Game Editing > 3D Modeling & Content Creation

3D Modeling WIP Topic

<< < (43/54) > >>

kat:
To do the opposite you'd have to treat meshes like brush volumes and clearly define segments with their own material/shader assignments otherwise yes, you'll end up adjusting everything at the same time in UEd. In Blender that means cutting the structure up and assigning different Materials to different sections of the mesh (even if they are mapped using the same image); so long as you stick to the power-of-two rule mentioned above that should then mean as you increase/decrease texture scale it should still apply uniformly over surfaces - 1:1 scaled x2 means an even 2:1 assignment because the model is 2m x 2m and so on... (in addition you might need to export to FBX if you're not already as that has better support for multiple-material assignments).

Not sure what's going on the the verts other than you perhaps not selecting/deselecting properly, when you work at a reasonably quick pace that can happen (especially when Blender is being a bit slow to respond). You can toggle grid-snap in Edit Mode using "Shift+Tab". If you have GtkRadiant 1.5 installed you can export brush volumes directly to OBJ (although they are blank iirc), else you can always convert brush structures to models using BSP2ASE (note that to get an ASE models successfully into Blender you have to use Blender 2.49 and the ASE import script, once done open that saved file into a newer version of Blender).

silicone_milk:
I may have sort of figured a way out without having to apply a unique material to every face.
I can select a face, unwrap just that face, and then scale/rotate/translate as needed across a tiling texture loaded in Blender. Islands may overlap but I'm ok with this.
Comparing the UV layout from manually unwrapping each face individually and just doing a Cube Projection shows that the cube projection method produces nearly identical results. The main difference is that the angled faces are projected (hence the name) to a plane and so their uvs align perfectly with the planar faces. Manually unwrapping has the UV straightened out and running with the direction of the face causing visible seams where it meets a face sitting on an axis.

For example, here's cube projection on the left, and a manual unwrap of the angled face on the right.
The latter would typically not be an issue (and would actually be desirable) because I never usually would tile textures across angled faces like that when mapping for Quake 3. Angled faces were usually a cue to apply a trim texture to separate two axis-aligned surfaces and "hide" the texture seam by avoiding it altogether.

Additionally, I found that I have better results with the cube projection if I enable "scale to bounds" so it uses up all of the texture space for the uv islands. I have a color grid at 4 different resolutions (256x256, 512x512, 1024x1024, and 2048x2048) that I can swap between and it appears to be a lot easier to wrangle with the density issue.

silicone_milk:
And then there is abandoning the UV layout and using UV coordinates generated from an object + cube projection.
This is generated using object data (linked to an empty) and gives me consistent results across two objects (window and support pillar thing)

For lightmap UVs I could just have UE4 generate them I suppose.

kat:
If you want to unwrap those inner bevel faces so you can apply a trim texture it's best to map them as a single chain of faces. The optimal way to unwrap and object like that would be to do the following;

1) select all the outer faces of the object and UV unwrap them as a unit.
2) select all the bevel faces and unwrap those as a unit.
3) select all the inner arch faces and unwrap those as a unit.

In each instance ideally you want to use "Unwrap" rather than "Cube Projection"; the former constrains itself to the groups general orientation, the latter doesn't. What this will mean in this instance is that you'll end up with three distinct UV islands in the UV Editor which you can position as needed. If you then want to assign different materials to each group you then just assign a material/texture per group of faces rather than individually (which isn't very efficient) - it's not a good idea to treat models exactly the same way brush volumes are when it comes to texturing.


The specific problem you're having with tiling across units is the result of not fully following power-of-two; although you're using it to define object structure in terms of unit size/dimensions, you're not mapping images edge-to-edge so you end up tiling to a cutoff point that's inside the available texture space instead of the edge/boundary - wherever possible you want to be UV mapping, at least horizontally, edge-to-edge (i.e. 1:1, 2:1 3:1 etc., across the width of the object).

silicone_milk:
I wanted to avoid unwrapping the UVs in that way (specifically with the beveled edge of the arch) as the seams would be glaringly obvious. I've played with the unwrap a little and have some stretching in the arch but I think it would be acceptable. If I change my mind and decide to have the game be in first-person where the camera can get super close to the texture then I might not be able to get away with it though.

I also created a new cut in the arch where the wood frame is so I can have the main seam land there and be hidden by the frame.



I could possibly use the face that there would be a seam at the beveled edge if I were to unwrap it similar to how you've done it and create some new faces to map the "trim" to (arches need a keystone and support stones).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page