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 - dgoyette

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Those are actually both things I've done, and they both seemed to ridiculous to me that I assumed there had to be a better approach that "real" artists use for this sort of thing. In that past, I've added more detail to the model to make it easier to paint it the way I wanted, but that seems really bad. For example, suppose the model will wear a striped shirt, and my approach is to model the stripes as individual quads just to make painting easier, that can't be right.

I'd like to know how people go about painting things with recurring, regular repetitions. Let's say, for example, I want a row of screws along the edge of a surface. I want them evenly spaced. Other than eyeballing it, are there any tools I can use to snap or align things?

The only technique I know of is to set the Spacing of a brush, and to fiddle with it until I get something that's kind of correct. But this involves eyeballing the spacing, and eyeballing the starting point so that it starts and ends at the right spot. This feels really sloppy.

A specific example I'm working with now feels like it should be really simple: A 1-meter long panel, where I want 4 bolts, evenly spaced, at the .125, .375, .625 and .875 marks. (So, it's like dividing the panel into quarters, and putting a bolt in the middle of each quarter.) I've tried using a stencil, but that's more eyeballing. What can I do better?


If you're able to share it, attach your SBSAR here and I'm happy to see if I get the same issue with it.

They aren't metallic, are they? If you have any metallic materials in Unity, they'll look great in Substance, but you'll need a put a reflection probe near them in Unity, otherwise they'll just be mostly black.

I'd be happy if someone could suggest a workaround to an issue I feel like I'm constantly dealing with: Changing things I didn't want to change, without the ability to undo it. A particularly frustrating example is setting up a stencil. Most of the time I get it positioned just how I want, then I make some tiny change to the view (by rotating/zooming/translate, etc), and now the stencil has moved and is no longer where I want it. The thing that's so frustrating is that I can't use Undo to get back to how it looked, because Undo doesn't track changes to the viewport transform.

Another example is when I accidentally rotate the brush when I was trying to zoom the viewport. I can't undo to revert the brush size to what it had been previously.

I find that a lot of Substance Painter involves making very precise changes to the viewport, and then being frustrated that I've accidentally changed something with no ability to get back to the way it was.

Again, maybe there's just a better workflow.

I want to use the same material in within multiple texture sets within my project. I see that I can right-click on a fill layer and Copy Content, and paste that into another another layer's content, but that's a lot of manual work when I'm making frequent changes to the material. I'm assuming there's some way to create a new material which I can include in my project, and use that same material in multiple layers/texture sets? I haven't found a way to do this. The intent is that after assigning that material to some number of layers, I can adjust the material once and have it affect all of the layers. Is this possible?

I feel kind of dumb for not realizing this sooner, but having been a Substance Painter user for about a year, it only just occurred to be today that maybe I could rebind the Hide UI key to something other than tab. I don't know how many times I've been just trying to tab through some fields in the UI, only to have it hide the the UI instead of tabbing to the next field. I just figured this was the way things were in SP. But today I found that Hide UI can be rebound to any other key binding, and upon doing so, tabbing through UI fields works great.

So the question is, why was Tab chosen as the default key binding for hiding the UI? I would assume that a huge majority of users would expect Tab to function in SP the same way it tends to function in almost any other program that has navigable fields. Yet by default it does not.

For the sake of new users, could you consider changing the default Hide UI key so something else, so that it doesn't clobber the completely functional and nice field navigation that you've build into SP?

Or, actually, I should mention that Substance Painter shows a nice 3D preview for these SBSARs, but Designer does not. Is that just an extra feature they worked into Painter that doesn't exist in Designer?

I found a solution to this, for filters at least. When adding a filter, I can change the first value in the filter from "All" to "Graph", and it will only show the graphs.

Thanks. I mainly have SBSARs that I downloaded from Substance Source. I assume that if I only have the SBSAR, I won't be able to create the preview?

Is there a good place for me to recommend that the SBSARs downloaded from Substance Source contain these 3D Previews?

In my library, it seems that all SBS files are previewed with a nice spherical 3D preview, while SBS just shows what appears to be the baseColor of the substance. Is this an option I can change somewhere? Ideally I'd have 3D previews for SBSAR as well as SBS.

Please see the attached image. This is part of the results I get when searching for "brick" in Substance Designer. The same file shows up twice, once as a "compiledgraph", with a nice preview, and again as an "sbsar", with no preview other than a big "S".

Is it possible not to show those "S" sbsars? They basically double the number of things in my search results, and they don't have a preview of the material. (Why is that, by the way? It seems like SBSARs would have previews in Designer...)

I tried creating a filter, at least, to only show my "compiledgraphs", but I don't see any way to filter by extension.


Substance Integrations - Unity - Re: Game performance
 on: February 21, 2019, 02:09:05 am 
That's true, but since the tiling is on the material, instead of on the mesh renderer, it means you can't easily create objects of arbitrary sizes. So, if one of you planes is 10x10, but another should be 8x8, or 10x5, the textures wouldn't line up properly if they were all using the same material. You'd either end up creating lots of materials that share the texture (where each material has different tiling), or you'd want to programmatically change the tiling settings of the materials at runtime. Either is fairly cumbersome. Compare that to the ease of using ProBuilder.

I started using ProBuilder a couple of years ago at just about the same time I started using Unity. Trying to create rooms using just Unity planes and cubes was a nightmare.

Substance Integrations - Unity - Re: Game performance
 on: February 18, 2019, 03:56:04 pm 
Is there a reason you need to specifically use small Quads for this? Keep in mind that each quad is composed of a mesh collider with a fairly large number of triangles. If you're literally creating thousands of them, I might expect performance issues merely from the colliders alone at some point. Nevermind that having thousands of objects in your scene would be a nightmare to maintain. Maybe you're generating everything procedurally? In that case, I'm sure there are better approaches.

Anyway, I recommend you look at ProBuilder. It's free in the package manager. It handles the tiling/repeat of textures on large surfaces. So, you could create a single large surface as big as you want, and repeat the material texture over it without stretching the material.

Here's where I am now, just in case anyone has some specific suggestions. See the attached image.

My approach has been to use some layered Starbursts to create the outward-going lines. I'm blending three different three different "rings" of these starbursts so that things change a little going from the center outward.

I'm also using Splatter Circular for the short perpendicular lines.

It looks...okay... But I haven't figured out how to get a nice crack pattern, where lines actually connect up. Notice that my perpendicular lines are just random in length. They don't connect one line to another, as real broken glass would.

Could anyone suggest some approach for how to get my perpendicular lines to bridge between two of my other lines?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6