Mudbox displacement maps in T2

[j meyer]

It's better for sculpting on verticals,less stretching of polygons.
World space is what I am using too.Tangent is for animated stuff afaik.
Yes there is such a balance and there might be more like the size of the
plane,but I have to test some more before I can tell.
I have no idea about that dipping,have to think it over.

[efflux]

efflux - read what paq wrote in the beginning.

I've seen that paq used Modo yet apparently Modo doesn't do export of vector displacement from what I've read but I'll have to look into it. Why this is so difficult to deal with is beyond me.

[efflux]

I'm just going to plough on with other things in Modo at the moment. When I eventually find the way to do this I'll try it. It would be good if there was a cheap way using xnormal or something but I just couldn't get that to work from Blender even when I got the meshes out of Blender.

[paq]

Well in modo just add a displacement map (top menu / texture / add displace texture) ... and sculpt your model.
Dont forget to save the texture when you are done.

With modo you dont actually sculpt, but you are in fact allready painting the vector displacement map ... so there is no baking needed. The bad side is that the sculpting tools are a little bit weird sometimes, especially the smooth tool.

I'm not really sure what you are trying to do with xnormal, extracting a vector displacement from an highres to a plane for example requiere all the in between subdivision level.  You cant just import an highres and do an extract. So the baking, or let's say the vector map creation, has to be done in your sculpting application (zbrush or Mudbox).

[TheBadger]

There is most definitely a difference in working in Mud and Z for this purpose, from what Im seeing in this thread.
Namely, 32bit vs 64bit. And the amount of polygons you can work with... so ultimately detail created and available in the vector. However, if your adding power fractals for color and displacement then thats not too big a problem as Chris proved with his image and files that he posted.
So working on detailing a sculpt with 6 million polygons vs 20 million.

We should also try to post some facts about simpler file issues
1) What is the difference in quality when using a vector made from a sculpt with relative small number of polygons VS a high number?
2) What is the difference in quality when using a vector made from a sculpt, when the vector is saved out at 1K VS 2K, VS 4K, VS 8K VS 16K, VS 32K?
or more simply, 4K VS 16K?
3) If there is any benefit from using a 32K vector, what if any issues arise in terragen when using a 32k vector? How heavy is the file? Any problems?

I know we are still working out workflows and very basic things, but at some point we should have the answers to the above questions too. I would think there important, but Im just thinking out loud

@J
lol! Yeah, making things more complicated is my job. Until monday that is, then I will be able to actually help you guys sort through all of this by testing too.
But truthfully I thought that idea about using a more complex planes would make things easier not harder. I was really surprised by your post on the last page showing the problem and fix. I simply don't understand why that problem would happen in the first place? I mean, I don't understand what the fundamental difference in the two planes are. Also, its more complex because of the amount of software we are using, but even then shouldn't a plane in Mud vs a plane in Z, Vs a plane in Maya, ultimately be the same thing?.. Yet we are beginning to see some differences I think.

Maybe there is something about the vector when its created, that makes a difference? Or maybe Terragen views a difference. For example, OBJs made in different software have different issues in Terragen. On the OBJ, we know from threads in this forum that different softwares write out OBJs slightly differently and we know what problems that causes and does not cause.
Can one of you who has the understanding look at the vector code and see what difference there is if any? And somehow define what any difference means?
Perhaps not now, but once we are all ready to make step by steps or concrete conclusions about this workflow?

Or maybe Im totally off the bus again? I don't know.

This is fun as heck though

By the way J. That face you made in your example sculpt is AWESOME! It looks like Moses, or maybe a Greek statue of Poseidon. Anyway, its very god like. Very cool face.

@Efflux
Take your time man. Once you get things worked out, it will be nice to have the additional workflow. Im not familiar at all with 3D coat, but I see from reading on line that lots of people use it. So probably some of them use terragen too.

[Tangled-Universe]

...

We should also try to post some facts about simpler file issues
1) What is the difference in quality when using a vector made from a sculpt with relative small number of polygons VS a high number?
2) What is the difference in quality when using a vector made from a sculpt, when the vector is saved out at 1K VS 2K, VS 4K, VS 8K VS 16K, VS 32K?
or more simply, 4K VS 16K?
3) If there is any benefit from using a 32K vector, what if any issues arise in terragen when using a 32k vector? How heavy is the file? Any problems?

...

I guess a nice systematic way to find this out would be too:

Make a plane with a certain fixed size, say 50x50 metres.
Use a fixed amount of subdivision so that polygon size is constant.
Sculpt details.
Export to 1k, 4k and 16k (4-fold increments).

Repeat this with either 2 lower or higher levels of subdivision.

Then investigate on what's the limiting factor.
There must be an ideal resolution for each situation, of course, but since you work with quite constant and predictable size-effects you should be able to derive a kind of rule of thumb like:

use 2k for subdiv2 on 50x50m grid
use 4k for subdiv3 on 50x50m grid

Just to name something of course, but something along that line.

[Dune]

Last one for now.

[j meyer]

....

We should also try to post some facts about simpler file issues
1) What is the difference in quality when using a vector made from a sculpt with relative small number of polygons VS a high number?
2) What is the difference in quality when using a vector made from a sculpt, when the vector is saved out at 1K VS 2K, VS 4K, VS 8K VS 16K, VS 32K?
or more simply, 4K VS 16K?
3) If there is any benefit from using a 32K vector, what if any issues arise in terragen when using a 32k vector? How heavy is the file? Any problems?

....

1.one difference is that you would have a more faceted sculpt - visible polygons - and
   thus you would have those facets visible in the VDisp too.
2.to make it simple the higher the resolution the higher the detail.
3.Don't know,never used a file of that size.File size would be huge.

Btw you can utilize up to 500 millions of polygons inZB via HD sculpting.
6 millions was just an example,20 would be possible too,no problem.

If you don't understand the difference between those planes it would be a good
idea to make some simple basic experiments like taking a normal plane in a low
subdiv state and just pull up the middle and sculpt vs a modified one,things
like that.Experience beats theory you know.

Thanks for the compliments.

[j meyer]

Almost forgot to mention:size does matter.
Setting the plane size to 200m in my modeler before taking it to ZB and then
sculpting and extracting the map did it.In TG I set the image size to 200m and
indeed the final multiplier of the VDisp shader could be left on 1 just as it
should be.

[efflux]

Well in modo just add a displacement map (top menu / texture / add displace texture) ... and sculpt your model.
Dont forget to save the texture when you are done.

With modo you dont actually sculpt, but you are in fact allready painting the vector displacement map ... so there is no baking needed. The bad side is that the sculpting tools are a little bit weird sometimes, especially the smooth tool.

I'm not really sure what you are trying to do with xnormal, extracting a vector displacement from an highres to a plane for example requiere all the in between subdivision level.  You cant just import an highres and do an extract. So the baking, or let's say the vector map creation, has to be done in your sculpting application (zbrush or Mudbox).

OK. There is a video on youtube where a guy uses xnormal with Modo. He does create the vector displacement map in xnormal. I think that's because he bakes down to lower res mesh.

[paq]

Do you mean the head baking example ?

In that example the shape of the lowres is allready very close from the hires one. In fact even 'classic' displacement map could do the job. Sure vector displacement is giving much better result (especially for the ears).

But that example is very different that starting from a flat plane (what we are doing here in terragen). If you are starting from a flat plane, you need the intermediate subdivision to build an accurate vector diplacement, that's why you need to do it in you sculpting software.

[Dune]

If you use basic shapes, just to get the specific caves or outcrops, you can do the rest in TG. Then you wont need very high resolution, I'd say. You may need an extra compute terrain before you apply additional displacements to calculate the initial terrain after VDISPing the cave.

Note on this one: needed to increase displacement tolerance to get the high billow to render alright. Funnily, it did appear in the prepass.

[paq]

Hi Dune,

That's some really great extreme example.

Just wondering, on the last pic, did you add a local light or something ?
There is something really weird with the lighting, at first sight I didnt really get the shape .

[chris_x422]

Hi guys,

been missing from this thread all week due to working away from home. I've not fully caught up, but will try to add a few more thoughts, so forgive me if any of this has already been said.

j meyer has it spot on as to how the workflow pans out in terms of setting scale and keeping the one to one height relationship.

I always set my scale in maya before exporting for sculpting, and out of habit always export 32 bit floating point maps for the sake if it's higher accuracy and detail.
It's all really no different to the normal creation of any sculpted displacement map. It's just essentially the calculation between one state and another, the base and the sculpt.
The base being a representation of what coexists inside terragen, ie a flat plane or a sphere (globe). It's for this reason say, that you can't work from a base shape that does not already represent what you plan to displace in terragen, as when you re-displace in terragen you are essentially recreating that difference again from original state to sculpted state. Hope that makes sense. The only difference between a vector map export and traditional grey-scale is that the vector displaces in xyz as opposed to just the one direction in grey-scale.

As I think I mentioned earlier, if the functionality of being able to subdivide imported meshes arrives in terragen, then your base shape can be anything you wish, with the ability to then do additional displacement, even on individual areas.
The technique I outlined after working on Snow white is relevant as to producing hybrid workflows with meshes already existing in terragen. http://1isok.com/huntsman_workflow_01.htm
It enables you to take any part of a landscape from terragen, either procedural, dem based etc, then export areas for sculpted treatments, and re-apply in terragen. It's a powerful and flexible technique as it allows you to focus and reshape any area you wish, as well as concentrate detail where it's needed.

The map size and density of any sculpted mesh you might need is usually dictated by how close the camera is to the area in shot, it just has to hold up to scrutiny, I usually subdivide to a level that I know is producing the detail I require for sculpting, then test a couple of exported map sizes to test how it's holding up. With experience it comes pretty quickly, but it's a good idea to test, as you can save a bucket load of memory and render time by not exporting higher resolutions than are needed.

Hope that all makes some sense.

Chris

[Dune]

I have tried making a plane in Lightwave, subdivide it a few times and export that through Poseray as obj to Mudbox. Then did some sculpting and exported a vdisp map. Didn't work, I got all small ugly displacements.
If I don't set any size to a plane in Mudbox, and sculpt, export and vdisp in TG, I can set any size to that sculpt, as long as there's a cohesion between map size and vector overall displacement magnitude.
What would be the straight lines occurring in the map? Blue and red I think. And why would I have to rotate the vector -90 degrees, and switch green and blue channels (green as Y, blue as X, red as Z). I don't quite get it yet....
Does anyone else work from mudbox? Can you subdivide parts of the mesh, and how?