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 - subpablo

Pages: [1]
1
There are a few filters intended for this purpose, like Color balance, color correct, color match, HSL perceptive.
https://docs.substance3d.com/spdoc/filter-109608972.html

2
If SPainter is setting up your project with multiple texture sets, that means it's detecting different material IDs.  In order to paint between UDIMs your imported mesh will need to use a single Mat ID.

1: You'll need to shift each mat ID to it's own UDIM either in your photogrammetry app (if exporting with UDIMS is an option) or doing it manually in another program.  (in blender, you can select faces by material, then move them into the right UDIM space.)
2: Once your Mat ID chunks are set up in UDIM configuration, you'll need to apply a single shader across your whole mesh, so when you re-export, your mesh will have a single Mat ID.
3:  Then you'll need to rename your textures to correspond to which UDIM you've moved each chunk to. (filename.1001.psd, filename.1002.psd, etc.)  This way SPainter will know how to load your textures when you set up your project.  If your Photogrammetry app has a UDIM export option, this may be a step it does for you, but make sure the naming convention matches what SPainter requires.

The first thing I'd check is if your Photogrammetry app has some option to export models in UDIM configuration, then go from there.

3
I have two tips for you and some advice:
1. There's a lot of empty UV space in your current layout you could be taking advantage of.  A good link with lots of info about UV best practices can be found here:  http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Texture_Coordinates
2. There are a few areas where your UV islands are touching each other.  Not providing enough padding between islands will create lots of problems for you.  More info here:  http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Edge_padding

Advice! - This may not be the best forum for questions like this, since these are basic UV questions rather than something Substance Painter specific.  (The issues with your layout would be a problem in any texturing software.)  My suggestion is to search for free tutorials on youtube to get a handle on the basics of 3d, UVs, etc. first, then find a non-software-specific forum like Polycount to ask questions on after you've gotten a better handle on the basics.  This way, you'll be much more likely to get responses.

4
The lack of a color swatch also prevents us from collapsing folder mask stacks as well, since there's no "fill layer" equivalent icon to disengage "mask mode".  The folder icon just opens/closes the folder like normally.
 
In the meantime, you can use Ctrl+click in the body of the folder to disengage the mask mode.

I appreciate the response, Jeremie!  -I'm not having any luck with this tip though.  I made an image to explain the issue I'm describing (in green/pink) just in case there's been some miscommunication.  It also shows (In blue) where I've tried your tip:



So far my workaround is to nest my major folders with masks inside another folder with no mask.  This works, but isn't ideal because working in these folders is still much harder to keep organized visually.  I appreciate any help!

5
UDIM support is new (and great!), but with it seems to have come a few quality of life backsteps.  Here's one:

With the removal of the color swatch for layers in UDIM mode, there's no way to re-collapse folder alpha stacks.  This makes visually scanning and navigating a complex file much more difficult due to the more cluttered view.

Non-UDIM mode funtionality:
1-Create a folder and add a mask to it.
2-right-click the folder's mask swatch and add a paint layer to your folder's mask.
3-click on your folder's "color mode" swatch to the left of your mask swatch to collapse your mask's layer stack.

UDIM functionality:
1-Create a folder and add a mask to it.
2-right-click the folder's mask swatch and add a paint layer to your folder mask.
3-Folder's mask stack can't be collapsed

6
I'm glad this is being looked into!

The lack of a color swatch also prevents us from collapsing folder mask stacks as well, since there's no "fill layer" equivalent icon to disengage "mask mode".  The folder icon just opens/closes the folder like normally.
 
Not only can we not use a layer swatch to visually grok complicated layers stacks, color pick from, etc. , they're now a bit more cluttered and hard to keep visually organized.

7
One workaround is nesting your gradient layer inside a folder, and then giving the folder it's own mask.

8
"Iron Raw Damaged" includes a height component, and "Silver Pure" doesn't.  Try changing the projection method of the material to Tri-planar in the material's Properties.

9
For anyone interested, a little more investigation turned up an explanation for what's causing this:

Substance is generating these masks by heavily blurring the Curve map, which introduces seams when nearby edge padding has striped or wildly different values.  It's essentially creating similar problems you'd run into if you didn't have enough padding, but in this case, it's caused by the padding method itself.  You can test this by loading your curve map into a fill layer alpha, adding a blur filter and playing with the values.

One partial way to mitigate this is by creating your edge padding manually in Photoshop by running the "Solidify C" filter from Flaming Pear (Free here:  http://flamingpear.com/freebies.html ).  This still creates lots of seams to fix, but I'll take a partial solution if I can get it! 

I wonder if it would be possible in future SP versions for mask generation to be "smarter" by blurring while taking UV seams into account somehow?


10
I'm hoping to find out if this is a known issue or limitation with the mask editor I should just expect to have to work around:

*SPainter version: 2020.2.0 (6.2.0)
*my baked maps (baked in Toolbag3) have no visible seams and have plenty of edge padding.
*all baked maps and models look as expected in SP's viewport. (no visible seams)
*Mask generators create glaring seams using only my mesh maps for generation.
      -Main issue is with curvature masking.  Seams begin to show up at the upper levels of the "fine" settings, and everything above that is bad enough to be unusable.
      -AO masking introduces very minor seams by comparison.
      -No visible seams in WSNormal, position, or thickness masking

In the attached image, all variables are turned off except what's highlighted in green.

Pages: [1]