanna use one material.
2. when i unwrap UV i became more free, i modeled it, then unwrap it all (never worry about separated mesh) ext: this handle got 4 faces, 2 faces at 1001, and then the other at 1002. and i dont have worry about making one full mesh at single tile. they can separated everywhere.

correct me if im wrong :)

I am having this same problem...

When I do a UDIM bake with a low and high poly, but without a cage, all seems fine.  However, when I do the same UDIM bake with a cage (e.g., the low poly pushed out a bit), the bake does not respect the UDIMs. The caged UDIM bake is messy, as though each bake is being multiplied on top of the previous bakes.  In other words, my bake for UDIM 1005 will also have baked info from UDIM 1004, 1003, etc.

Is this a known bug?

Could any of you share your project and meshes through PM?

Hi Jeremie,

I sent a PM to you which includes the meshes I used.

Could any of you share your project and meshes through PM?

Hi Jeremie,

I sent you a PM of the meshes I used.  Did you get them?  I had not received any confirmation from you that you got them.

Yes, I transferred the meshes to our QA team.

I have attached images of UDIMs 1001, 1002 and 1003 before the normal bake and after.  As well I provided the bake settings I used (very basic settings).  You will note that UDIMs 1002 and 1003 contain information from the UDIM 1001 bake.  It is weird.

Have there been any developments from the QA team on this issue?
Last Edit: April 06, 2017, 06:10:01 pm

Just checking in.  Any progress?

It's a good thing I am not relying on this product to meet a deadline.

Any progress from the QA team?  UDIM support doesn't mean much if you can't bake to UDIMs.

The issue has been aknowledged and reproduced and will be fixed as soon as we have the bandwidth to do so. I would recommend baking without cage for now as this issue only shows up when using one, while we work on fixing this issue.
On something like the weapon or a face, it is very likely that the use of a cage will result in only minor differences compared to a cageless bake, especially if you use the name matching option and correct ray distances.

OK.  Thank you.

Hi,

It has been a while since the following statement was posted on this issue.

The issue has been aknowledged and reproduced and will be fixed as soon as we have the bandwidth to do so. I would recommend baking without cage for now as this issue only shows up when using one, while we work on fixing this issue...

Have any improvements been made to UDIM cage baking yet?  If not, is there an idea as to when you will have an opportunity to address the issue?
Last Edit: September 19, 2017, 12:06:21 am

there is a way to bake in 0,1 or 1001 and then transfer to 1002,1003 manually? in other programs I mean a temporary solution.

with deadlines, this subject worries me.

UDIM is the future no dought