Author Topic: Unreal Engine 4 not exporting my .FBX to Substance Painter  (Read 5350 times)

Hi guys, I'm trying to use the Substance plugin to export a mesh to substance painter but no matter what format I use, either FBX or OBJ, when exporting to substance Painter via the LiveLink plugin, I get this error:

"No valid FBX found for this object, one must be exported. Please disable the "Collision" static mesh option in the export dialog folowing this one."

And well, it does export to my substance painter however it misses all my texture sets that I've set up in Maya. It just comes with a material named WorldGridMaterial.

Am I doing something wrong?

Oh and my Unreal Engine is crashing after sending it to Substance Painter

Hi guys, I'm trying to use the Substance plugin to export a mesh to substance painter but no matter what format I use, either FBX or OBJ, when exporting to substance Painter via the LiveLink plugin, I get this error:

"No valid FBX found for this object, one must be exported. Please disable the "Collision" static mesh option in the export dialog folowing this one."

And well, it does export to my substance painter however it misses all my texture sets that I've set up in Maya. It just comes with a material named WorldGridMaterial.

Am I doing something wrong?

Can you describe your workflow in detail?

The popup that you get when trying to send a mesh to painter only pops up if the base .fbx file cannot be found. This can occur if trying to send meshes that are built into Unreal (Starter content, etc) or sending a mesh that is bought from the Marketplace. Also collision must be turned off before sending the mesh to Painter, otherwise errors in Painter can occur.


I have this exact same error. However the .FBX resides in the unreal folder and there should be no reason the plugin can not find it, especially when the initial import to create the UAsset works just fine. The meshes are made in a dedicated DCC, no BSP or Market assets.

When I export the mesh by the popup it places the new .FBX in the SP_Textures folder. For example; if I have an mesh called Door. It exports this mesh to SP_Textures > Game > Door. If I manually place the FBX there before sending to Substance Painter it all works fine. The plugin seems to require the .fbx file to be place in the SP_Textures folder with the same sub-folder architecture as the UAsset. This potentially makes a redundant 3-x level deep sub-folder architecture for each and every mesh you export.

This really interrupts the workflow and makes it impossible to have a centralized folder with .FBX assets, without ending up with duplicates for every model sent to substance painter. Even more annoying is the fact that when I update the source mesh in my DCC I would need to export it all over again to the SP_Textures folder in order to see the reflected changes in Substance Painter.

Last Edit: July 16, 2018, 10:58:15 am

I have this exact same error. However the .FBX resides in the unreal folder and there should be no reason the plugin can not find it, especially when the initial import to create the UAsset works just fine. The meshes are made in a dedicated DCC, no BSP or Market assets.

When I export the mesh by the popup it places the new .FBX in the SP_Textures folder. For example; if I have an mesh called Door. It exports this mesh to SP_Textures > Game > Door. If I manually place the FBX there before sending to Substance Painter it all works fine. The plugin seems to require the .fbx file to be place in the SP_Textures folder with the same sub-folder architecture as the UAsset. This potentially makes a redundant 3-x level deep sub-folder architecture for each and every mesh you export.

This really interrupts the workflow and makes it impossible to have a centralized folder with .FBX assets, without ending up with duplicates for every model sent to substance painter. Even more annoying is the fact that when I update the source mesh in my DCC I would need to export it all over again to the SP_Textures folder in order to see the reflected changes in Substance Painter.

Thanks for the feedback! I agree that this can be annoying and disruptive to a workflow. I'll put it in a ticket so we can improve this.

Quote
Thanks for the feedback! I agree that this can be annoying and disruptive to a workflow. I'll put it in a ticket so we can improve this.

Thank you for the answer. Personally I see this as something that could be easily configured in the plugin settings by giving the user some options with check-boxes, or perhaps setup a root path themselves.

Anyways looking forward to any improvements to what is already a great plugin nevertheless.:)