Malo
-
Posts
314 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Malo
-
-
Thank you!
-
Among the strange patches, there is this case in yellow. the subdivision is not done in x16 in AM, it is different from its mirror patch, and there is a bug to the export of this patch, but its subdivision is done.
-
Hello Robert,
Yes, the ideal for exporting triangular patches into polygons would be this topology. Now I doubt that we will not rewrite a polygonal subdivision express for export. But I thought it would be possible to filter its triangles-quads to rewrite them into triangles.Hello Rodney,
The proposal (left back foot) is good to avoid the problem of hooks, only does not solve the problem of triangles-quads. The best solution in this case would be to turn the hook into a CPs for export (see the front left foot). There I had to think about it before, because I have to redo the UVs.
Hooks and triangles are two differents problems.
What is strange to me is that this bad topology in AM is not seen, whereas when we push the creation of weird patches with the hooks, it is seen in general as for the following image.
-
Robcat,
Yes, "f 3/1/3 1/1/1 1/1/1" is not correct. It's a flat triangle, it will not be visible. Fot me their writing lulls the file and does not bring any interest.
The import of AM is a step that is not to do with the subdivision of the patches, however it remains interesting to study how the import interprets the writing of triangle-quads export by AM. if we look at the file export in a text reader, we see that there are only quads.
The model is the same crtl / copy four times in the same file. So the order of writing the triangular patches is not the same. Hence the difference of topology.
It is by modeling the foot of this dog that I noticed this problem:
-
This missing faces it is not a problem of normal inverted, but of interpretation of a triangles written like a quads.
It seems to me that the problem comes from the fact that the three-sided patches are not a triangle but a four-sided patches whose one side is zero. That's why the quad topology focuses on one of the corners and not the center of the patches. The dynamic subdivision of AM does the rest, it eliminates the quads whose volume is almost zero, a flat quad is zero, it eliminates it. on the other hand, if a quad at a null side is volume it is not zero, so it remains. AM only manages quads inside a patch.
Yes it is possible to create an external tool to correct the triangles of files exported by AM, but it seems to me that it is better to correct at the source.
Here is a model where there is a 4-sided and a 3-sided patches, move the CPs for the differentiators.
-
It is true that the export triangles can provide a solution (without correcting the problem of hooks).
The advantages of quads is multiple : a file less heavy to treat, may subdivide for zoom, or to make it more smooth, or to sculpt details over it, or to apply a displacemant map. -
I think as you Nemyax, but I am not sure.
Passing through Wings3D corrects the writing of triangles (without keeping vertices numbers), but does not correct the topology that is internal to AM. Part of the problem of topology does not come only from triangles, but from writing hooks that do not write enough information to know where to attach but try to guess it.
-
Hi, thank you for your answers.
Is the problem not found in the SDK libraries? because the problem is found in the Lwo export.
I doubt that the answer is not as simple as rewrite the line of triangles when exporting because it would have been done for a long time. And I am aware that the interpretation of the patches is a real puzzle, seen the number of non-visible combinations that exists. (even if I would like to hope that it is simpler than I imagine)
Here is another problem related to the export and the three-sided patches. Here are the same three-sided patches, copy 4 times, which gives different topologies.
We can see that sometimes the hook is attached to the wrong side. Is it due to the fact that he is lost to know if he is attached to AB, BC, CD or AA?
-
Good evening everyone,
I ask myself this question for a few years already, without finding a logical answer.
I noticed that the AM export Obj writes the triangles like quads.
That is to say for a triangle ABC, the convention is to write as follows: f A B C
But AM write them: f A B C A, which is the convention of writing quads (f A B C D).
Some programs like Wings3D play them correctly, others like Blender, consider them as bad quads that they ignore, which creates holes and therefore unusable.
I thought this was because the three-sided patches are a variant of the four-sided patches, but I do not understand the usefulness of keeping this writing export that makes it heavier files and that do not make them compatible with any programs.
But seeing changes this done during the past years on the export plugin of obj, without this triangle writing being changed; I tell myself that there is something that I do not know or that I do not see, hence my question: why write triangles as quads?
Thanks in advance for those who will be able to show me the benefits of writing these triangles as well.I ask this question, to know if it would be interesting to request an option to Stephen Gross to correct this problem in the export plugin. Not wanting to post this request if she is stupid. -
You will encounter some problems that are as follows.
AM makes an invisible subdivision in the patches. So either export the patches as polygons or export the invisible polygonal subdivision.
The internal subdivision of AM poses different probems, the writing of bad triangles (a quad whose side is null), The hooks brings openings in the topology. (Do not use an adaptive subdivision, because it will not be only the hooks that will pose this problem and that will be seen in the rendering(displacemant)). The Nemyax plugin corrects this problem by converting the holes into ngones and polygons, and writes the triangles correctly. However, it does not export a subdivided model, and so we change the volume when we apply an external subdivision. There is a way to find an almost equivalent volume in Blender by applying a smooth invert before applying a subdivision. The advantage of this method is that your model has a correct topology that will be rendered correctly. Hope that will help you. -
-
Hello,
There are several ways to export your model. To better answer your wishes, we must ask the following questions: Do you want to export the mesh (subdivided, non-subdivided, triangular), groups, uv, bones, weights, actions?If there is no need for subdivision, the most complete tool is the plugin for Blender created by Nemyax (it imports meshes, bones, weights, uvs, and actions in Blender): https://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=47778&hl=blender
You can then export your model via Blender in Obj or other formats.If there is a need for subdvision, direct exportX: https://www.patchwork3d.de/am-directx-exporter-73-en
There is an addon for Blender to import DirectX format (https://github.com/littleneo/directX_blender) after export your model in Obj or other formats.
-
The splitpatch topology is the same as the Catmull-Clark division but it is true that there is an important difference, splitpatch keeps volume.
If there was a variant of splitpatch that uses Doo Sabin's topology it would be ideal. (maybe it would be worth it to adapt it?)
The only way that I see for now is to export the model subdivide X4 in Obj, import into Blender use the exellent plugin create by Nemyax to subdivide (Make A:M-Friendly copy) and import back into AM in MDL. The problem is that we lose in volume.
-
Beautiful model and good result of cloth simulation!
Looking at the wireframe I get the following question:
It appears that you use the splitpatch plugin (Catmull-Clark subdivision?) to create the cloth. Do subdivisions of triangles and pentagons not pose aesthetic problems (three splines at the same intersection)? Would not the subdivision Doo Sabin give a better result? -
Hello and thank you very much for your informations!
I did not know the trick for the SHIFT key (thank you)
My intention was to use different maps to have a bigger definition in the details and to save the surface to paint so as not to overload the weight of the images.The only solution I found was to isolate a part of the model by erasing everything else. Bake and export. Copy the UV in the XML file export and paste this UV into the XML file of the complete model.
But it's a lot of manipulation -
Hello,
Is there a way to baked surface for a selection and not on the whole object?
-
I use this AM's plugin : https://www.patchwork3d.de/am-directx-exporter-73-de
And I use this blender's addon to import the .x format in Blender : https://github.com/littleneo/directX_blender/wiki
-
Yes I can get the desired result by "the AMXtex DirectX Model (*.X)..." plugin, thanks.
-
There is a way by directX export, groups and Uv are good.
-
Sadly another problem comme with 3DS export : the UV is bad
-
Great, thank you Detbear!
-
good evening,
When I export in Obj format a model with groups, the groups are well exported in the Obj file.
On the other hand, if I apply a UV to the model, the groups disappear in the exported Obj file.
Are there some things specific to do to export UVs and groups in the same Obj file?Thank you in advance for your responses.
-
Hello,Here is a little project, which allows from a 3D model (prop or * .mdl) to automatically build the rotoscopes views in a blank model. (the rotoscopes are not in the dimensions of the original modell, i don't found a solution for that,) : projectA little video to explain how to use it : videoHope that can be usefull for someone.
-
2
-
-
Hi everybody,
good headache!
To avoid adding too many CPs, and not losing too much shape, here are the solutions that come to my mind.
Star = hook. Green square = new CP. Green line = new spline portion. yellow=bias1. a new spline around the pole, to give possibility to hook.
2. use the bias ta keep the shape of the middle spline.
3 and 4 is similair,
Hope that can help.
How to do with expressions to size a bone between two nulls?
in A:M Rigging
Posted
Hello,
Is there anyone who knows how to do with expressions to size a bone between two nulls?
thanks in advance.
Malo:)