Autodesk Remake ---> Quad OBJ ---> A:M model

[rijklau]

Hi all, wonder if any one posted this before, or is this the right place to do it.

 

My job requires working with 3D sculptors who worked in ZBrush and Freeform and my duty is to provide the necessary poses for them to base on for sculpting, and A:M is of course my choice for doing the poses.

 

It was always a problem for me however to get some necessary models form them back into AM as a decent model rather than props. Today I seem to have figured out a way using Autodesk Remake:
https://remake.autodesk.com/about

 

Remake allows me to import a high density STL file

 

And I can reduce the polygon size dramatically

 

Check the file for errors

 

and then export to OBJ(Quads)

 

Using the default import OBJ plugin in A:M, I can import the OBJ with excellent result, nearly all patches as quad

 

Hope this is useful to any one who wants to convert triangular meshes into A:M

 

Rijk

 

 

[Rodney]

That (resulting) mesh looks quite promising... very dense... but promising.

 

Thanks for sharing your findings.

[rijklau]

That (resulting) mesh looks quite promising... very dense... but promising.

 

Thanks for sharing your findings.

 

Rodney, the density of the mesh depends on how much detail you want to keep from the original STL. The head sculpt was originally 48XXX triangles and I reduced it to 10000. If needed I can reduce it to 1000 triangles which in theory will give you a mesh with 500 patches. But then a lot of detail would be lost. It really depends on what you need the final mesh for.

 

Rijk

[Rodney]

Thanks for the follow up.

I can almost see where exporting to multiple 'resolutions' and then stitching parts together might create some form of 'optimal' density; high density where detail is needed and lower density where it isn't. Of course that would lead to certain requests for some utility to auto-hook/auto-stitch those higher density meshes into the low not to mention a need for means of easily separating a mesh at optimum locations where 'rough terrain' transitions to smooth. This makes me think of some A:M code that asks an 'isflat" query on splines/patches. I suppose a threshold could then be set to determine which surfaces where flat (little detail) and save those to one mesh with the remainder saved to another. Sorry... mind wandering.

 

It really depends on what you need the final mesh for.

 

Most definitely. And I can readily see where the higher density meshes would be useful for closeup and for creating image maps for use with lower density derivatives.

This reminds me of discussions here in the forum with Yves Poissant related to gamma settings for imagery and how linear color space is ideal up until the point of departure where the image must be displayed on some device. Changes in gamma must be considered relative to that device. This makes me wonder all the more if there is some equivalent to linear space in the 3D world of meshes... and I find myself thinking of the elegance and resolution independence of splines and patches. My mind drifts further but I think I had better stop there before I hurt myself.

 

It's nice to know tools are available to serve the purpose if so needed.

 

Also, if you haven't investigated Nemyax's Blender plugins that convert back and forth from A:M to Blender that might be worth looking into.

[rijklau]

Also, if you haven't investigated Nemyax's Blender plugins that convert back and forth from A:M to Blender that might be worth looking into.

 

Actually I have. And I use it at home for my own projects. Unfortunately at work sculptors only use ZBrush and Freeform, and engineers used UG or Solidworks. The only way to communicate with them is either STL or OBJ or parasolid.

[Fuchur]

Hey Rijklau,

 

very promising... could you try it with lets say 2.000 patches or somethinge like that?

I'd be very interested to see, how well it is done and what it can do there .

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[rijklau]

Hey Rijklau,

 

very promising... could you try it with lets say 2.000 patches or somethinge like that?

I'd be very interested to see, how well it is done and what it can do there .

 

See you

*Fuchur*

 

I did some experiment trying to reduce the poly of the original STL. Somehow remake seems to use a constant density to create the Quad OBJ file no matter how many polys the original STL has.

 

 

The final patch count is always around 10K. There might be some hidden options to set the mesh density in the "Advance Option" in the export panel which require subscription.

 

Rijk

[Rodney]

I don't know anything about Remake but...

 

You may want to check to see if there is a setting to output patches linearly.

The outputs you've posted appear to be bicubic.

 

Edit: I see you've already considered this but cannot confirm. Perhaps someone else with access can:

There might be some hidden options to set the mesh density in the "Advance Option" in the export panel which require subscription

 

.

 

There are benefits to both but going the bicubic route is automatically going to increase density.

I suppose the gain is uniformity.

 

Here's an example of the two from OpenSubdiv documentation:

 

 

(The attachment may have more to do with texturing than modeling but some aspects are still applicable)

[rijklau]

I don't know anything about Remake but...

 

You may want to check to see if there is a setting to output patches linearly.

The outputs you've posted appear to be bicubic.

 

There are benefits to both but going the bicubic route is automatically going to increase density.

I suppose the gain is uniformity.

 

Here's an example of the two from OpenSubdiv documentation:

 

 

(The attachment may have more to do with texturing than modeling but some aspects are still applicable)

 

So far I cannot find any setting in the free version of Remake during export so I can go no further than that. At least this process allows me to get a very decent model into AM to work with. Much better than previously a triangulated mesh or a prop.

[Rodney]

Much better than previously a triangulated mesh or a prop.

 

I'll say. Trying to work with imports made with tris has always made me want to hit myself over the head repeatedly with a very heavy hammer.

 

Check to see if your clients/employer will fund your use of the full program (one time purchase).

It is in their best interest and the worst they can say is 'no'.

[itsjustme]

Have you tried to use ZBrush to retopo the mesh? ZRemesher may help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7BYTbUIM5I

[rijklau]

Have you tried to use ZBrush to retopo the mesh? ZRemesher may help: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7BYTbUIM5I

Thanks for the suggestion. Will look into that later.

[John Bigboote]

https://www.mixamo.com/decimator

 

Here is another reducer from mixamo (adobe?) called the decimator, havent tried it- just saw it.

https://www.mixamo.com/decimator

 

Here is another reducer from mixamo (adobe?) called the decimator, havent tried it- just saw it.

[pixelplucker]

Remake looks promising, have to give that a try. I usually convert quad models into nurb solids for 3d printing.

[pixelplucker]

Maybe I'm missing something? Carefully looking at the half dozen buttons there doesn't seem to be any tri to quad conversion in this?

Good news is the uninstaller seemed to work better than the installer

[pixelplucker]

After further reading on forums I found that the obj quad conversion is only on export. So basically there is no low level control. You would be better off with 3d coat. They do have a Steam version for less money if that is an issue.