Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - rosenand

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
I don't think you'll use any of your old projects. I'm pretty sure all the used materials are built into the project file itself, like the mesh textures and mesh itself. That's why the SPP files are so big.

As for stuff from older Painter, I think some of it is on Share: link1, link2.

Wanted to post this, found this topic, so definitely +1

Thank you for quick response :)

I just opened some older projects, and even the older exported PNGs look too soft when compared to SP view. But, of course, I'm viewing those older projects in SP 2.3.1, so maybe it's not that the exports are too soft now, but that the view in 2.3.1 enhances the detail too much (not only the combined channel view mode, but also the main, 3D Material view).

Still, I'm pretty sure (but not 100%) the older projects were 1:1 in SP and UE when I when I was working on them, and new projects are not. All of this is weird, but I'm glad you guys are already on it. Thanks again.

Hey, I don't know if this is important in this case, but I've noticed usually all kinds of seam artifacts are much more visible with the metal shader than with non-metal.

Hello, this week I noticed my new objects looked too smooth in UE4, compared to SP. Had this on two different objects. Narrowed it down to the exported PNG itself, not actually UE. It looks weaker, compared to the "Normal + Height + Base normal" view mode in SP. I don't think I've noticed this effect before, and I'm working with the same settings and presets as always.

In both cases, the normal detail comes from the height channel. Tried exporting to PNG 16 bit, same problem. Any ideas? Thanks.

Hello :)

With objects like the one in the picture attached, where the side of the tube is repeating 3 times, 2 of those being outside of the main 0.0-1.1 UV space, it's only possible to paint on the part inside the main UV space. The other parts aren't directly accessible, which makes it hard to remove seams etc.

The only solution is to cut the geometry while unwrapping, and put everything inside the main UV square, but this increases actual vertex count (UV islands), and is not always possible/practical. It would be nice to be able to paint everywhere. Thanks :)

Substance PainterSubstance Painter - Discussions - Re: Paint Stitches with AO
 on: September 29, 2016, 06:17:15 pm 
I guess one worfkflow is, after you're done painting height/normal info, to export just a normal map, reimport it and plug into the main slot, then bake your AO using the normal map info (not sure if it would work in this case, though).

OR - if you're using the stitch brush to paint a mask of a fill layer - create another fill layer just for the AO, copy and paste the mask, add a blur to the mask (filter layer), then histogram scan (yet another filter layer) - this gives you an expanded version of the original mask. Now just remove the inside from the mask, so that all you have left is just the border. Unfortunately I don't think you can paste individual mask layers, so you'd have to create another fill layer for the AO, but white, not black (and set blending to normal), with the original mask.

I hope you get it :D

Edit: I see you work with normal layers. That's why I prefer working with fill layers and masks instead. Try it.
Edit2: attached a ZIP file with a SPP project for the second method (just a quick, rough test).
Edit3: also, a small image. The first fill layer is color & height, the second is AO black, the third one is AO white.

Is it about export only? I mean, can I safely work on an object that requires a non-square texture, and just postpone exporting final textures till a fix is released? Or is it more deeply rooted, meaning I should restrain from working on such objects for now?

Yeah, I ended up doing it the right way.

I got some decent results early on, and was afraid I would mess them up while improving the helper graphs. But it's just a matter of control and knowing what you're doing :)

Edit: I've attached an illustration of the problem so that you don't have to read through a wall of text :)

Edit: OK, it seems I found a way. Export the main package with dependencies, and then clean both packages, leaving only the graphs I want in both of them.

Hello there. I'm working on a substance library for our game. I've already got some decent results, so it's time to start organizing it so that we don't get lost in dozens of graphs in random packages.

I've got one main sbs package, and within it many graphs I'm experimenting with, jumping from one to another, nesting them in each other; some helper graphs, and some material graphs using those helpers. Every now and than I get a result I really like, for example I managed to combine my dirt, cracks and pebbles  graphs in a convincing asphalt material. I want to store those versions of those graphs separately, so that I don't lose this asphalt material, but in sbs (not sbsar), so that I can still tweak the pebbles or cracks or dirt graphs, with the asphalt material in mind.

At the same time, I want to keep working on independent forks of those pebbles and dirt and cracks graphs, while creating new materials like concrete and soil and whatnot, without affecting the versions of those graphs that worked for the asphalt material.

The problem is that if I create a separate asphalt sbs package and COPY those helper graphs into it, the asphalt graph will still use the old graphs from the original package. Changes made to the copied versions will mean nothing.

On the other hand, if I MOVE the helper graphs into the new package, and change them while tweaking my asphalt material, the changes will also affect, let's say, my pavement, cliff, or soil materials.

To be clear, I know that I could include PARAMETERS in the helper cracks/pebbles/dirt graphs, so that I could use them in all my materials at the same time. But I'm talking about situations where changes to the actual graphs are necessary. And again, I know about compiled sbsar's, but here I'm talking about sbs files that I can tweak at any time.

How can I go about this? Thank you in advance :)

Is this really procedural? No sculpting, scanning etc.? If so, then wow.

What resolution were the textures in Marmoset?


This would be very helpful :)

If you want fine-grade noise, try "fractal sum" noises.

Or "Make it tile patch" nodes, with octave set to 1 or 2, some disorder, and mask precision to almost 1.

But once the finest detail in a noise reach 1px size, I don't think scaling makes a difference.

Yeah, it's more of a feature request. But your post proved useful anyway - I haven't thought about the gradient map step to ultimately vary the luminance. Thanks for your help :)

I did exactly that with Tile Generator, but that's just repeating the exact same 5 panels throughout the whole texture. Tile Random is a powerful node, having this little Quincunx feature would make it even better.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6