I'm trying to make an ST tree from an imported mesh (Lightwave, then MUD-sculpted obj, taken through Poseray, where it looks good, with normals ok, then imported in ST), but when I render in TG the light is not calculated properly; the whole trunk is in shadow (while branches added in ST do render the right way). The strange thing is, that it looks okay in the preview. I guess it's a problem with the trunk, but I can't get my finger on it. It's not the shadow of the leaves!
Does anyone of you have any ideas?
An unfortunate camera angle can sometimes hide things like flipped polygons.Have you tried it Ulco?
Very odd about the preview treatment, don't have a solution, but can't get away from the impression that somewhere along the chain the trunk is being evaluated as if inside out.
Are the tree bark images solid right to the very edge? Or is there a thin margin that is actually transparent?
Hi Dune,
Looks like a normal problem. I have seen this often when geometry are mirror and the vertex normal not updated.
- Did you scale the object negatively (mirror) during the process ?
- Is there any normal map applied to the object ?
I'm still not sure of your process : so the trunk is build in lw, sculpted in mud box, export into ST for the additional branching ? Then you export the whole tree for terragen ? (in .obj ?).
Would be easier to check out if you can provide a piece of the trunk geometry ^^ What if you flip the polygons normal (F ?) in LW before exporting to Terragen ... and be sure vertex normal channel is killed too before exporting ?
Is the sun coming from the left or the right? (Ignore what the tree looks like)
Question 2: What does it look like if you render with shadows disabled?
Sun is coming from the right, I'll try a render with no shadows. Here's a render made with normals flipped (in TG), so that's not the solution either (it's even stranger). I guess you're right, paq, that is has something to do with normals.
The process was; make simple trunk in LW, map in LW, enlarge 100x in Poseray and export as obj (vertices welded, normals smoothed, recalculated, and also saved), get rid of T-shapes of exported obj in Balancer (which often cause problems in MUD), import in MUD (indeed, there were UV problems mentioned, but I forgot what. But UV map is not exactly within boundaries of mapping area, that I know), increase vertex density 2 levels, sculpt, export as obj. Import in Poseray again, reduce size x0.01 to normal size again, save as obj, import in TG....
A normal map is applied, if you mean bump. I'll see what happens if I turn bump off. That may also be a sign of inverted polys, indeed. But I wouldn't know where they would have been inverted. What do you mean by 'killing the vertex normal channel'?
I'll get the trunk from my other machine and post if I can't figure this out.
Tree bark image is solid.
I think something went flipping halfway, as branches have a different face orientation (or flipped normals) than the trunk. I will try a completely new trunk and do it more carefully, see what happens.
I did another one and found out it goes wrong in Speedtree. Here's an exported trunkmesh from ST, if anyone can find out what is wrong here, I'd be much obliged. Normals in ST look good, texture also, but it's dark in TG.
So I exported branches separately from ST and merged with the LW-MUD-trunk obj in Poseray. With a little fiddling that works (strangely the branches were not fitting exactly as it was in ST), but it would be better to do it all in one go.
In ST the way to go is to make a default flat 24-poly (or so) mesh, import the trunk geometry and assign it to that mesh. I think something with the lighting calculation goes wrong there, although that's not visible in ST. E.g. you can't work on the texture or coordinates anymore of that imported trunk.
Maybe the other way round would be better; make a tree in ST, export, separate the trunk and work on it in MUD, then combine again.
Some images:
olive trunk from MUD
olive in ST
olive total in TG
trunk normals in ST
trunk obj
2 renders of Poseray combined tree
The trunk you posted was indeed flipped (selectable faces inside).
Attached is a flipped version.
You should not use Poseray to scale objects - as mentioned earlier - as that can
cause strange troubles sometimes.Do that in LW.Just my opinion.
UVs are a bit messed up too.Holes and some faces at the topmost boundary are
oddly stretched.
Hey Jochen, thanks a lot. I'll dive into this again. Mapping was done quite crudely for this test, so that's what's causing the stretching. I have to find a good way to properly map a base trunk before sculpting on it. I'm no good at mapping in any other software.
Still strange that ST shows normals poiting outward and still exports a flipped mesh... I still have to try flipping it before exporting, and keeping the branches normal (as they are ST).
Its quite a nice looking tree any problems aside. Well worth the effort I would say.
Solved. Somehow the imported mesh is inverted in Speedtree, but if you flip the normals it's exported the right way. Simple actually. Thanks again for all your input, guys.
Here's also a view of how you can work on individual assets in ST, very... VERY handy!
Currently praying for my program angel to drop this in my computer, heh heh heh...ST makes me drool
Yea,glad to see it was just a matter of flipping normals.
I've got a near perfect workflow now (ST to LW to MUD to LW (for some deletion) and back to ST), only struggling to get the trunk flipped alright, which doesn't seem to work in ST. Blue lines pointing outward (normals) in both branches and imported trunk, but when exported to TG light is not falling right on the trunk, while it does on the branches. Very weird.
What is the polly count of a tree in speed tree that would be considered high detail, and what is the comparison to a sculpt in mud in that regard?
Also, have you worked in a simplification, like baking or just out-putting maps, or is the method more straight forward raw whole objects so to speak?
Quote(ST to LW to MUD to LW (for some deletion) and back to ST)
A high quality tree would maybe have up to a million polys, I had one or 2 that had around 700k. Usually I try to keep them lower, say 200-300k. (if I recall well). Leaves take up the most, and/or small, but well defined branches. When taking the trunk into mud, I need to increase levels at least 2 times to sculpt anything decent. Though, of course that can be done in ST beforehand.
I don't know about baking maps. Texture is applied in ST, refined until it sits well, and still there when exporting, that's all I know. I did, however import the UV's separately in MUD (import same obj), and found they were gone in higher subdivision, so I 'retextured' to this higher level (not remapping but some other way, can't remember the button atm.), but later in LW found that the mapping was too small (reduced to within the boundaries of the UV space), so I had to stretch the texture again (it's repeated across the trunk of course).
What is 'baking maps' anyway?
http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Texture_Baking
Ah, thanks Chris, I'll take a look.
Meanwhile I've found out that it's pretty hard to import a modded trunk in ST and export as a whole again. So, my workflow is now; model in ST, export as obj, open in LW, separate trunk from branches and decrease texture so it fits in UV space. Make 100.000%, and subdivide until a nicely dense polycount. Then export as obj, open in MUD, sculpt (no extra levels necessary) while keeping the areas where the branches meet intact, save and combine with branches in Poseray. Pff, that works.
No problem.
That still seems like a lot of steps to make one tree, a very nice looking one all the same but i suppose it depends on one's time, patience and perseverance.
Can be done in less than an hour, depending on how accurate it's needed, sculpting taking the most time. And one tree makes a whole forest ;) But, you are right of course; depending on the need for such a tree, it's worth investing the time.
For me, this developed out of Michael's query for olives, and my curiosity, which is now satisfied.
An hour or less is no real issue then. Certainly worth it for what the results are. :)
This is going well now, though I had this strange thing; exporting an obj from LW11, and importing in TG it rendered a totally black image, without even a terrain, while the preview looked okay. So, I opened the lwo in Poseray and exported the obj from there. Works like a dream.
That is a most awesome tree, you should make a 'for sale' set. They'd be as good or better than anything I've seen, especially that can be successfully used in programs other than .max.
I don't know about selling, as some parts are made in Speedtree, and they have this policy (but also a dedicated sales website). Other parts are made in LW and MUD, so I don't know how far that ST EULA goes. It's a great way anyway to adjust formerly basic trunks into more elaborate things. Experimentation for now.
Strange preview; no texture.... (Michaels trunk experiment), but it renders.
Quote from: Dune on December 19, 2015, 07:30:36 AM
Strange preview; no texture.... (Michaels trunk experiment), but it renders.
Odd...I've had that on some imported .obj models as well from time to time...dunno why here either
Quote from: Dune on December 19, 2015, 05:37:11 AM
I don't know about selling, as some parts are made in Speedtree, and they have this policy (but also a dedicated sales website). Other parts are made in LW and MUD, so I don't know how far that ST EULA goes. It's a great way anyway to adjust formerly basic trunks into more elaborate things. Experimentation for now.
too bad ST are such 'stick in the mud' , 'dog in a manger' about selling...how are they on simple cashless sharing, hee hee hee....what a hippie I am eh?
Quote from: Dune on December 17, 2015, 07:27:26 AM
Ah, thanks Chris, I'll take a look.
Meanwhile I've found out that it's pretty hard to import a modded trunk in ST and export as a whole again. So, my workflow is now; model in ST, export as obj, open in LW, separate trunk from branches and decrease texture so it fits in UV space. Make 100.000%, and subdivide until a nicely dense polycount. Then export as obj, open in MUD, sculpt (no extra levels necessary) while keeping the areas where the branches meet intact, save and combine with branches in Poseray. Pff, that works.
This is coming along nicely. The only thing to work on now is making sure leaves don't follow the tree flow, but gravity.
Ulco - look at this please:
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,19091.msg194865.html#msg194865
Maybe it is something similar here.
I guess that's it, Jochen, no normals. Still strange it renders ok then.
Anyway, with some effort I managed to put branches to Michael's trunk. Working/modding from a base ST trunk (which will later be deleted) and keeping the branch intersections like they are would work a lot faster, but I can't complain about the result of this test. Even exporting from ST worked, though I had to open in LW to flip normals, then open in Poseray to recalculate the normals. But it works.
Now for better leaves...
I am careful, Bobby, don't want to step on toes.
No normals is just a problem - rendering wise - when you have a low poly
mesh,because it looks facetted then.So here you would only notice in
close ups.
Nice result nonetheless. :)
Quote from: Dune on December 19, 2015, 12:08:05 PM
I am careful, Bobby, don't want to step on toes.
Always good practice...only stuff I have shared that I didn't create I went to the owner and got his permission to .tgo them, and Drew Costigan willingly, as most would, said yes. Most are flattered that you're interested and pleased to share to new formats. It was those flowers I posted at ashundar way back.
Quote from: Dune on December 19, 2015, 12:08:05 PM
I guess that's it, Jochen, no normals. Still strange it renders ok then.
Anyway, with some effort I managed to put branches to Michael's trunk. Working/modding from a base ST trunk (which will later be deleted) and keeping the branch intersections like they are would work a lot faster, but I can't complain about the result of this test. Even exporting from ST worked, though I had to open in LW to flip normals, then open in Poseray to recalculate the normals. But it works.
Now for better leaves...
quite amazingly massive and ancient looking...well done Badger and Dune
Is this haze look just from the leaves you are working on or translucency? It looks weird considering the contrast of the shadow on the trunk.
(http://i.imgur.com/XPYCKv1.png)
I think they're just coincidental areas where translucency of the leaves add to the greyness of branches at those points. Leaves are not optimal anyway, yet. To make a tree less heavy you can use whole branches+leaves, but that is obviously harder to make realistic. I think in this one it's a combination of single leaves and branches+leaves. The first branches+leaves I made where done in ST, but with translucency settings on the whole thing the branches got translucent as well, so I made a new translucency mask for the leaves only. But as said, the leaves areas need work, aiming for a good compromise between MB's and reality. I don't want trees of hundreds of MB's, really, but it's possible of course for close-ups.
Very impressive work Dune - Sadly I don't have the tools to emulate your workflow :-\
Thanks Mick.
I tried another one, which I quite like. Only 'problem' is to keep the texture more or less okay. Too much sculpting and it gets stretched too much. I don't like remapping such complicated meshes.
whew, pretty impressive work...I need a new hammer.
Tried to make one piece out of a few, but that didn't work as expected.
And a new one, in a collaborative project with Jochen.
Wow, nice work. You two work well together...very nice leaves as well.
So,
first is to box model the trunk. Then you send that to mud to retopo to perfect quads. Then back to modeler to correct any stray edges. Then you map, then you send to sculp.
There then should be no need to map again. In a mud maya workflow, you simply update the models with "send to", although I have been hitting memory limits because this works back and forth with FBX. But is doesn't mater really how much change you make to the model when sculpting within certain limits.
Or you can send maps alone and displace the base model. Which is how you would do it in Maya if rendering there.
I'd prefer to keep the mapping from ST, as remapping is tedious (for my limited modeling knowledge), so now it's ST>LW(separate trunk)>MUD>LW (replace trunk)>PR>TG.
Quote from: Dune on December 23, 2015, 06:17:14 AM
I'd prefer to keep the mapping from ST, as remapping is tedious (for my limited modeling knowledge), so now it's ST>LW(separate trunk)>MUD>LW (replace trunk)>PR>TG.
And yet still the vast majority of VFX companies and artists oppose strongly to standardization of all kinds of 3D data types ::)
Ludicrous.
I might as well keep on using this thread... made a branch in ST. Olive ripeness is procedural ;)
Amazing.8)
Did some more work on the branch, because leaves sit on it in particular way. Better I think.
I did some renders but encountered the GISD+BLUR-bug (pillarerror), so I turned GISD off again, and also an issue regarding shadows. I think that if the sun shines in a 'bad' way on a bent leaf, the translucency or light is calculated too hard, so you see the poly edges (while the normals were calculated as smooth). I may try a heavier leaf mesh (this is an 8 poly).
Not sure I could tell the difference between some of these images and the 'real thing'
Object looks great.
QuoteAnd yet still the vast majority of VFX companies and artists oppose strongly to standardization of all kinds of 3D data types ::)
Ludicrous.
Boy do I know how you feel!
...
Nice last few tests Ulco!
I was trying a few experiments as well building on the first. Trying to make vectors of the trees, and stamp into a terrain. Not sure how this is going to go. Have to do it two different ways. one way to make any tree trunks that can be used any normal way, and also another method to make them into vector brushes to paint onto a terrain... Starts out the same way though.... Trying to make them as crazy as I can so that they can look interesting without branches and leaves, since I can't think of anyway to apply those to a vector terrain in TG.
Changing the textures alone can make things very alien.
Still not sure why It did not output normals.
Also, very confused how you were able to post an image of the trunk with that painted on texture, ulco. I could not even get the UVs to show in maya. Saving an FBX crashes me in mud every time now. I still don't understand so much of this stuff, mostly I think do to what T-U said. Its deliberately made to be as overly complex as possible.
Quote from: Dune on December 23, 2015, 11:57:45 AM
I might as well keep on using this thread... made a branch in ST. Olive ripeness is procedural ;)
Cool trick with the olives...noticed the green ones in another of those series of renders.
Great work Ulco! This has evolved very nicely. I'm taking notes...
You know where to find me, Doug ;)
Michael, you mean the olive 8 combi? That's an LW screenie with texture on.
Would be cool to have some vdisp trunks; you'd have to make a vdisp map by adding another lowpoly plane (if you worked from a plane, I think that's the only way to get it to work on a flat surface in TG), and mapping the difference.
Hey man. :)
Yeah, I have to import the base shape first. And make a height field (no overhangs) so like top down in TG. Then on that new plane raise up the height field, then sculpt and make the vector. then take that vector and try to paint with it. You can make a vector out of any object in mud by first making a simple displacement, then using that on a new plane then sculpting in your detail and overhangs and such. demo here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuGDdhSqIhg when you have time.
I will send you some vectors if they pan out. I tried to send you the .mud but I still can't believe how huge .mud files are.
I will do the other stuff first though, definitely after this we should get back to doing things with vectors. Working back and forth like this on small individual object/projects is kinda fun actually. Learning a lot and it keeps me motivated/interested. :)
There's so much to be done, I wish I had three of myself. Yeah, I know how to make vdisp maps, but I thought you didn't ;) Trying to get the hang of ZBrush now, which can combine branches to trunks and thus make it possible to sculpt on the whole thing (small tut from Jochen is helping me).
Our Christmas appointment was cancelled (sickness, not of us), so I've got time, yeah :) ( ::))
Merry Christmas thread readers.
The "procedural ripeness" trick is pretty awesome Ulco. :D
- Oshyan
Thanks, Oshyan. It's unfortunate the 'real olives' can't be hung in whole trees. Well, they can, but MB's soar to much above 100MB.
This latest has DOF, so no GISD. Would be great to have both.
Quote from: Dune on December 26, 2015, 02:26:06 AM
Thanks, Oshyan. It's unfortunate the 'real olives' can't be hung in whole trees. Well, they can, but MB's soar to much above 100MB.
This latest has DOF, so no GISD. Would be great to have both.
Is that a finished product then? Great bark by the way....
How do you mean, finished product? The olives are just small objects that you add to branches, like leaves, but as each consists of maybe 30 polys, it soon gets heavy.
Quote from: Dune on December 26, 2015, 11:53:03 AM
How do you mean, finished product? The olives are just small objects that you add to branches, like leaves, but as each consists of maybe 30 polys, it soon gets heavy.
Just a thought Ulco, if you use the parts where the olives are as an separate object you might instance the olives.
How easy or needed or not might depend on your scene.
Quote from: Dune on December 26, 2015, 11:53:03 AM
How do you mean, finished product? The olives are just small objects that you add to branches, like leaves, but as each consists of maybe 30 polys, it soon gets heavy.
I think I meant the tree, not necessarily the olives.
@Bobby: we're working on a 'perfect' workflow, so up till now every tree has it's glitches. In that sense it's not a finished 'product'. Replacing the simple trunk by an elaborate one is not too hard, but remapping still needs work.
@Kadri; that's an interesting idea, but a bit difficult perhaps, as the olives will also grow to fat branches and trunk if these are not separate objects. And they will cross leaves. For a more distant view simple flat polys with an olive texture will do quite nicely, I think. I did think of making a sitting bird, though, that can be populated into a tree, though some will sit awkwardly on their branches, no doubt.
@ Ulco...gotcha...I'm enjoying watching this evolve. Reminds me of my early Amiga days when everyone was so creative and helpful. I think that's what I like best about this community/forum...it's very old school and new all at once...
I totally agree, it's great to work together on stuff.
Those branches and leaves are really looking good in this last image!
Quote from: Dune on December 27, 2015, 04:41:45 AM
I totally agree, it's great to work together on stuff.
In musical terms it's jamming...we did that with comix (underground style comics) back when we all worked on paper around a huge table...them were the daze indeed....