Applink Developer haikalle Posted May 26, 2009 Applink Developer Report Share Posted May 26, 2009 Congratulations Andrew! v.86 RC is working a lot better, but there is a couple things. These are small things. 1.Now I can render both DP object and Voxel object together which is great, but if I Inc. Res of Voxel object then DP Object gets smaller size (x2). Or do Voxel model gets bigger..I'm confused :lol: 2. With render If I have DP object and there is spec map, I really don't see it when I render it. It just looks that spec map is all over the object. Maybe I have to go to check my eyes. New glasses may help. Here is a pic about spec issue. It should not leave marks like that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 26, 2009 Report Share Posted May 26, 2009 I pointed this bug out a while ago and it still isn't fixed. Hitting Save or Ctrl+S opens the Save-As dialog instead of just saving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted May 26, 2009 Report Share Posted May 26, 2009 V85: Cavity display bug.This bug appears in version 85 again. In Version 84 it was fixed, first time on my system. But in v84 there was a shadow bug, too. And now in v85: the shadow bug is gone, but the cavity display bug appears again. Following a video, that shows it. I am using a GeForce 8800 GTS with 512 MB memory. Regards Chris -> Example Video (7,5 MB - DivX) The cavity&shadow display bug still exists in version 86. Do someone have the same problem? To evaluate: go to the voxel mode, choose a voxel-shader with cavity elements, f.e. the "red wax"-shader or the "bronze"-shader. Then got to the voxel main menu and swich "cast shadows" on. Really a pity. Regards Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted May 26, 2009 Report Share Posted May 26, 2009 V.86: "Flatten tool" artefacts When I am using the flatten tool, it produces artefacts in the model. See the attached video for examples. By the way: I don't like the flatten tool, currently. It is half-baked. I like the scrape tool much more. The scrape tool is the true "flatten tool" for me. The scrape tool works much cleaner und better. I guess, there is no need for the current flatten tool, like it is for now. Flatten tool artefacts example -> Click me... (DivX, ~17 MBytes) Regards from germany Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 V.86: Voxel curves stays after reset to New Scene How to reproduce: - Voxel mode: Choose curve tool. Set some curves. - Go to main menu and choose File->New. The created (virtual) curves stays. I expect a clean scene. Be creative Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member rimasson Posted May 28, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 3 bugs with alpha 86 in Pixel painting mode : when i use a Draw with line or draw with strokes curve, or a stroke type whre the radius is affected, the color picker (using V) dosen't work If i draw multiple curves using the draw with lines or curves strokes, when i Undo, ALL the curves are gone, nopt only the last one. I still have a dotted stroke when i use the drawwith extrusion tool with the soft stroke option enabled. There's also one annoying thing with the picker tool : actually, it use the brush size to average the sampled colors. Could you add an option to pick ONLY the color of 1 pixel under the brush ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 28, 2009 Contributor Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 alpha87 cuda DX 64 I made dozens of merging tests with a lot of different models and also a lot of different quadrangulate/merging settings (I'm trying to find best possible settings) (I used default merging settings and 3DC automapping for those screenshots...new users will also probably use those settings) conclusion: merging for microvertex gives much better results now (only 3 or 5 artifacts , in alpha 86 and before it was much much worse) but...users in the industry will expect flawless merging because even just 1 artifact is bad , it's not like a texture artifact :it cannot be painted over. but...the main problem is merging for DP which still creates ugly normal maps I sent model torso if you want to test (but really,it is the same with all models) The thing I'm wondering tough; is why am I the only one to post about that? Is everyone mergings artifacts free? Am I the only one with quirks ? Please ,people make some tests before release. 3DCoat "voxel/quadrangulation/autommaping/merging" pipeline is pretty important,I think it is core feature and main selling point.It has to work without artifacts. Please test with full fledged models not with nice and clean headbusts or 3DC sample files. People in game industry make pretty complex models and the main point of voxel sculpting is to allow that. ;to TREE321...please test merging with some of your sculpts,that would be good test Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member wailingmonkey Posted May 28, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 artman, to be honest, "voxel/quadrangulation/autommaping/merging" is not my workflow so I've not had problems yet ... but at some point it may be one workflow for me, so I'm glad you've come across the issues you bring up. I generally do "voxel/retopo/export-to-UVLayout/import-w-new-UVs/merge" and have had no real issues thusfar (except some early problems with resolution of lowpoly being too low and creating spikes which couldn't be fixed in the merged object to be painted...). I agree, tho, that people should be speaking up as we near release (as well as after release!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 I made dozens of merging tests with a lot of different modelsand also a lot of different quadrangulate/merging settings (I'm trying to find best possible settings) (I used default merging settings and 3DC automapping for those screenshots...new users will also probably use those settings) conclusion: merging for microvertex gives much better results now (only 3 or 5 artifacts , in alpha 86 and before it was much much worse) but...users in the industry will expect flawless merging because even just 1 artifact is bad , it's not like a texture artifact :it cannot be painted over. I was having huge problems with this on my old man sculpture and Andrew fixed it a lot. I do still have one of these that looks just like your screenshot behind my guy's ear, but it's pretty hidden back there so I didn't complain anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 28, 2009 Contributor Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 I was having huge problems with this on my old man sculpture and Andrew fixed it a lot. I do still have one of these that looks just like your screenshot behind my guy's ear, but it's pretty hidden back there so I didn't complain anymore. Phil,do you still have your two-headed terror? If so,could you try to merge it with quadrangulation dfault +autommaping for both DP and Microvertx and post results. I really need to know if it is a hardware problem on my side. This is driving me nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Heh I never did get around to finishing him. I tried with micro-vertex and it crashed during the quadrangulation. I'll try that one more time, then try it for per pixel, but I don't think it would make much difference since I think the quadrangulation is the same for both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 29, 2009 Contributor Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Heh I never did get around to finishing him. I tried with micro-vertex and it crashed during the quadrangulation. I'll try that one more time, then try it for per pixel, but I don't think it would make much difference since I think the quadrangulation is the same for both. quadrangulation is the same but normal maps look completely different,microvertex is much better than in DP. you can even make normal map out of of microvertex method,save uv along with normal map and load it in DP mode and it's still look better than the normal map you get when merging for DP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 OK I did get it working for micro-vertex. I had major issues with one of the legs and the area where the wings connect, aside from that there were a number of tiny problem spots. I'll try DP now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 29, 2009 Contributor Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 It is exactly like my tests.....ouff, I thought I was affected by an evil curse or somethin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 The DP version had problems in the same areas, the problems just look different. It also has a much chunkier look to the model, maybe if I had checked "auto smoothing groups" that would look better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Bug in 86 and 87 (and 85 too I think): My Layer Blending panel keeps disappearing from it's docked location and taking the whole group with it. I know it's that one because now I can't get that one to open any more, even after restarting 3DC and installing the latest alpha. Edit: Oh I figured it out and actually I remember reporting this before. Layer Blending is listed in two places. If you click it under Layers it works, but if you click it under Windows > Popups nothing happens. Of course that still doesn't explain why that whole group keeps disappearing. Panels I have in that group are Layers, Layer Blending, and Materials (the objects one) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 29, 2009 Contributor Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 The DP version had problems in the same areas, the problems just look different. It also has a much chunkier look to the model, maybe if I had checked "auto smoothing groups" that would look better. I tried "autosmoothing group" and it doesn't help. I tried a LOT of combinations of settings and nothing seem to do. The only thing I've found out is that space density and position in space have an effect on quadrangulation results The only thing I didnt try yet is good old handmade uvs.(I did tried zbrush auv and guv tiles tough and 3ds max automapping and it is not better) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 I had hand made the UVs with my Old Man. It didn't make any difference. But you're right about position in space, I tried adjusting my polygons on the old man so that they were more evenly spaced out and that did fix some of the problems. As far as the smoothing groups I was just referring to that fixing the general "chunkiness" all over the model where I could see many of the polygon edges instead of it looking smooth like MV did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 29, 2009 Contributor Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 As far as the soothing groups I was just referring to that fixing the general "chunkiness" all over the model where I could see many of the polygon edges instead of it looking smooth like MV did. I knew you were referring to that and as I said autosmoothing option didn't fix the chunkiness on my side. It's like traces of the lowpoly inside the normal map..I don't understand how it happens. And by position in space I wasn't taking about the disposition of polygons on the model but the position of the model itself on the grid space. I had a model that had artifacts when quadrangulating if it was far way from the grid in 3d space and it was ok when I brought it closer to the center,I made the test 4 times just to be sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member wailingmonkey Posted May 29, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 alpha 87 Cuda DX 64-bit - it appears that the 'eraser' tool is only able to add depth (not erase) when used with DP mode and attempting to erase...in the picture below, the 'bumps' never get erased, but instead stay evident as height gets added. I was expecting normals data to be erased or returned to 127 127 255. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 V.87: Voxel Mode -> Shadow bug Hello Andrew, thank you for fixing the cavity bug. But there is a shadow bug that appear already in V.84. See the video for example -> See me... (DivX ~10,5 MB) Regards Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Shpagin Posted May 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 I still have a dotted stroke when i use the drawwith extrusion tool with the soft stroke option enabled. What is draw with extrusion? I improved picker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 I thought I saw that this was fixed. The brush size is still different between the 3D view and the UV texture editor. If I make it a "normal" size in the UV editor it is huge in the 3D view, like wise if I make it "normal" in the 3D view the UV editor shows it really tiny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member rimasson Posted May 29, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 What is draw with extrusion?I improved picker. This tool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Erasing paint from DP seems to leave behind a "residue". It looks a little like if you paint with color and spec, then just erase the color. But spec painting is turned off. I think I can even see it a little in the Color page of the 2D editor. It's a little hard to see, but here's a video. http://screencast.com/t/47NkFFiW46t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Shpagin Posted May 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Erasing paint from DP seems to leave behind a "residue". It looks a little like if you paint with color and spec, then just erase the color. But spec painting is turned off. I think I can even see it a little in the Color page of the 2D editor.It's a little hard to see, but here's a video. http://screencast.com/t/47NkFFiW46t It looks like you have painted color and specular but erased only color. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 Yeah, that's what I said, it looks like I painted color and spec, then erased color, but that's not the case. The spec map doesn't show anything and spec was never turned on, just color. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Small bug, when painting freeze there's no alpha in the cursor, just the yellow circle and a + in the middle. Here's another weird bug. I had painted some Freeze onto an area, then undo didn't work, so I painted over it with Ctrl pressed to get rid of the Freeze. Then later I went to erase the paint I had on that area and notall of it would erase, there is a pattern of lines left where the freeze had been earlier. I can repeat this on other parts of the model. Small video showing it http://screencast.com/t/9hovURKQ8ey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member wailingmonkey Posted May 31, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 3.00.01 DX Cuda 64-bit: Retopo Tools - create a topology from voxel sculpt - export topology object and create a UV set in an outside program - import mesh back into 'Retopo' room with new UVs - 'split rings' anywhere - UV-set is blown away (so if you try to merge, you'll get invisible object) . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor artman Posted May 31, 2009 Contributor Report Share Posted May 31, 2009 3DC v3-01 gl and dx cuda 64 (from voxtree not retopo menu) quadangulate for dp freezes quadrangulate and paint says: empty model and quadrangulate alone does nothing (The calculation seem to happen but no models are dropped in retopo) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.