|
Strife Onizuka
Moonchild
Join date: 3 Mar 2004
Posts: 5,887
|
06-24-2007 03:48
I've released a new version of 3dm2sculpted: http://home.comcast.net/~mailerdaemon/3dm2sculpt.zipChanges: - This new version outputs at 128x128
- Exports each surface of an object to it's own texture (the previous version only output the first surface)
- The surfaces of an object are resized together allowing for the user to manually stitch them together in an imaged editing program.
Roadmap: - Automated stitching of surfaces
- Resampling of UVs to facilitate stitching of uneven edges.
- Sizing of areas to allow for different areas of the mesh to have greater detail over other areas
- Preview window
_____________________
Truth is a river that is always splitting up into arms that reunite. Islanded between the arms, the inhabitants argue for a lifetime as to which is the main river.
- Cyril Connolly
Without the political will to find common ground, the continual friction of tactic and counter tactic, only creates suspicion and hatred and vengeance, and perpetuates the cycle of violence.
- James Nachtwey
|
|
Ziggy Puff
Registered User
Join date: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 1,143
|
07-08-2007 16:57
I've been using this for a while, and I like how it works. The improvements you said you're working on will be helpful too. I noticed that for a multi-surface single-object 3DM file (in my case, this was a boolean union of multiple single-closed-surface objects), the resulting sculpt textures are 'placed' correctly, i.e. I can put the resulting textures on a set of identical size/position prims, and get the original build back, since each prim 'moves' to its required position. This is hard to describe, but you know what I'm talking about. Going through the source, it looks like you figure out the size bounds of the object, and then scale things to maximize detail? In my case, what I'm trying to build is something like a skeleton - prims spaced far apart relative to the size of the prims. In this situation, I wonder if I'm losing detail because the 0-255 range is scaled to fit the whole build, but each piece is a lot smaller. The solution would be to not perform the union, and run the objects through as separate objects. This gives me the detail I want, but now I have to scale/position the objects manually to get back my original build. Would it be possible for your program to generate an accompanying text file, with some information on the transformations needed after the textures are brought into SL? Or some other way to accurate place objects that were multiple objects in the 3DM file. That would help a lot with importing complex builds. And on the same topic: From: someone The surfaces of an object are resized together allowing for the user to manually stitch them together in an imaged editing program I tried this, but I wasn't sure how to place those textures in the larger image, and couldn't get this to work. |
|
Strife Onizuka
Moonchild
Join date: 3 Mar 2004
Posts: 5,887
|
07-08-2007 22:55
From: Ziggy Puff I've been using this for a while, and I like how it works. The improvements you said you're working on will be helpful too.
I noticed that for a multi-surface single-object 3DM file (in my case, this was a boolean union of multiple single-closed-surface objects), the resulting sculpt textures are 'placed' correctly, i.e. I can put the resulting textures on a set of identical size/position prims, and get the original build back, since each prim 'moves' to its required position. This is hard to describe, but you know what I'm talking about.
Going through the source, it looks like you figure out the size bounds of the object, and then scale things to maximize detail? In my case, what I'm trying to build is something like a skeleton - prims spaced far apart relative to the size of the prims. In this situation, I wonder if I'm losing detail because the 0-255 range is scaled to fit the whole build, but each piece is a lot smaller.
The solution would be to not perform the union, and run the objects through as separate objects. This gives me the detail I want, but now I have to scale/position the objects manually to get back my original build.
Would it be possible for your program to generate an accompanying text file, with some information on the transformations needed after the textures are brought into SL? Or some other way to accurate place objects that were multiple objects in the 3DM file. That would help a lot with importing complex builds.
And on the same topic:
I tried this, but I wasn't sure how to place those textures in the larger image, and couldn't get this to work. Manual stitching is no fun, it's a jigsaw puzzle. As long as you didn't join the mesh into a single object (and kept each bone was it's own object) you shouldn't have a problem with detail in that regard. One possible way to boost the LOD would be to decouple the resizing for the axises. Course the program would need to tell the user what they needed to be to get the ratio back to what it was. Though that might have detrimental effects if you were trying to make a really tiny prim. It will be a while before the next version is released. I may release a version with crude auto-stitching in the interim.
_____________________
Truth is a river that is always splitting up into arms that reunite. Islanded between the arms, the inhabitants argue for a lifetime as to which is the main river.
- Cyril Connolly
Without the political will to find common ground, the continual friction of tactic and counter tactic, only creates suspicion and hatred and vengeance, and perpetuates the cycle of violence.
- James Nachtwey
|
|
Ziggy Puff
Registered User
Join date: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 1,143
|
07-08-2007 23:30
From: someone As long as you didn't join the mesh into a single object (and kept each bone was it's own object) you shouldn't have a problem with detail in that regard. That's what I did after I figured out what the program was doing. But now every 'bone' is centered and maximized within the prim's cube, so they're not lined up any more. I was wondering if the program could output some information about the scaling and positioning needed to re-align the pieces. From: someone One possible way to boost the LOD would be to decouple the resizing for the axises. Course the program would need to tell the user what they needed to be to get the ratio back to what it was. Right, that would result in a scaling transform that had different values for the 3 axes. |
|
Strife Onizuka
Moonchild
Join date: 3 Mar 2004
Posts: 5,887
|
07-08-2007 23:52
From: Ziggy Puff That's what I did after I figured out what the program was doing. But now every 'bone' is centered and maximized within the prim's cube, so they're not lined up any more. I was wondering if the program could output some information about the scaling and positioning needed to re-align the pieces.
Right, that would result in a scaling transform that had different values for the 3 axes. I'll work on it. I'll get something posted later today or tomorrow.
_____________________
Truth is a river that is always splitting up into arms that reunite. Islanded between the arms, the inhabitants argue for a lifetime as to which is the main river.
- Cyril Connolly
Without the political will to find common ground, the continual friction of tactic and counter tactic, only creates suspicion and hatred and vengeance, and perpetuates the cycle of violence.
- James Nachtwey
|