Normals/Specular creation - How to in Gimp?

[Shandi Varriale]

After searching I found some instructions on how to create a normal/bump map:

and when I create a normal from GIMP for mesh body skin it looks very unclean and off putting on the avatar. I've tried various settings and it's not pretty like I know it can be with some guidence from any of the pro here.

So I'm reaching out on what settings folks use and find success with AND how to create a specular, please.

Thank you.

[Chic Aeon]

You might look at ShaderMap4 (also a pro version which I have) which is free and let's you easily tone down the maps to your need.  It should be noted that both normal and specular maps are DEPENDENT on Windlight (R) settings  -- which of course the creator has no control over once the item has left their hands.  For that reason I seldom use those maps in SL. They work much better in Sansar. 

 

So it is likely that the ugly look is in PART the Windlight setting you are using. It could also be the dpi of your original image along with its size. You may be better off to make a LARGE map and then resize and perhaps sharpen in GIMP.  I have never used GIMP so really can't say.

Good luck.

 

[Shandi Varriale]

Thank you Chic, I'll check out ShaderMap4. Appreciate the advice.

[BiroIsHere]

Better use Materialize 

Its free, better and faster. 

On 2/7/2019 at 7:24 PM, Chic Aeon said:

You might look at ShaderMap4 (also a pro version which I have) which is free and let's you easily tone down the maps to your need.  It should be noted that both normal and specular maps are DEPENDENT on Windlight (R) settings  -- which of course the creator has no control over once the item has left their hands.  For that reason I seldom use those maps in SL. They work much better in Sansar. 

 

So it is likely that the ugly look is in PART the Windlight setting you are using. It could also be the dpi of your original image along with its size. You may be better off to make a LARGE map and then resize and perhaps sharpen in GIMP.  I have never used GIMP so really can't say.

Good luck.

 

Normal maps looks smillar at every windlight, point is in specular maps. I realized Diffuse Glossynes maps made like for Unity4 (shines only at alpha background) works way better for SL and at any windlight than most of traditional Specular maps. Ofc its need to be made right way + settings inworld at specular need be set right too.  

I wish LL will add intensity slider for normal maps ;c

 

 

Edited April 27, 2019 by BiroIsHere

[Chic Aeon]

49 minutes ago, BiroIsHere said:

Normal maps looks smillar at every windlight

Just noting to keep thing "true" that your comment is completely incorrect. I could easily put in screenshots and perhaps someone else will, but I have more important things on my todo list.  

 

[Chic Aeon]

Back on my building pad, here are some examples of various Windlights(R) and how different a normal map can look. These are shots of the new building  == hence not mine as I rarely use normal maps in Second Life.   The house is very cute, but it is easy to see how different the textures CAN look under different Windlight(R) settings. 

EDIT: Since the person above (with a link to an external product which is definitely mentioned in the community guidelines as a no-no ) objected to the mention of a creator,  I am going to remove the name of the maker of this wall. Since a huge number of people recommend OTHER people's products hourly every day, I do NOT believe there was anything wrong with me mentioning the name. 

I wanted it to be clear it was not MY normal map. 

 

This is all the same view and camera angle. I simply cycled through some of my Windlight(R) settings from the quick preference pane.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2019 by Chic Aeon

[BiroIsHere]

Well ok. 

Nice advertising btw. 

[ChinRey]

3 hours ago, Chic Aeon said:

Back on my building pad, here are some examples of various Windlights(R) and how different a normal map can look.

In addition to the windlight issue, there's also a big difference between how normal maps look without shadows (High graphics) and with shadows (Ultra graphics). I once filed a JIRA about that. It was closed as "expected behaviour".

Of course there are also people who don't use ALM, some because their computers can't handle the extra load, some because they stick to the standard graphics settings (it's only on by default in mid+-to-ultra on the standard viewer and only in high+ and ultra in Firestorm).

And if that's not enough, every now and then we see builders - or more likely uploaders of internet loot - using nomral maps with incorrect swizzle coordinates. Second Life uses Y+ normal maps while both Unity and Blender use Y-. Get that wrong and the normal map only looks ridiculous. It's easy to correct if you know abut it and if you bother to actually look at your model before you ship it to unsuspecting builders, but not everybody do.

I won't say normal maps are a failure, they do have their uses. But they are very unreliable and have to be used very carefully.

[OptimoMaximo]

10 hours ago, ChinRey said:

And if that's not enough, every now and then we see builders - or more likely uploaders of internet loot - using nomral maps with incorrect swizzle coordinates. Second Life uses Y+ normal maps while both Unity and Blender use Y-.

Sorry Chinrey, but that-s incorrect. What you are referring to is the difference between two formats, OpenGL (+Y, used in Unity, Blender, Maya, 3DSMax natively) and DirectX (-Y, used in UnrealEngine4 and Substance softwares). The differences also sprout in the tangent basis that's being used, where, for example, Blender, Maya and UnrealEngine4 use a Mikkt Tangent basis by default while other softwares MIGHT need to get this setting sorted as not being their default. Also there is to notice that smoothing groups play a HUGE role in how a normal map is being baked (high to low poly workflow), changing the resulting map by a VERY big deal depending on the setting. So, to summarize, there a few aspects that interfere with normal maps creation that in SL can give very noticeable artifacty results, but those same aspects are a factor also outside of SL.

[ChinRey]

4 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

Sorry Chinrey, but that-s incorrect. What you are referring to is the difference between two formats, OpenGL (+Y, used in Unity, Blender, Maya, 3DSMax natively) and DirectX (-Y, used in UnrealEngine4 and Substance softwares).

Woops, sorry. Yes, Unity and Blender both use y+. But the important thing is that there are two ways to order the y normals and if you choose the wrong one, your it won't look very good.

 

4 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

The differences also sprout in the tangent basis that's being used, where, for example, Blender, Maya and UnrealEngine4 use a Mikkt Tangent basis by default while other softwares MIGHT need to get this setting sorted as not being their default.

I thought Maya had its own tangent basis algorithm? Yet another pitfall for the normal map maker to watch out for.

 

5 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

Also there is to notice that smoothing groups play a HUGE role in how a normal map is being baked (high to low poly workflow), changing the resulting map by a VERY big deal depending on the setting.

And yet another one...

 

5 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

So, to summarize, there a few aspects that interfere with normal maps creation that in SL can give very noticeable artifacty results, but those same aspects are a factor also outside of SL.

The two factors that are fairly SL specific ones though, are first two we mentioned, windlight and the different shader options. Those have a huge impact on the effect of the normal map.

[Janet Voxel]

On 2/7/2019 at 11:07 AM, Shandi Varriale said:

After searching I found some instructions on how to create a normal/bump map:

and when I create a normal from GIMP for mesh body skin it looks very unclean and off putting on the avatar. I've tried various settings and it's not pretty like I know it can be with some guidence from any of the pro here.

So I'm reaching out on what settings folks use and find success with AND how to create a specular, please.

Thank you.

It depends on which body you have, but I’m assuming it’s Mod. It sounds like a scaling problem though. The good news is you won’t need anything more than gimp and the normal generator plugin.

First thing you want to do is find a good image of a skin texture, preferably a square image, preferably one where you can see the pores. Save that and fire it up in gimp. Duplicate the skin tile twice. This is going to be your normal and specular map.

Pick your first copied layer, run the normal generator. Play around with the filters (I like sobel) until you find one that gives you a nice depth. Normal map is done.

Pick your second copy, except this time you’re going to suck all the color out. There’s a few ways you can do that: grayscale, desaturate, decompose rgb, decompose hsv. If you have the g’mic plugin, you have some extra ones too. For simplicity’s sake just do desaturate, now you have a black and white image. Bam....it’s a specular map.

The thing to remember about a specular map is white is highly reflective, black is not reflective at all. Your black and white image should do, but you can play around with it and make it more black or white. You can also adjust the specularity in second life. 

Now, resize your image to 512x512 or 256x256. You could do 1024x1024, but it’s not necessary. Export as a png or targa and you’re done. Bring it into SL and you’re good to go.

If you have a mod body, it’s actually a bunch of mesh parts. So if you slap a normal map on it, it’s going to look icky no matter what you do. So if you just put the map into the body it’s going to scale it up everywhere and you’re going to look....bumpy. In edit mode, select face THEN insert the normal map into each face and scale it down on the horizontal and the vertical. 70-75 works on a human avatar, in my experience, but play with it until it looks good to you. Just make sure it’s the same value for the horizontal and vertical scale. This is going to be tedious, but you’re going to do it for each face of the body.

Then do the same thing for the specular map. One face at a time.

That should give you a better result.