headus 3D tools headus 3D tools / 3D scans
Support Forums
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch    UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
headus 3D scans

Current Poll
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  

What would you most like to see in a future UVLayout release?
Redo
3%
 3%  [ 1 ]
Multiple UV sets/layers
48%
 48%  [ 15 ]
Multiple views/windows
19%
 19%  [ 6 ]
Recognize OBJ material groups
12%
 12%  [ 4 ]
User defined colors, hotkeys, buttons
16%
 16%  [ 5 ]
Total Votes : 31

Author Message
headus
Site Admin


Posts: 2854
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:36 pm    Post subject: Current Poll Reply with quote

Now that the Mac OS X version is out, I'm thinking about what *big* thing to look at next. Above are the top five, so vote for your favorite and it might get top priority!

Phil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
GeoffRiley



Posts: 71
Joined: 21 Feb 2007

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Multiple UV Sets/Layers is the current runaway leader... okay, that's only after 4 votes, and I imagine that is only because the email notification has only just been arriving in peoples mailboxes.

I'd just like to say how much I enjoy using UVLayout though: it really is a pleasure to use.

I only 'play' with it, however, and so I'm bound to be missing tricks that I've just not got around to learning yet; but currently when I lay out something across a number of tiles I usually end up fiddling around in another editor to shift each tile into the right position for DAZ|Studio or Poser to work with...

UV Sets and/or Layers sounds like just what I'm after.... either that or a shove in the right direction for how I should be doing it! Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lewi



Posts: 61
Joined: 14 Jul 2006

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does the multiple views choice include the previously mentioned, edit UV's in the " UV window " and see the changes to the texture in the " 3D window " ?.
If so I like this best, but multiple UV sets runs a close second.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
headus
Site Admin


Posts: 2854
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Multiple UV Sets/Layers is the current runaway leader... okay, that's only after 4 votes,"

And one of them is mine :-)

"shift each tile into the right position for DAZ|Studio or Poser"

I know there's more than a few poser people using uvlayout, and this is the first time I've heard of a possible problem with the tiles. Maybe a picture or two would help me understand whats going on?

Phil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
headus
Site Admin


Posts: 2854
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"edit UV's in the " UV window " and see the changes to the texture in the " 3D window " ?."

Yep, that's the one!

Phil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
GeoffRiley



Posts: 71
Joined: 21 Feb 2007

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

headus wrote:
I know there's more than a few poser people using uvlayout, and this is the first time I've heard of a possible problem with the tiles. Maybe a picture or two would help me understand whats going on?

I'll see if I can put some images together to show what I mean; but I'll start another thread when I do.... don't want to clog up in here! Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GeoffRiley



Posts: 71
Joined: 21 Feb 2007

PostPosted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GeoffRiley wrote:
headus wrote:
I know there's more than a few poser people using uvlayout, and this is the first time I've heard of a possible problem with the tiles. Maybe a picture or two would help me understand whats going on?

I'll see if I can put some images together to show what I mean; but I'll start another thread when I do.... don't want to clog up in here! Smile

Typically, since I had said that I've not been able to get it to go wrong since.... [mutter] [mutter]... I'll blame Smith Micro and retire back into my little hovel. Twisted Evil


Before I go:
Merry (slightly belated) Christmas and a Happy New Year to you Phil.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
r_knightly



Posts: 74
Joined: 29 Jun 2007

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would be great to be able to use LSCM to do the initial Unwrap This would pretty much bypass the Stretching step. i often use Silo to do then and then do the packing stacking and optimising in UV layout. It'd be nice to have it all in 1 spot though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IKHandel



Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Sep 2009

PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:03 am    Post subject: An old poll but I voted anyway :) Reply with quote

Have added my vote to the runaway leader ..Multiple UV sets/Layers

The more I look into UV uses recently, the more I see a requirement for Multiple UV maps, as from where I am looking the use of displacement / normal maps in particular seem to be becoming almost the norm.

Bit of a pain that Obj only supports 1 map

To me this is where the CG world is rapidly moving ever more rapidly.

IKHandel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
headus
Site Admin


Posts: 2854
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Bit of a pain that Obj only supports 1 map "

Yep :-) I still haven't decided on FBX or Collada. Whats your thoughts?

Phil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
IKHandel



Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Sep 2009

PostPosted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:41 am    Post subject: For what it's worth Reply with quote

Whilst both Fbx and Collada support multiple UV maps...

My short answer... Collada


Long answer...(I would be very interested on other users with more experience giving their input on this)

Looking at the choice between FBX and Collada from a purely user point of view I spent some hours yesterday researching the pros and cons of each.

No wish to start a heated debate but from a few hours research the impression I have between the 2 is as follows..
(I would stress that this is an area I am NOT technically knowledgable on and can only form a somewhat hazy analysis. Am more than open to being corrected in anything I may have misinterpreted).

Collada supports instancing,( I believe FBX does not?) which I note has recently been heavily pushed/improved in the latest version of Cinema 4D V11.5.(Especially in the very recently released mograph2 module)

I note also that Collada also supports instanced animation clips. Clips seem to me to be becoming a more powerful animation editing/compilation method as more high end 3d apps increase their capabilities in this area.

Collada appears to support physics (how well I am unsure. but it appears to be Rigid body dynamics at the minute).

Instanced Physics appear to be supported as well.

Physics and dynamics and instancing are areas I suspect that are going to play an ever increasing animation role as raw processing power continues to increase. My hazy crystal ball tells me this area is going to develop steadily in many high end apps over the coming years.

I note in a few forums there is a dislike of XML (used by Collada), I have also seen mentioned that Collada is tweaked relatively often which can cause compatability problems (struggling to verify this). It seems the latest version of Collada (1.5) was released early 2008, so I do wonder a little about the frequent update compatability
problem comments I have seen?

I note that Collada supports joints not bones, seems this is becoming the industry accepted norm now (EG cinema 4D v 10/10.5 transfered its Mocca rigging system from bones to joints, as did the now defunct Truespace) I am assuming that FBX supports joints rather than bones so both equal on this one?)


FBX snippet refering to Mudbox capability

Newly added support for the Autodesk® FBX® software file transfer technology helps make it possible for artists to transfer 3D scenes built in 3ds Max, Maya and Softimage into Mudbox with greater portability and more data retained than was previously possible using the .obj file format. This means greater productivity as artists no longer have to redo as much work.

Possible tenuous connection... the upcoming Zbrush 4 should include GoZ for PC exchange between Modo,C4D,Maya, How well it works remains to be seen. I gather there have been some problems with the Mac version.

I guess a fair summary from my perspective might be..

Observation...
FBX is slowly integrating a limited Collada element into it. FBX is prevailent but I get the impression it is not improved at any great rate, and is somewhat limited/ dated. Fbx is going to be around for a considerable time to come simply because its currently more widespread, and because so many high end apps are now owned by the same company.

Collada, on the other hand, appears to be more complete, but is currently less prevailent. I get the impression Collada is not only gaining momentum in popularity, but also seems to be more active in adding additional functionality. I note that Cinema 4d added Collada to their supported formats relatively recently.

In short I suspect neither are about to be retired in our lifetime, but that collada may have the edge in the long run, due to having more supported capabilities. Fbx will, I suspect, be forced to continue to enhance their integration of a limited collada set simply in order to appeal to as wide a commercial audience as possible (until
they have bought out all the other apps LOL)

Sidenote..
There was an element of frustration creeping into my research on FBX as so many official links to Fbx info were broken, which I found very unprofessional for such a high profile Software house, bit surprised at that one.

NB.My references to C4D are simply because it's the main app I use, and so have more recent knowledge of. Maxon obviously don't have the monopoly, but as an independent software house I am surmissing they "may" have more flexibilty in their choice of direction of travel. In comparison, Fbx is kind of ingrained and so intertwinned with multiple long standing apps that even if a change of direction was desired, it would be like stopping a lumbering but extremely heavy somewhat out of date freight train. (just an observation from my perspective.. not trying to start any heated debates here)

With the limited time I had available I could find no direct supported feature comparison table between fbx and Collada, if anyone has this info I would be very interested to see it.


A few useful links to related stuff I found during my limited research.

http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=467753


This one may be a little out of date, but interesting all the same
http://www.terathon.com/wiki/index.php?title=Collada_Plugins

http://www.khronos.org/files/collada_spec_1_5.pdf

Cheers
IKHandel (Ade)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
headus
Site Admin


Posts: 2854
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow! Thanks for all the info ... very thorough. I'm leaning towards Collada initially, with FBX maybe later on if there's the demand for it.

Phil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
IKHandel



Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Sep 2009

PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:15 am    Post subject: Very Welcome Reply with quote

To be honest the prev post is more a "notes to self" as I sifted through a load of info gleaned from online searches.

I figured posting them might help someone at some point down the line. They are far from complete as I was struggling to get good info on Fbx in particular.

Cheers
IKHandel (Ade)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IKHandel



Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Sep 2009

PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 4:34 am    Post subject: Sketchup UVing Reply with quote

Just discovered that google sketchup files (.skp) are actually Collada files in disguise.

With a small amount of jiggery pokery any .skp file can be extracted to a collada version (just tested it and it works).

I know sketchup pro has .Obj export option, but the free version does not.

So all those zillions of free sketchup .skp models could be UV'd with UVLayout, if it talked Collada, eliminating the need to convert to obj or buying the Sketchup pro version.

Mind you a huge number of sketchup models need a serious amount of retopology before they are actually usable in other apps.

IK
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JamesH



Posts: 17
Joined: 10 Jul 2007

PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Definitely COLLADA for me !

I've written a couple of COLLADA exporters, and like the format, and there are a few SDKs out there to help. I wrote one, just using TinyXML to format the XML and another using the COLLADA DOM - which took a while to understand ! But at least you get the source !

The FBX format from what I've seen is completely closed and if there are bugs in the SDK or Autodesk decides to change the format, you are completely at their mercy to receive updates.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group