Jump to content

Mesh Artifacting - please help


Michael Bigwig
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3402 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone. 

I just started getting into mesh, and I've created a total of three models without a problems, however, this newest model isn't cooperating. 

You can see that SL isn't reading the pologons correctly, causing artifacts...

I've tried everything in Maya--I've tried smoothing edges with normals, cleaning up, reducing poly count, smoothing/increasing poly counts, forcing tesselation...

 

Can someone explain to me what I'm doing wrong in either the constuction of the model, the setup, or the export. 


This mailbox is build from one single polygon cube. 

 

*using Maya 2014

*exporting using FBX Converter 2013.3

** on a side note, this model imports perfectly into Unreal Engine 4, with zero artifacting.

** on a second side note, why the heck does the textured model look so dark in SL...I even made the baked texture extra bright, but it still imports into SL way too dark.

Thank you kindly in advance. 

 

THE FIRST IMAGE IS FROM SL, THE SECOND IS THE UV TEXTURING, AND THE THIRD IS FROM MAYA VIEWPORT 2.0

 

MailboxForumPost1.jpgMailboxForumPost3.jpgMailboxForumPost2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a Maya person but from the photo it looks like the model is picking up at "tint" from your model. Have you checked to make sure that the base color of your model after import is still white or very light gray?  Your model photo looks like it is dark gray. Add that texture and you would get what you see.

 

That's all I got :D  - LOL. Sometimes it IS just that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The third image is my base lambert texture in Maya...it's un-textured essentially. Are you talking about why my texture is too dark? Hmm...I've never tried to change the 'base color' of the model. I always considered that to be an 'un-textured' export. I figured when I place a texture on a model in SL, it simply takes over as the main diffuse color...

 

I'll give that a go.

 

My main problem though are the lines cut into the back of the mailbox, which relate to the edges of the model...

 

Thanks regardless! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you tried to simply delete the faces that aren't showing right and recreating them? There might also be some faces underneath the top ones poking through. I'm not sure but from the first image it looks as if there's a face under the surface between the top and bottom edge of the rounded top part. Had that happen to me when merging objects and with dividing faces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be a good place to check Christhiana, however, this model was made from a single polygon box. There are no other faces behind the rounded part. The curve was fashioned by beveling the edges...that's a standard way to do it, not sure why the export doesn't like those faces or edges...

 

I guess I can try deleting that section and recreating it.

 

Thanks for the suggestions and help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. To see if it's "tint", simply go into the Texture tab of the edit dialog inworld, and check that the diffuse texture color is set to pure white.

2. Are the edges across the curved part smooth-shaded? I guess in Maya that is having them in the same "smoothing group". (Also re-check the normals - should be ok as you made it by bevelling).

3. There is/was an artefact caused by inworld ambient occlusion (not fixed as far as I know). You can see if that is affecting your model by turning it on and off in Preferences (assuming you have advanced lighting on). However, I think your model is probably too small to have this problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use Maya.  It looks like the normal edges of your mail box are set to soft instead of hard.  That looks like where the artifacts area coming from.  The rounded back part of your mesh edges should be set to soft but the corner edges and legs should all be set to hard edges.

The dark color, as already mentioned, is probably do to your faces in SL being set to a different color than white.  In SL right mouse click on your mesh, after you rez it, and click "Edit".  Then in the edit window click "Faces".  Next click on texture tab and click on your mesh.  If the color isn't white click on it and change it to white.  My guess is it is probably the same color of gray as your lambert.

Lastly you don't need to be using the FBX converter to convert your file to a DAE file.  You can export directly out of Maya as a DAE file.  Click on "Window>Settings/Preferences>Plugin Manager.  In the Plugin Manager window scroll down till you see "fbxmaya.mll" check "Load" and check "Auto Load" then close the window.

To export your mesh click on your mesh in the "File" menu select "Export Selection". Next change the file type to "DAE_FBX.dae".  Type in the name you want it to be and click "Export".  Your DAE file is ready for upload.

You should be able to click Upload Texture option in the mesh upload window and the texture will automatically be applied to it in SL though you will have to pay to upload the texture.  Since you already uploded the texture you can skip this to save L$10.

Remember you can always log onto the Beta Test grid and upload mesh and textures for free.

Hope that helps. :)
Cathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

I tried differfent smoothing groups in the images above. I made the hard edges hard, and only the smooth edges smooth. I also tried without any smoothing groups. Although, I didn't export with any smoothing options in Maya or in the SL import...maybe I missed an option to include smooth groups?

Ah, so there IS a darker default texture that sits below my diffuse? That's stupid. My placed diffuse color should take over the base level color automatically.

Thanks for the tips on exporting dae...I saw that and wasn't sure if that was OK to use. That saves a few clicks.

I'll let you guys know later tonight if this works.  

Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...or in the SL import.

There is a Generate normal button, with an associated crease angle, which will smooth adges where the faces are at less than the crease angle, and make others sharp. However, this doesn't work as well as doing it in your 3D program. If I remember correctly, it leaves all UV seams sharp. It might do as a stop-gap, and to diagnose the problem, but I wouln't recommend it for general use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you use the fbxmaya.mll and export your mesh as a DAE_FBX (*.dae) file you don't have to worry about smoothing groups.

All you have to do is set what ever edges you want to be soft  to soft and what ever edges you want to be sharp to hard on your model.  Just click on your model and then press F10 to go into edge mode or hold down your right mouse button over your model and select "Edge" when the menu appears to go into edge mode.

Once in edge mode select the edges you want soft or hard and go up to "Normals" menu at the top of your screen.  Of course you have to have "Polygons" selected in the Status Line drop down window which is under the File menu in the top left corner of your screen to seen to see the Normals menu.

So click on "Normals" menu and then go down to and click on either "Soften Edge" or "Harden Edge".  I am sure you already know how to do this.  I just want to make sure we are both on the same page.  You don't have to worry about UV edge seams being set to hard or anything.

To export your mesh out of Maya then just select your mesh and "Export Selection" with the DAE_FBX (*.dae) file type.  In the SL mesh upload window be sure to select "Include Textures" option.  The faces of the mesh that have the texture applied to them should automatically have been set to white.

Now I am using an older version of Maya 8.0.  So my DAE_FBX(*.dae) doesn't export textures properly.  If I want to export a model with textures already applied I either have to use the open source DAE plugin beta version or export out as an FBX and use the FBX converter like you done.

This isn't a bid deal for me.  I normally just export out my mesh as a DAE_FBX(*.dae) file with no textures associated with my lamberts and upload them separately to SL and then rez and apply the textures manually.  Say I have textures applied to my lamberts in my model in Maya and now I want to export my model as a DAE file.  I just create a new lambert for each one of the textured lamberts I have on my model.  To replace the lambers I just select the faces of a particular lambert/material and create a new lambert.  I normally change the new lambert color to white.  Then I export my model out as a DAE file and upload it to SL and upload my textures to sl separately.  

I know it seems like a bit more work than exporting as a FBX and converting it to a DAE file but if you don't have the correct settings on your FBX exporter then your model will be messed up.  Besides I often upload several versions of the same model before I am completely happy so why pay to upload the same textures over and over again.

Now your version of Maya is much newer and I am fairly certain that your fbxmaya.mll plugin won't have any sort of texture problem uploading it to SL.  So you won't have to jump through the same hoops as I have to.

I hope that helps. :)
Cathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply Kathy--I am, however, pretty comfortable with modeling and texturing in Maya as you can probably tell by my UV unwrap and custom texture work. :)

 

I'll continue messing around with smoothing edges/normals...maybe I'm choosing the wrong edges. And I'll try the direct export via DAE_FBX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Figured it out!!

 

I exported using the DAE_FBX selection within Maya itself. 

I also selected the entire model, and then NORMAL>HARDEN EDGE, and then selected the only the red edges (image below) and SOFTEN EDGE those.

It worked! 

I've included my final SL models in an additional image.

Thanks everyone for your time!

 

* Land impact 5, with three levels of LOD.

 

MailboxForumPost4.jpg

 

MailboxForumPost5.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi :)

Texturing looks good but you seem to have forgotten a step in your modeling workflow :matte-motes-agape:

The Optimizing of your mesh to reduce the number of vertices to a minimum.

Optimize.png

 

Also I think an LI of 5 is too high for something like this. For a mesh this size its reducing the vertice/tri count in the Lowest LOD that will reduce the LI weight the most. So work on that, a simple cube shape and perhaps a couple of planes for each foot is all you would need.

And for the physics mesh an Analyzed  cube is sufficient. I would then expect the LI to be around 1 or at most 2.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another one: If you are going to use a normal map, then you can keep more(all?) edges soft, and compensate for the shading when you bake the normals from the high poly model. This will reduce the vertex count in the uploader, which splits* vertices at sharp edges that meet with different normals. You can may also get some reduction by welding UV islands where that's possible possible, because vertices are also split* across UV seams.

*In the internal format, every vertex in the vertex list has position, normal and UV coordinate. So when the same geometric vertex appears with different normals, at a sharp edge, and/or different UV coordinates, across a UV seam, then a whole new vertex has to be created..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you guys so much for following up with optimization. I'm new at optimizing for gaming, and I will definitely go over this model and merge verts and delete faces not needed.

 

The base faces of the legs are already gone, however, I did choose to keep the base of the main unit...I will definitely delete that as well.

 

As far as the handle, I recently watched a video explaining that it's best to merge the mesh geometry, instead of overlapping a separate object and using 'combine.' Hmmm...you're saying to allow the handle to be separate because the small flap door would be a solid face and I'd save a lot of information? Gotcha.

 

I did change the LOD of every level...I used 'reduce' in Maya to reduce geometry by 25%, then another 25%, then an additional 30% (keeping the %80 total reduction for LOD 3 and 4.

 

As far as the resolution, this is taking up most all of the UV area...I didn't care about some things like the handle, but perhaps I could because it is a bit lower rez. Other than the handle, I'm pretty content with the rest of the texture resolution.

 

I baked textures/shadows (light and color) from the standard LOD...I did not use a higher poly model to bake normals--should I do that? Or is my standard bake OK?

 

You guys are awesome. Thanks very much.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't mean to be rude, and I'm sure people have discussed this on other forums...but I can only assume one of the many reasons why the economy in SL could be much better is that people low-ball or undercharge for way too much stuff.

 

I recently did a search for mailboxes just like mine and there are several quality pieces as good or better than mine which are selling for $1L...seriously? One Linden? I put in hours of work on this, several days actually, and I'm charging $150L...I think that's reasonable for a mesh item that took skill in in modeling, texturing, UVmapping, etc...

 

...and there are folks doing this kind of time-consuming skill-based work and just giving them away...I think that kinda stinks. I don't care how 'generous' you're trying to be...it hurts the economy does it not?

 

There's a site called 'Turbo Squid', it's a place you can sell your 3D assets. You are not allowed to sell things for WAY cheaper than the norm for a product and it's community counterparts. I think that's fair. I think you should be allowed to set a lower price, but I think there should be a limit.

 

Not the end of the world...just a sad thought that I won't make any money on all this work becuase Joe Shmoe is giving his away for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Michael Bigwig wrote:

I honestly don't mean to be rude, and I'm sure people have discussed this on other forums...but I can only assume one of the many reasons why the economy in SL could be much better is that people low-ball or undercharge for way too much stuff.

 

I recently did a search for mailboxes just like mine and there are several quality pieces as good or better than mine which are selling for $1L...seriously? One Linden? I put in hours of work on this, several days actually, and I'm charging $150L...I think that's reasonable for a mesh item that took skill in in modeling, texturing, UVmapping, etc...

 

...and there are folks doing this kind of time-consuming skill-based work and just giving them away...I think that kinda stinks. I don't care how 'generous' you're trying to be...it hurts the economy does it not?

 

There's a site called 'Turbo Squid', it's a place you can sell your 3D assets. You are not allowed to sell things for WAY cheaper than the norm for a product and it's community counterparts. I think that's fair. I think you should be allowed to set a lower price, but I think there should be a limit.

 

Not the end of the world...just a sad thought that I won't make any money on all this work becuase Joe Shmoe is giving his away for free.

Joe probably got his from a game or "free" 3D site. That is who actual 3D modelers in SL are competing against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.I did not use a higher poly model to bake normals--should I do that?

I don't think it's a matter of "should". I was really just mentioning it for completenss, not to say it's necessarily even a good idea. It's a lot of work even if you already have a high poly model - more if you have to make it, and not easy even when you know how. There are two possible reasons for doing it, I guess. My suggestion of using it to reduce vertex count by having all smooth shading and correcting the shading problems with a normal map is probably not a good idea in SL because many people will not be using advanced lighting. For them, the normal map will be ignored, and they will see the artefacts, which can be ugly. So you are better off starting off making textures that will work without advanced lighting, as you have done. Then you have the option of adding a normal map that will work with that texture to give more realistic detail for those with advanced lighting. Whether that is worth the effort, only you can decide. Same thing goes for a specular map. You also have to decide whether the extra maps are worth the performance cost of the extra textures.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing about lower prices here.

The items sold here are being used only here, "inside some free-to-play video game" in a sense.

Everyone here is building for the 'cash shop' of 'sexy sims online', at the most base level at least.

This is not like selling a product on renderosity where its going to be used in art (naked pictures on people's deviant art galleries) or gaming or whatever.

- Your customer has a much lower concept of the value of the goods.

 

As for the $1L items though - it is possible they are ripped content. Its also possible they're promotions designed to get brand attention. And its possible they're much less optimized than they could/should be.

- And if its optimization, you can compete by showing renders at close and far, and in complex angles and lighting, and being truthful about your land-impact.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi again :)


Michael Bigwig wrote: 

As far as the resolution, this is taking up most all of the UV area...I didn't care about some things like the handle, but perhaps I could because it is a bit lower rez. Other than the handle, I'm pretty content with the rest of the texture resolution.
 

What Cristhiana meant was that with a better layout of your UV's you would be wasting less texture space. Your present layout is wasting approximately 40% of the available area.

UV unwrap rearrange.png

 

A better layout would mean you have the choice to increase the size of the UV islands and so have better resolution or  a better choice would be you could use a smaller texture size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the new UV layout. That is very kind of you to take the time to do that. Ya, I suppose that's how I should get used to doing it. I suppose I'm being lazy not wanting to move everything and cut and paste the texture (with this current model)...but hey, that's just super lazy...I guess I'll do that.

 

I optimized my model--merging verts and deleting a few more faces not needed, and now the model won't upload into SL. For a minute it did load, but was completely black no matter what I did (I figure that's a UV issue)...now for some reason after I tweaked a few things, the model is a red X in the uploader and won't even take...not sure what I did wrong along the way. I simply merged verts and deleted some faces...

hmmmm...

 

I guess I'll have to take the old model that works, and slowly make changes to see which is the change that won't take. Bummer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Edit >Texture panel why are the Horizontal and Vertical scales not set to 1.0 ?

Optimizing is usually done before UV unwrapping. Deleting faces and merging may well have changed your UV mapping a bit.

In Blender we have an option to Disolve  vertices instead of deleting, this has less effect on the UV's ...... having said that if the texture is mapped correctly in Maya it should be the same in SL (unless you now have more than one UV map and the wrong one is being uploaded along with the model ?)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3402 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...