Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Looks like the problem is in the definition of "texture map," which some people use to mean the UV instead of the diffuse map that is made externally from a UV template (and thus has nothing to do with the process, unless you're redoing a UV to match an existing texture). I've always used and understood it to mean the latter.
irrellevant but just commenting
I have tried moving vertices around in Carrara's uv room to fit a texture map
mostly on large poly models it is so laggy and jerky I find it impossible
pity there is not a way to just reduce the polys for the uv grid image without decimating the model so you can shift sections
(sounds silly but what I mean is you see only half the polys but all the ones inbetween get moved too)
I would like to be able to take photographs of buildings, clothes and people and map them onto objects!
can with simple lowpoly ones but certainly not Daz models for instance!
Exactly - the UV information is contained within the .obj definition file - what you lay out as a UV map is the template that you paint on, or project, the diffuse map onto to instruct the computer where to place each pixel onto the mesh. I suppose in a way that could be seen as "pinning" the texture to the template, although, for clarity, it would be better described as "fixing".
This has no relation to the pinning process used to generate the UV template.
@ Wendy - yes, this is a big problem I find using Carrara - the lagging when trying to move verts on the UV grid. The process you describe works pretty well in Hex because you get almost real-time feedback - not really a recommended method because the result will only apply to the specific map you are using, but it is a useful one-time quick-fix.
Okay, you win. I'm not going to enter into yet another three day long attempt to nail jelly to a tree, and in the end find out it depends on what the definition of "is" is because someone doesn't want to lose face.
That can happen, but genuine confusion over terms is not the same as ego, and terms can be slippery in 3d because different programs, tutorials and classes do not define terms identically. In this case it's more useful to say "by this I meant this" than to just keep shooting in the dark.
It is not about "winning" or "saving face" - this is not a competition, simply helping people who asked the question to understand the function of pinning in UV map unwrapping. Period.
Sorry, SickleYield, my comments were not directed at you. And no, it's not confusion over terms.
It's real simple. Someone stated "Pinning also has nothing to do with pinning it to a texture map". As a general statement, that is factually incorrect. Nothing to do with terms.
I gave an example of a human face. If you are reproducing a human character, one commonly used technique is to photograph the actual human character and use those images as the texture image that you will apply to the character. In that case, you need certain points on the mesh to line up exactly with certain points on the image. Distorting the image to match up with the UV mapped mesh is very difficult. So you do the opposite. You match your UV unwrapping to the image. That's where pins come in. They allow you to place certain vertices at fixed points over the image, and tweak and relax and distort the rest of the UV mapped mesh to line up with the rest of the image. Of course they aren't always used that way, but I was responding to the comment that pins had "nothing to do" with that.
And, clearly, many apps have that functionality, for that particular purpose, which I showed in the excerpts from the various manuals. However, as I said, Carrara and Hex don't seem to have it.
However, this being the Carrara forum, what happens is that some folks with very limited knowledge make broad pronouncements that are factually incorrect (not you), and then when you correct them they lead you on a frustrating journey that I call "nailing jelly to a tree". You can spend hours, days, weeks, trying to explain the facts, but they will never back down. They will always re-define what they said until at some point they can sound like they were right all along. "You misunderstood when I said it was 'huge'. Obviously, if you knew anything at all, you'd realize that meant 'really really small'....."
And then they get angry at you for acting like a smarty pants.
Heh, never mind, can't be bothered ;)
Yes, that is the process Wendy referred to. Just to be clear, when I refer to "pinning", I'm referring to the use of the pin function as part of the unwrapping process. The process of matching the UV's to the texture is done post-unwrapping, of which pinning is a part.
You can certainly move UV's around to to match the texture, but they don't need to be pinned, using the pinning function - you simply move them. In Hex, in order to use the pin function, you would need to go into UV mapping mode. If you then use the pin function this remaps, so you would be chasing a moving target.
Just to show that I do understand what you are getting at, I made a start in mapping the face of an old man with a beard onto the babyface by moving the UV's around. I don't have the time, inclination or skills needed to do it fully, but it is possible - probably easier in a more sophisticated application.
But thank you for bringing this up - it gives me an idea on how to map an actual photograph onto a FaceWorx head - this would be easier, because the head mesh would be designed from the actual photo, so would already pretty much match the texture to start off with.
Right. It's all semantics.
Right. It's all semantics.
Seems to me that I said that in a completely unrelated discussion. So who are you going to accuse of starting an argument now? Grow some stones and insult the one that disagreed with you.
Just to be clear, that's nonsense.
And Evil, I have no clue what you're so upset about.
By the way, as you can see we just had the "redefining what they said until the point where they can sound like they were right all along" phase, and now we've just entered the "and then they get angry at you for acting like a smarty pants" phase. :)
Just to be clear, that's nonsense.
And Evil, I have no clue what you're so upset about.
I'm not upset. I'm saying you're using a line to attack Roygee, that I used in an argument with you. You clearly have edited your quote to try and make it appear as if my reply was a random statement. It wasn't, and you know it. Roygee had a difference with you, and clearly has some knowledge of what he's talking about (maybe more than you gasp!) and you decided to bring up what I said in another thread (which he was a part of, and had knowledge of) as a way of trying to belittle his opinion that he would "get." Again, not emotional or upset, but I call them as I see them.
As I have no knowledge to impart in this thread, I'll let Joe get back to telling everybody that he's right, and everybody else is wrong.
One thing that Carraras UV map unfold does that annoys me to no end is how if you chop up a complicated object HOW carrara arranges them all right up against one another and is a pain to grad the exact right lines points and verts to rearrange them...
Don't waste your cyber-ink, EP.
If anything, this discussion has strongly confirmed something I have long suspected.
Just hope folks who want to learn will see past the white noise.
Post edited because of misguided compassion
You are correct sir! Thanks for the advice. Looking forward to learning more regarding UVs from you.
Yeah, me too. Whenever you're ready I'll be listening, pen in hand.
That's about it, really. How you unwrap and lay out a specific mesh depends on the mesh and how you are going to use the template.
Huh? That's it?
What about the projection axis? And the pinning axis? And dissociating UV's? And relaxing UV's and iterations? And target welding? And islands? And fitting UV's? And detaching polygons? What about all that stuff? And in Hex, all the UV editing tools and brushes?
And what about pinning? Is there a way to do what I was talking about? Come on, man, we're looking forward to learning more regarding UV's from you.
Take a look at the title of the thread - it is not "Understanding everything possible there is to know about UV mapping".
I don't go from the assumption that I am the world's top expert in all things and everyone else is a total ignoramus. I know for a fact from seeing their work that folk posting here do have very good knowledge of UV mapping and have no need for condescending redundant information.
Gee Roygee, you are a saint my man :)
Most people woulda had Joe on their ignore list by now.
In fact, I think most people have....
:)
I try to take my cue from the best forum citizens, such as yourself and 3dage;-)
Just to digress for a minute, I took a close look at the forum TOS. The lawyer in me asks; "Where is a mod when you need one?" But then the psychologist in me says; "Nope, leave it - it's a great case study in social media interaction"
ignore? Never! That is where trolls get their jollies and I'm not in the business of dishing out jollies to trolls.:cheese:
With all due respect, I think that if your sole purpose is to attack others, then you guys might want to do it via Private Message or something.
In any case, for those who are not allergic to information just because it's not included in the thread title, let me put in another plug for the Hexagon UV tools. Including one which I really wish worked, but doesn't seem to, and I'd love to hear from anyone who has successfully got it to work.
It's the Gap Size setting in the UV Unwrapping tool. According to the manual, it's supposed to "define the margin between each UV group by adjusting the Margin value. The weaker the margin value, the closer the UV groups are to each other." Which would be nice to resolve an issue that I assume most of us have experienced in both apps, and that is separate UV meshes being unwrapped so that they are effectively touching each other. Which means that selecting each of those meshes can be troublesome. If you could enter a value that defines how far apart the unwrapped meshes are, selecting could be much easier because you'd have more space between "islands". Unfortunately, after many repeated tries, varying that value seems to have absolutely no effect.
There really doesn't seem to be anything equivalent in Carrara, so if it did (or does) work, I think it would be a big selling point for Hex vs. Carrara. However, I believe if the individual meshes are assigned to different shading domains, both apps have the ability to select which shading domain meshes are displayed in the UV view, so that issue goes away.
In any case, one of the big advantages I've found for the Hex UV tools as opposed to the Carrara UV tools is that, as far as I can tell, Hex provides manipulators when you select UV meshes, while Carrara doesn't. So with Carrara, if you want to select and move/rotate a mesh, it can be very difficult. Often in Carrara you need to click on an individual vertex to move your selection, otherwise you lose the selection. So with a dense mesh, if you miss the vertex by a fraction of a millimeter, your selection drops and you have to re-select. With Hex you have a nice, big, translate/rotate/scale manipulator to operate with.
Z is Y?
that explains a couple of things i wasn't understanding. :)
thanks Wendy!
This demonstration by 3DAge (of course) is very helpful. The two pins on the bottom sides is what I need to try for my custom toon figures. I have been putting the bottom pins along the middle vertical axis. An attempted application is likely to make an appearance in this month's challenge.
.3DAGE said
HI Richard ;)
You always ask the most difficult questions :)
Unfolding a 3D head shape isn't as easy as unfolding a t-shirt, and exactly where you define the seams is probably more important that whether you use Pins or not.
Both Seams and Pins depend on what "you" want to get and how you want to "texture" the model.
For example:
You could define a seam from the back of the neck, across the top of the head and down the nose to the front of the neck, which would give you a Split with a left and right side of the head. or you could define a seam from the back of the neck to the top of the head, and set a couple of Pins (one on either side of the neck) (see pic) which would give you a single unwrapped head.
For a Clothing item, like a t-shirt or trousers (pants) the best idea is to follow the seams you would find on a real garment.
for example,. A T-Shirt, would have two panels (front and back) with seams at the sides, and at the top where the two panels would connect. (see pic2)
If you need pins they would be at the top or bottom depending on what you want.
Or,. you could define the Arms of a shirt as separate sections with a seam to unwrap them, so, it's not a simple question to answer, and one method is as valid as another.
Much depends on the mesh and how you want to split that, and whether you want a single panel or different sections.
Nah, still getting a mess when unfolding a head.
Try putting a seam around the face, under the jaw and something leading to the ears so that the backs of the ears can have seams too. There's just too much warped curvature to unfold neatly into a sheet.
I've actually got some pretty decent tutorials in my UV Unwrapping thread that help with all of this.
One problem that I'm seeing with this particular example is that the edges seem to run vertically through, rather than forming loops. It's these loops that help the whole process.
My Buddy, Garstor, is really getting into UV Unwrapping and has a pretty cool video here
Hi Dart, thanks for the links. Have been following that threa and Garstor's tutorials. In this case, the head is separated from the body by seams, so the ears etc that you mention are not the issue.
What I have found works best for me is to use seams to cut the face from the head, and lay the face down separately. That is how some Daz figures are done. Here is the same model using this method. I am not done, but it is a significant improvement (although still frustrating).
I put seams around the face, and seams looped around the open mouth and eye holes.
I put seams around the neck.
I put seams around the shoulders and wrists. I put seams around the thighs and ankles.
I put seams to try to separate the tops and bottoms of the hands and feet.
In the first unfold, everything is really small.
The face is OK, but will need a little work. I resize and move to the top of the uvmap.
I then arrange the islands to roughly correspond to the torso and limbs.
I then went through and corrected a few cases of overlapping vertexes.
** I have not attempted to fix the scale of the legs, etc., ***
I applied a checker procedural shader and did a test render. You cans see the scale issue in the thighs.
OK, still lots of problems, but I am pretty sure all the cases of overlap have been fixed. I think I could 3DPaint this successfully as it is, but I will save now then come back later and try to fix the scale issues.
.