[stevecullum]

Quote

I guess the only way to export the results from a mulit-res Ptex paint is via Texture Baking?

So far, unless other 3d apps offer support. I thought the results worked well considering the texture map is a complete patchwork of tiles! Need to test with animation next though. In anycase, the more popular this format gets, the more chance someone will write some import plugins.

[philnolan3d]

If you saw my quote from the guy at Disney above, after seeing the 3D-Coat results he questions whether there is even a need for a ptex format.

[simmsimaging]

stevecullum, on 10 February 2010 - 04:46 PM, said:

So far, unless other 3d apps offer support. I thought the results worked well considering the texture map is a complete patchwork of tiles! Need to test with animation next though. In anycase, the more popular this format gets, the more chance someone will write some import plugins.

Yep, I agree - it's quite workable for now, but I'm always after the best detail, so if I can see it around the corner I won't be content to settle if I don't have to

philnolan3d, on 10 February 2010 - 05:22 PM, said:

If you saw my quote from the guy at Disney above, after seeing the 3D-Coat results he questions whether there is even a need for a ptex format.

Maybe that is in another message from him? I didn't read that into what was quoted anyway. However, there seem to be some pretty clear advantages to Ptex from what I have seen so far so not sure why he would say that.

b

[philnolan3d]

The first line of his second paragraph: "One of the questions that seems to come up is whether the Ptex file format is needed or not."

[simmsimaging]

philnolan3d, on 10 February 2010 - 05:47 PM, said:

The first line of his second paragraph: "One of the questions that seems to come up is whether the Ptex file format is needed or not."

I read that as a question often asked of him, not his POV. Either way though, he speaks to that pretty clearly just a couple of lines after that:

"We tried sending these packed textures
directly to Renderman at one point (before Ptex) but it didn't give us
the performance or filter quality that we wanted. For us, the Ptex
file format and rendering performance is critical."

Given the accuracy/detail you can get with it, and the potential overhead control/drop if render engines support the format, why wouldn't this be better than PP in 3DC? Have I misunderstood things? (again)


b

[philnolan3d]

Well I do think the ptex format would be best, but it is nice to have the current method to use in the mean while.

[simmsimaging]

philnolan3d, on 10 February 2010 - 05:56 PM, said:

Well I do think the ptex format would be best, but it is nice to have the current method to use in the mean while.

For sure - this is a great addition to 3DC.

b

[pbowmar]

For us (film work) the Ptex format is critical. We'll be loading potentially hundreds of 4k textures in, the per render bucket access and optimizations of the Ptex format will be very important...

Cheers,

Peter B

[ifxs]

pbowmar, on 10 February 2010 - 07:24 PM, said:

For us (film work) the Ptex format is critical. We'll be loading potentially hundreds of 4k textures in, the per render bucket access and optimizations of the Ptex format will be very important...

EXACTLY! Fro 4k, and even 2k work, PTEX is very helpful for GPGPUs and non-gpu based render engines. I'm thankful Andrew added this feature so early on, and hope the major render engines add it ASAP.

[philnolan3d]

To be clear when I was talking about "Ptex format" before, I meant the .ptx file format that Andrew has not yet implemented. Just in case that wasn't clear before. You can see samples of the format here: http://ptex.us/samples.html