PDA

View Full Version : Blender better than LW? Probably not, but what's wrong with my textures?



Bax33
05-31-2014, 03:30 PM
I'm trying to get better, but with little success. :) I've attached a very simple project consisting of a cobble stone street. I was trying to do this Blender tutorial http://www.blenderguru.com/videos/the-secrets-of-realistic-texturing/ in Lightwave. Yet, my results are nothing like what they come up with in the tutorial. I'm certain this isn't a LW issue, but a problem with me, which is probably even sadder. :help: At any rate, I've attached the project. I tried increasing the subdivisions of the plane, using nurbs and not, applying the displacement via nodes in the object properties as well as in the surface editor and the bricks still look pretty flat. I'm wondering if it is the camera angle, the lighting, the fact that the image/texture I started with is only 700 x 700, or maybe I didn't use Shader2 properly to create the other maps? Maybe I have the maps assigned to the wrong nodes? I'm just wondering if anyone can get me closer to more realistic textures in LW. Thanks in advance for any help.

XswampyX
05-31-2014, 06:15 PM
Hello Bax33.

Here's my stab at it. The problems you are having are to do with :-

1. The mesh you are using for your displacement. If you use a sub-patched mesh you can increase it's density at render time.
2. Colour space settings.
3. Not having anything to reflect off your cobbles.
4. Your normal map isn't good enough for large normal movement. It's almost just random noise. ShaderMap is good for small details or just stand in textures. It's good.... I bought it! :)
5. The displacement map is pretty much the same.
6. The way you have your reflection/spec and occlusion map integrated into the surface.
7. Some other things I can't remember.....

I have included a scene that bakes out a new normal map for you.....

Hope it helps.

Cheers.

Bax33
05-31-2014, 08:46 PM
Thanks XswampyX, I will try some of the things you mentioned and examine the scene you returned. If Shadermap isn't good for things like this, then what other software is good for this? I thought about downloading CrazyBumps as the tutorial suggested, but my Antivirus shot up red flares about it being infected with a virus, so I didn't download it. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

jboudreau
06-01-2014, 01:37 AM
Hi Bax33

After going through your scene I noticed a few issues

- You had no UV Maps for your road texture. Creating a UV Map for your road will make it easier for you to texture
- You were using the Ambient Oclusion map as your displacement map instead of the actual displacement map you had created
- You had to put your displacement map texture in the displacement Map Texture Channel that is located under the Object Properties Panel

- You didn't need to subdivide your road geometry as much as you did, All you need to do is subdivide the road geometry a few times and then press the tab button to turn it into sub patch mode. Then In Layout you can increase your display or render subpatch level to around 20 or 30 or what every you prefer

- Your Texture Node flowchart was more complex than it needed to be

Here is a revised version of your scene below, take a look and let me know if this helps you get started

122128

I also created a different scene that is attached below

122129

Low Resolution Textures Used 700px x 700px

122130

122134

High Resolution Textures Used 3750px x 3750px

122131

122133

Hope this helps
Jason

Bax33
06-01-2014, 08:58 AM
Thanks for the sample scenes and feedback Jason. My scene is looking better, but still not exactly like yours. I mean I make it exactly like your low res using the same textures you are but I'm trying to recreate the textures and UV and get the same results. I also noticed that using the displacement 'T' seems to produce better results than the using the texturing Node in the Displacement tab of the object properties. I thought they were supposed to produce the same results, but obviously not. Thanks again, I'll keep practicing. You got me a lot further than I was.

jboudreau
06-01-2014, 07:36 PM
Thanks for the sample scenes and feedback Jason. My scene is looking better, but still not exactly like yours. I mean I make it exactly like your low res using the same textures you are but I'm trying to recreate the textures and UV and get the same results. I also noticed that using the displacement 'T' seems to produce better results than the using the texturing Node in the Displacement tab of the object properties. I thought they were supposed to produce the same results, but obviously not. Thanks again, I'll keep practicing. You got me a lot further than I was.

Hi Bax33

No problem glad I could help. Yes I noticed that myself at first I tried doing it with the nodal system but I wasn't impressed with the results I was getting. The displacement Channel on the object itself was giving me way better results. I don't really use nodes unless I really have to for things like skin, car paint, normal maps, AOC Maps and other shaders etc. basically things that can't really be created using the old texturing methods. I prefer the old way of texturing over nodes but they both have their advantages so It's good to know both.

Thanks
Jason

JoePoe
06-02-2014, 01:24 PM
So, yes, there's a little bit of a bunch of stuff going on. Good advice so far.... I won't beat the same drum(s).

As far as Nodal displacement goes....
Use Luma > Input
and try running it through a scale node first OR (my favorite) using Spot Info => normal.

I used jboudreau's normal map in the main texture area too because..... well you know by now :).

Also, I noticed in the node panel (that wasn't hooked up... no image etc) that what you had tried had a mip mapping of 9.something. That'll kill your displacement.
Keep it very low (.001) or better yet off. (That goes for the normal map too (I think that was okay, but just for future reference)!)

Try this (Exaggerated scale & jboudreau's disp map also) 122149 or this 122148... you can see the open GL action.
This is using your displacement map 122151

More inline with your original scale 122152

Edit: Oh.... and should you get the same result? Yes. Using T 122158 Using Nodes (scale) 122159
... and, of course, in this case the Spot Info Normal (all straight up here) node gives the same result as the rest.

Bax33
06-04-2014, 09:31 PM
Thanks JoePoe. This information helped as well. I did some more experimenting and I'm a little better. I think I have the concepts at least and liked your suggestion of using the scalar and Luna. That did work. What I finally did for the images below was create a one meter plane, add the street UV map and send it to layout and then instance it. With the low res texture, I recreated my NORM, SPEC and DISP maps in an attempt to make them a little better. However, I think the image that I best is the one with DISP and Color only, no normal map. I was surprised that playing with the opacity and texture amplitude both affected the displacement. Actually I learned something from each of you that contributed, so thank you all. I'm still not sure how Jason got the low res street looking so good, I guess its the maps (or just me) :hey:

At any rate, the attached is about the best I can come up with at this time. Not great at all, but better than where I started. If I push the displacement up more they look really fake. I'll keep practicing. Thanks again all.

Bax

JoePoe
06-05-2014, 10:08 AM
Cool. Comin' along fine.

One last thought.
Obviously you know that relying mostly on displacement comes at the cost of a high poly count. Which may be fine.
But it really does help to have the normal map working too. So...
Sometimes (depending on how/where you make your maps) the normal needs to be inverted on the Y axis. (I thought someone mentioned this already, but I don't see it now).
If it does need to be flipped and you don't have that box ticked, the effect will work to counteract what you've got going on in the displacement and things will appear to flatten out.
So give that a try if you want. :)