material's and UV's in blender

[smokey13]

yeah I suppose my focus is all over the place mostly because I cant make my mind up about what to do(asset creation, modding, or creating full games) in the end I decided to try it all.

not being knowledgable about the finer points is still better then what I know.

I will add you when I finish this post.

also I took a quick look at the levels on your webpage and I like your maps, I especially liked the look of your winter map

[smokey13]

hi, im back again and have yet another issue. I marked the seems like odedge said and came up with this (it was the only way I could think of doing it)

I unwrapped it, fiddled with the layout a bit and ended up with this,(the image is 4096x4096, I know that's BIG, but I tried a 3072x3072 but that obviously did not work and could not go smaller because the resolution would have been poor at best)

in blender my model looks like this (witch is not to bad)

but in UDK it looks like this

witch lets face it does not look good because of the shadows, I tried changing the lightmap res and it did not help at all, now it's supposed to be a static mesh but just for the hell of it I turned the "can become dynamic" option on and shot it and when it moved it looked almost the same as it did in blender. so to my question, is there a way to get rid of the dodgy shadow effect without redoing the UV?
just a few side notes. 1# before anyone says it I know the red parts need to be dirtier(its a WIP). 2#there is a few empty parts of the UV image because if I scaled any of the pieces to fill more of the space then different parts of the mesh that are the same length would have a different amount of pixels by a very noticeable amount.

thanks for any help anyone can give.

[geodav]

no as good as your container but with simple auto uv's in blender


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

in the start up map, i did make the lightmap res 128 but i don't think that helped much

i know the uv's need tweaking

i think you have to many seems in you light map uv's

[Odedge]

Nice progression.

I presume you are using the same UV layout for both the diffuse and lightmap? If so, I can sort of see why you won't get the best results.

1. Like geodav stated, having less seems (more islands in the UV editor) is a good idea.
2. Having the faces on the UV layout match the same "placement' as the model helps. While it looks like you have done this, it's hard to tell with out the file. If you select one of the main faces on the container (in the UV section), do all of the surrounding UV faces get selected?
3. Does your mesh have geometry that it doesn't need and you can get rid of it? This will result in fewer faces to have on both UV layouts.
4. The bigger the face is on the model, the bigger that UV face should be. I can see why you want the red paint to look equal on the diffuse UV layout, but this doesn't apply to a lightmap UV layout. THe main faces and ends of the container should take up more space as their shadows/light info, will be seen easier than any smaller faces.

Hope this helps.

[WedgeBob]

I'm sure there could have been ways of simplifying that UV Layout even further to make it where you wouldn't have to worry whether things won't line up the way you'd want them to. Considering the cubic shape of that dumpster, I'm sure there's a lot that could be done to make sure that something like this wouldn't happen. After all, simpler UV Layout = less seams, and easier to follow when it comes to lightmapping, and making sure the diffuse textures will line up properly.

[Spoof]

... (the image is 4096x4096, I know that's BIG, but I tried a 3072x3072 but that obviously did not work and could not go smaller because the resolution would have been poor at best)...

It's wise to stick to powers of 2 (16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096), though you can mix and match the width and height (e.g. 1024 x 256).

[smokey13]

ok, I have no idea where to start this so ill jump in by answering you individually

GEODAV: I usually unwrap using the "smart UV project" button (without marking seems) like the bench I created(pictures are earlier in thread)or this can

but it kept unwrapping the frame in a dodgy way and leaving me with lots of unusable space on the UV image.(if you look at the first page of this thread at the bottom of the page you will see what I mean). I took my lightmap res to 3000 just to see what happened and it still did nothing(I found its not fixable that way , although a res of 3000 would just be rediculous ). I to think I have too many seems(it was the only way I could think of doing it).

ODEDGE: thanks I took some time off for xmas so it's probably not quite as far along as it could have been but it's still much better than before. ok I don't think I have a lightmap UV, after I unwrap I just click the "new image" button in the UV editor, paint it and just use that. still having a few issues with seems but as its the first time I've tried using them that's not a surprise(I need more practice). the UV faces placement does not quite match the model(you will see what I mean further down). I am not sure if the model has geometry it does not need (hopefully someone on here can tell me later). As for point 4, I don't know about the lightmap(but like I said earlier in this thread my workflow is probably flawed and I think we just found a big one.

WEDGEBOB: im sure there is a better way to layout the UV but I am still a beginner at modelling (about 3 months total).calling it a dumpster "hhmmm how rude ),only joking it's supposed to be a storage/shipping container.

this download link (file size 4.16MB)
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?7jhhaiq6kiokqgb
is for the new stuff, it contains the .blend file, .TGA files, and a .upk file.

a few notes
1# I tried to pack the image in the file (not sure if it worked or not),the UV image in the .blend file is the original green version I used to create the red one (I did it like that so you can just "replace image" in blender to see exactly what I did).
2# I included the .upk file so you can just drop it in the UDK/content folder and then place it in a level so you can see what I mean when I said about the shadow changing when you shoot it.
3# I included both the red and the original green .TGA files, because I wasn't shore if the image packed or not and just in case It didn't.
4# I upgraded to blender 2.65, not sure if that would screw up the .blend file if anyone try's to open it in an older version.
5# you will notice there is no collision mesh on the model in blender, this is because I cant do them yet but I downloaded one of GEODAV's tutorials so I think I will be able to work it out once I have finished the working out texturing.
6# if you change to edit mode in blender you will be able to see the seems a lot better than the picture from earlier(you might want to explode the mesh to see it properly).

just to show everyone where my modelling, UV mapping, and texturing skill is right now the image below is the first mesh I ever made

as you can see there is a vast improvement when you compare the old(first original version) and the new witch I re-did a couple of weeks ago.
this image is the same model when I first mapped and textured it

now keep in mind I didn't know how to rearrange UV layout back then and there was loads of wasted space, as a result it looks terrible, but if you compare it to the big container UV layout the difference is clear. in UDK as shown i might have been able to use it as a background filler but nothing else.

any comments or critiques for any of my meshes/textures welcome.

just had a random after thought on the front of the container the bars and handle should be smooth shaded, I tried it but it didn't work. I think the problem is because I import it so blender treat's it as 1 object(in object mode). does that make sense to anyone and if so is there a way to separate the bars/handle from the rest of the mesh in blender so I can apply both smooth to the bars/handle and flat shading to the rest of it?

thanks in advance

[Spoof]

I think you're trying to accomplish too much detail in a single mesh/texture. Some ideas...

• Re-use the texture space on opposite sides of the container. Use the same UVs for front and back, left and right, etc. This can cause mirroring that breaks text baked into the texture (see below).
• Remove text/labels/signs, apply them to the mesh as decals. This requires less resolution in the base texture, allowing the decal to be high-resolution.
• Use detail textures to increase apparent resolution
• Create a separate mesh for the keypad detail, with it's own textures.

Edit: this relates to the container mesh (was typing as you posted)

[smokey13]

hi spoof

I have thought reusing texture on opposing sides, also because of JESSIEG and ODEDGE's suggestions I thought about overlapping the the UV section to create slight differences between opposing sides but getting the rusty bits to line up would be a lot of hastle and mirroring the sides like you suggest would not look good if you were in a game level where two containers were facing each other(because they would look like a mirror image of each other) . when I made the mesh I was thinking of the big containers on borderlands 2 and I don't think the textures are the same on both sides. I mean I can make meshes like the ones in BL2 like this

obviously they are not exactly the same as BL2 and I will make my own unique textures.(so there would be no chance of legal action, ect...)
I don't know how to make decals or make/use detail textures

[JessieG]

Decals are literally just materials that you can drag around in a scene and place on anything without worrying about UVs. Look up decal materials in the UDN for more info on how to set them up (very simple).

For detail there's many options. One that may be a bit advanced for you right now, but worth looking into, is using an object world position node in the material. Basically what I do for some stuff to add variety to them is make a tiling dirt/grime texture and multiply it on top of the regular diffuse texture. Using an object world position node for that texture, the texture stays in place when moving the object so it will look different on duplicates based on where in the level I put it.

This explains it better:

http://www.chrisalbeluhn.com/UDK_***..._Tutorial.html

[Spoof]

If you haven't done so already I would take a good look at some of the stock meshes/materials/textures that come with the UTContent of UDK. They demonstrate very well all the concepts such as detail maps, good use of UV space etc. Reverse-engineer everything you can!

This tutorial may help, it's a similar asset to your container.

In all your images you've triangulated the mesh. This is usually a good idea for the final asset if you need to control edge flow, but during development I think it's more efficient to stick to quads - you retain edge loops, and there's less visual clutter, etc. The exporter will triangulate for you.

Finally Polycount is a fantastic source of professional insight. Check out the low-poly modelling contests where contributors show their topology, maps and textures (dig around and you'll find lots of great examples).

[Odedge]

I took a look at your model and have some suggestions for you. I assigned different materials to the different faces, which you can download the blend file.

There are 2 containers. The container on your right (if you are looking at the front of it) is your original container, with new materials assigned to the faces.

• The "ExtraFaces?" were the last set of faces I found and you should be able to delete and not affect the mesh.
• The "DeleteFaces" are internal faces that you should be able to delete and not affect the mesh as well.
• The "KeepFaces" are external faces that are good to keep and should not be adjusted either.
• The "AdjustFaces" are faces that are not very efficient and are wasting texture space. These can be optimized a little bit (will explain later).
• The "SimplifyFaces" are faces on the bottom of the mesh that the player should never see and you don't need them to be complex. You can possibly delete them, but then you would have an open mesh and that might effect culling other meshes. Safest bet would be to make them as simple as you can.
• The "DifferentMesh" are faces that you could probably create as a separate mesh and have their own texture as well.

The container on the left is a modified container.

• If you look on the bottom, you will see the "simplified faces" I mentioned earlier.
• I also deleted a lot of the internal faces as well.
• If you look at the back, you will see some floating faces. This is a adjusted back panel I made. In all of your main panels, the left/right/top/bottom faces that are at right angles to each other extend past the "angled faces". They only need to extend to where the "angled faces" are. They edges of each faces should be shared as well. Going further into the mesh means you are wasting texture space on a part of the mesh that can't be seen.
• Just a suggestion, but for angled objects like this, it's probably best to keep everything snapped to the grid (at least the bigger pieces). This way all the edges will line up with each other, especially if you need to tweak them.
• This may have been mentioned before, but the frame and the faces of the mesh could/should be 1 continuous mesh with no internal faces (faces that can only be seen from the inside).

Regarding the UVs

• Like someone mentioned, using decals or other methods for the rust might be a better way to go so your texture for the container doesn't have to be so big.
• If you want proper lightmap UVs, you can't rely too much on automated UV layouts. You need to have as few islands as you can and make sure all of the faces are oriented the correct way and are in the correct place (compared to your mesh).

[smokey13]

hi, I will do the same as yesterday and answer you one by one.

JESSIEG thanks, I checked out the link and will experiment with it once I have perfected my UV. the only thing that might be a problem is that the wall used in the tutorial has a flat face but my container has recesses and im not sure how it will look in the corners of the recesses because they are at right angles to the main faces

SPOOF I have had a quick look at the stock assets before but that was a while ago and I will have another look in the morning. the tutorial looks very useful(although a bit confusing) I will have a better look tomorrow. I actually do not triangulate my meshes, you see I create my meshes in another 3D app export to
.3DS format then import the .3DS file into blender to put the finishing touches on the mesh, apply material, UV map and texture. I checked out "polycount" but it was draining the credit on my dongle (i'll get more in the morning and have a proper dig though it).

ODEDGE I checked out the file you made (i think i worked out how to apply different materials to different faces from looking at it so thanks for that) also I see what you mean about the containers faces, because of your suggestions i decided to try remaking it with the frame and main box as one part instead of two.
here is how it turned out

i tried to mark seems and unwrap the new version using as few islands as possible but the UV kept coming out skewed at really weird angles.
you can download the .3DS file here
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?7ynm7ef07btm76a
if you want to take a look
there are some differences between the meshes
Old mesh
verts:374
faces:808
H=190
W=190
D=391.006
New mesh
verts:450
faces:860
H=200
W=180
D410
(H,W,D are in blender units) the reason for the increase in verts and faces is because i did not like the bars or handle i had on the front so i upgraded them a bit, i also changed the bottom of the container (its not quite how you did it but i did simplify it a bit, i did it that way because lets say i want to have to containers side by side with a slight gap between them and one on top you might see the bottom and did not want it to be just a flat surface).

[Odedge]

ODEDGE I checked out the file you made (i think i worked out how to apply different materials to different faces from looking at it so thanks for that) also I see what you mean about the containers faces, because of your suggestions i decided to try remaking it with the frame and main box as one part instead of two.
here is how it turned out

i tried to mark seems and unwrap the new version using as few islands as possible but the UV kept coming out skewed at really weird angles.
you can download the .3DS file here
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?7ynm7ef07btm76a
if you want to take a look
there are some differences between the meshes
Old mesh
verts:374
faces:808
H=190
W=190
D=391.006
New mesh
verts:450
faces:860
H=200
W=180
D410
(H,W,D are in blender units) the reason for the increase in verts and faces is because i did not like the bars or handle i had on the front so i upgraded them a bit, i also changed the bottom of the container (its not quite how you did it but i did simplify it a bit, i did it that way because lets say i want to have to containers side by side with a slight gap between them and one on top you might see the bottom and did not want it to be just a flat surface).

Now that's what I am talking about. From what I can tell (I downloaded the .3ds file), that's a very efficiently built model. All of the main faces are visible and there are no wasted faces.

I see your point on the bottom of the model and that's make sense to give it some "depth".

Nice job man.