1. Have the Microfiber Diffusion set up in a way that it would allow dark colors. I'm just thinking it would be useful to be able to make things like believable nylons and stockings which get darker/more opaque closer to their edges:
2. Have a detail slot for every texture. It'd be really cool to be able to add things like high-frequency texture detail and transparency for things like screen doors, sub-pixel metal flake specular for a car paint shader, or a tiling direction map for carbon fiber in the secondary reflection slot.
A little table diorama I am working on inside TB2. Still a WIP. Some of the items are still in a blocky stage like the machete, compass, and makeshift crisco-can-candle. Definitely will add some more small props as well as my molding trim for the wall etc.
1. Have the Microfiber Diffusion set up in a way that it would allow dark colors. I'm just thinking it would be useful to be able to make things like believable nylons and stockings which get darker/more opaque closer to their edges:
slot.
Not sure how the fuzz is handled currently... overlay perhaps? If they had an option to switch it to additive, multiply we could achieve these looks easy breezy
I played a bit with Toolbag 2 yesterday and one thing made me totally crazy. I'm wondering if I'm the only one that is bothered by this : why is there so much noise in the shadows ?
I'm not talking about the grain setting in the camera, but the noise that appears in the shadow maps. The amount of noise visible is insane and in my opinion totally destroy the quality of the rendering. Would it be possible to disable it ?
I tried on two computers to be sure it's not a bug :
Ah ok. Try dragging your manually created light into the sky group, this way it shouldnt rotate when turntable style is set to scene. This should do what you want.
Ok thx. It sort of works now. However when I render out a turntable or playback the corresponding turntable anim, the lights switch back to the initial Sky rotation. I can workaround this by adding a guessed "rotational" offset though. I read something about a Sky rotation reseting bug. I guess this is related?
Thx
I'm wondering if I'm the only one that is bothered by this : why is there so much noise in the shadows ?
I've never seen that on my own models. Do the computers you tested on share any components? It could still be an error, even if it's happening on more than one computer. Maybe your specs aren't high enough? Not sure what difference that makes...
Maybe it as already been suggested but a default setting in the preferences for the setting of the anisotropic filtering for the map you put into your material would be cool.
Like the default tangent space.
I played a bit with Toolbag 2 yesterday and one thing made me totally crazy. I'm wondering if I'm the only one that is bothered by this : why is there so much noise in the shadows ?
I'm not talking about the grain setting in the camera, but the noise that appears in the shadow maps. The amount of noise visible is insane and in my opinion totally destroy the quality of the rendering. Would it be possible to disable it ?
I tried on two computers to be sure it's not a bug :
try putting anti-aliasing to 4x in the render tab, that should help. and then change the resolution to 2:1, which should eliminate it completely.
the shadows are affected by resolution. when taking your final shots, render out at crazy huge sizes, then size down in photoshop and you won't have the problem.
try putting anti-aliasing to 4x in the render tab, that should help. and then change the resolution to 2:1, which should eliminate it completely.
the shadows are affected by resolution. when taking your final shots, render out at crazy huge sizes, then size down in photoshop and you won't have the problem.
... I was not aware that capture resolution had quite such an impact, that'll change how I take my presentation shots then, cheers!
And as far as the OP's noise issue goes, I haven't seen anything even close to that severe even with a res of 1:1 with no AA, so maybe its not just a resolution issue, have you cranked the sharpen effect up super high or something?
Not sure how the fuzz is handled currently... overlay perhaps? If they had an option to switch it to additive, multiply we could achieve these looks easy breezy
Yeah, I'm not sure what kind of math is going on behind the scenes. Seems like some kind of additive fresnel, judging by what happens when you input negative values into the Fuzz slider. Can't say for certain, though.
Being able to switch between different blending modes would be super cool.
try putting anti-aliasing to 4x in the render tab, that should help. and then change the resolution to 2:1, which should eliminate it completely.
the shadows are affected by resolution. when taking your final shots, render out at crazy huge sizes, then size down in photoshop and you won't have the problem.
Thanks for the help, however I already tried those settings. The thing is, I'm not using toolbag only for making pretty things, I use it also for testing the normal maps on my meshes and see if their shading behave correctly.
Unfortunately with the noise it's impossible because everytime you move the lighting the noise bump in your face, making it impossible to track changes correctly. Also performances : Temporal AA is a bit heavy.
I would really like some settings to at least disable the noise...
EQ, I have 8 gb of RAM in my computer. Marmoset doesn't seem to greatly increase strain on the RAM, it hovers around 4.76 GB in use, with or without my loading a high-poly mesh. Closing Marmoset entirely lowers it to around 4.38 GB in use. And CPU usage stays pretty low during the whole process.
This is with Windows Media Player and Chrome open, so nothing particularly greedy. On its own, toolbag uses around 29 mb of RAM, freshly opened. And 366 mb when I'm trying to load a large mesh.
8gb of ram, plenty free when trying to load a model. Nothing else hardware wise I can think of that's out of the ordinary. 2gb vram too. AMD beta drivers (7870), win8 x64..
Ok thanks for the info, this just gets more and more confusing, there really isnt any reason why your system should struggle with this file. Im going to pass it on to our engineers to dissect for now.
Sure, just checked in 2.01 and its been fixed. The features I'm currently missing the most from tb1 are being able to toggle light icons and snap camera. I'd also really like if there were a way to tile textures. Maybe even axis independent, so I could tile just across X for example. Pretty handy in knald for example to check how a texture tiles quickly.
Yeah, tiling is something that will probably make it in for a future update.
It was originally, but after some time, it stopped being default. Zero idea how it wasn't like that by default. Uninstalled then reinstalled, and it's default now.
I was talking to a mate who was using Toolbag, and he ran into the same problem. He thought that, because the preview of the image looked light, turning on sRGB might be more 'correct'. Turns out it was because he turned off Scale and Bias too, and that was stuffing his stuff up completely. BTW, what does the Scale and Bias checkbox do?
The scale and bias checkbox needs to be turned off if you load a float-point HDR normal map. Most people will never need to turn that off.
A suggestion that occurred to me just now. It would be super nice to be able to group materials on the right in a similar fashion to how we group stuff on the left in the scene organizer.
Yeah this is an interesting suggestion, we may look into it if there is a lot of interest.
Also I know it's been stated before but another plus 1 for duplicating things in the scene organizer.
Oh you don't know? Duplicate is in my build here now. lolol
1. Have the Microfiber Diffusion set up in a way that it would allow dark colors. I'm just thinking it would be useful to be able to make things like believable nylons and stockings which get darker/more opaque closer to their edges:
You should be able to do this by entering negative values currently. I did a little test and it seems to work.
Yeah, I'm not sure what kind of math is going on behind the scenes. Seems like some kind of additive fresnel, judging by what happens when you input negative values into the Fuzz slider. Can't say for certain, though.
Being able to switch between different blending modes would be super cool.
Its add, but if you enter a negative value its basically a multiply. Only thing to keep in mind is that it will invert the hue of your color/texture input if you set it to negative values.
2. Have a detail slot for every texture. It'd be really cool to be able to add things like high-frequency texture detail and transparency for things like screen doors, sub-pixel metal flake specular for a car paint shader, or a tiling direction map for carbon fiber in the secondary reflection slot.
Something like this will probably come eventually, if it's via detail maps or a layering system we still have to figure out.
I played a bit with Toolbag 2 yesterday and one thing made me totally crazy. I'm wondering if I'm the only one that is bothered by this : why is there so much noise in the shadows ?
I'm not talking about the grain setting in the camera, but the noise that appears in the shadow maps. The amount of noise visible is insane and in my opinion totally destroy the quality of the rendering. Would it be possible to disable it ? I tried on two computers to be sure it's not a bug :
This looks totally broken and is certainly not typical. So, a few things: First off, the skin shader is scale dependent. Try rescaling your mesh so that it matches the scale of this cube (which is roughly the size of a 2m tall person): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/499159/scalecube.obj Secondly, the skin shader blurs the shadow content, there is a slider for shadow blurring that controls this. The blurred shadows get dithered, in the viewport you may notice some noise, but the multi-sampling on image export should clear it up (similar story for local reflections). If you still cant get it to look better, get me a copy of your scene and textures and Ill take a look.
Ok thx. It sort of works now. However when I render out a turntable or playback the corresponding turntable anim, the lights switch back to the initial Sky rotation. I can workaround this by adding a guessed "rotational" offset though. I read something about a Sky rotation reseting bug. I guess this is related?
the Diff-map like this: Cuz the UV is overlapping the face... any idea guys? P/s: this is not happened in Max or Maya!
What file format are you exporting? Make sure youre exporting mesh normals (not smoothing groups if from max). Toolbag reads the mesh normals saved in the mesh file.
@ monster.insane push one of the overlapping UV sets over one UV tile. Marmoset doesn't handle ovelapping uv's well it creates all kinds of errors.
This should not be the case, TB1 had some issues with overlapping UVs but as far as I am aware those are fixed in TB2. If you have a file where overlapping UVs are causing a problem, please get it to me so we can take a look.
@ EarthQuake - ah my bad just assumed the same issue was there. Just tried and no seam problem I got into the habit of offsetting my UVs with toolbag 1.0 so I had not tried not offsetting in 2.0. Thanks!
Thanks for the help, however I already tried those settings. The thing is, I'm not using toolbag only for making pretty things, I use it also for testing the normal maps on my meshes and see if their shading behave correctly.
Unfortunately with the noise it's impossible because everytime you move the lighting the noise bump in your face, making it impossible to track changes correctly. Also performances : Temporal AA is a bit heavy.
I would really like some settings to at least disable the noise...
In addition to the things I mentioned above about scale, try turning the shadow blur value down, the default may be a bit heavy.
For quick normal map preview you can also apply a standard material (ie: not the skin shader) and you shouldn't see any noise.
What file format are you exporting? Make sure youre exporting mesh normals (not smoothing groups if from max). Toolbag reads the mesh normals saved in the mesh file.
thank you. the format file is obj, and i try to smoothing group in max, and it is smooth all face in TB2. :thumbup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by allaze-eroler Hum I think I misexplain what I wanted to mean : I know where to load the vector displacement but what I mean is that I'm trying to set up from zbrush for to get a perfect vector displacement for marmoset.... Which mean I'm trying to get these perfect sphere stuff...
Originally Posted by EarthQuake
Hi, I just ran the VD diagnostic thing, it looks like #19 from zbrush, and scale center set to 0 set to in marmoset gives the best results.
I also ran the VD diagnostic (geo plane with 48 slots and 48 spheres) in zbrush 4r6 and then opened up the exported .obj file in Marmoset 2. Sphere #7 works with world space maps in marmoset 2 but NONE of the spheres work with tangent space maps. I could never get sphere #19 to work either. No matter what settings I used.
I also tried taking that same VD diagnostic .obj test file into Maya and then back as a .obj and I also tried a .fbx. Same result.
Has anyone gotten zbrush Vector Displacement maps to work in tangent space in marmoset 2.0?
speaking of vector displacement maps i noticed a bug that might explain why you are having so much trouble with what settings to use.
not sure if its in the latest version haven't tested it since 2.0,
anyway load the VD diagnostic file and rotate the enviroment and you should see all spheres moving around all wobbly.
This looks totally broken and is certainly not typical. So, a few things: First off, the skin shader is scale dependent. Try rescaling your mesh so that it matches the scale of this cube (which is roughly the size of a 2m tall person): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/499159/scalecube.obj Secondly, the skin shader blurs the shadow content, there is a slider for shadow blurring that controls this. The blurred shadows get dithered, in the viewport you may notice some noise, but the multi-sampling on image export should clear it up (similar story for local reflections). If you still cant get it to look better, get me a copy of your scene and textures and Ill take a look.
In the Occlusion slot of the material. You'll need a secondary UV channel for it to work properly. You're going to need to use the FBX model format instead of OBJ if you want to retain a second UV channel.
speaking of vector displacement maps i noticed a bug that might explain why you are having so much trouble with what settings to use.
not sure if its in the latest version haven't tested it since 2.0,
anyway load the VD diagnostic file and rotate the enviroment and you should see all spheres moving around all wobbly.
Ok cool, thanks it looks like we've got some work to do here. I've logged the rotation bug and asked about tangent space support. It is correct that we only support world/object space VD maps currently. This should get some love in a future update.
Also check out the Toolbag 1 tutorials, while the apps are very different many of the basic concepts are the same. http://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn
not sure if someone has same problem, but when I export model from max 2012 in obj, in marmoset it looks like one big mess, problem can be solved by adjusting vertex precision to 9 or lower and checking normals optimise checkbox
not sure if someone has same problem, but when I export model from max 2012 in obj, in marmoset it looks like one big mess, problem can be solved by adjusting vertex precision to 9 or lower and checking normals optimise checkbox
Can you get me a copy of that mesh exported both ways so we can have a look? Plus a screenshot of the exact export settings for each, thanks!
Sorry if this has been asked but I couldn't see it anywhere, is there a way to have multiple UV sets? i.e. one for diffuse and another for normal map?
Yes, but currently only for the AO map. You can't have your diffuse and your normal map on different UV sets. This is something we may add in the future.
In the Occlusion slot of the material. You'll need a secondary UV channel for it to work properly. You're going to need to use the FBX model format instead of OBJ if you want to retain a second UV channel.
The AO map can be applied to the secondary UV channel in TB2, however this is not mandatory. If you've got unique uvs for your object, there is no reason to add a second UV channel.
Use the little UV Set drop down to pick the UV channel, 0= base uv set, 1= secondary uv set.
FBX is required though as the OBJ format does not support second UV channels (or I think more accurately, most 3d apps do not save multiple UV channels with OBJs).
hey Joe, i noticed that secondary specular intensity seems to be dependent on the primary specular intensity. if i lower main spec intensity to 0 then the second spec doesnt show at all. is this a bug or by design ?
if i use a metalness map then second spec does not get affected by metalness intensity. the fresnel seems to be working fine and independently.
hey Joe, i noticed that secondary specular intensity seems to be dependent on the primary specular intensity. if i lower main spec intensity to 0 then the second spec doesnt show at all. is this a bug or by design ?
This is by design. How do you like it?
if i use a metalness map then second spec does not get affected by metalness intensity. the fresnel seems to be working fine and independently.
I just checked and this appears to be working as expected. Is there something specific you would expect it to do?
Basically how secondary spec currently works is this:
It pulls the base reflectivity from the reflectivity input texture (specular or metalness map) and also the base settings (none for metalness of course). The secondary reflection/Fresnel settings then act as multipliers on that content.
well i think it works great for the majority of situations but in some cases it take quite a bit of back and forth tweaking of both specs to get them to look just right since second one is dependent on the first.
i was expecting it to be completely independent like the car paint shader in mental ray. but it is ok since it is not a bug.
well i think it works great for the majority of situations but in some cases it take quite a bit of back and forth tweaking of both specs to get them to look just right since second one is dependent on the first.
i was expecting it to be completely independent like the car paint shader in mental ray. but it is ok since it is not a bug.
Ok cool, yeah I think there are probably some improvements we can make there at some point. We also might want to add a dedicated car paint type shader/reflectivity model as well.
I've been playing with the blending modes to try to come up with a way to do grimey glass. Dithered diffusion doesn't really work for glass, as the highlights get all gross. Add blend doesn't really work when you add texture variation, as diffuse is added as blend which = glowy dirt. So my solution? DO BOTH! I duplicated my glass planes, on the first chunk I've added a diffuse only material with dithered blending masked for the grime/dirt. On the second chunk, I've got it set to add blend with the appropriate spec/gloss content. A: No glass B: Dithered diffuse C: Additive Spec B+C E: Additive diffuse+spec for comparison
This shows the difference between the two layer method and simple additive blending a bit better
Started playing around with Substance materials and when using "Metalness Map" it doesn't seem to want to map anything into that slot.
Also, not sure if this is intentional, but if I update a .sbsar in SD4 I have to manually re-load it in Toolbag and then click "Place Textures" for it to update.
Well, since secondary spec can't load unique textures, the best way to get that look is probably the same thing I did with the eyeball example earlier in the thread.
1. Make your undercoat material
2. Duplicate the mesh chunks that you want the car paint shader on
3. Set up a glossy material with additive specular. Add a displacement slot with a grey image and the smallest amount of displacement that pushes it past the base mesh
Works for carbon fiber clear coat type materials too.
A lot of people uses Knald to generate Transmission maps for their models in Marmoset, but maybe they don't know that is possible to do the same in Maya and V-Ray. Here's my tutorial to show how to.
Replies
1. Have the Microfiber Diffusion set up in a way that it would allow dark colors. I'm just thinking it would be useful to be able to make things like believable nylons and stockings which get darker/more opaque closer to their edges:
2. Have a detail slot for every texture. It'd be really cool to be able to add things like high-frequency texture detail and transparency for things like screen doors, sub-pixel metal flake specular for a car paint shader, or a tiling direction map for carbon fiber in the secondary reflection slot.
I'm not talking about the grain setting in the camera, but the noise that appears in the shadow maps. The amount of noise visible is insane and in my opinion totally destroy the quality of the rendering. Would it be possible to disable it ?
I tried on two computers to be sure it's not a bug :
Ok thx. It sort of works now. However when I render out a turntable or playback the corresponding turntable anim, the lights switch back to the initial Sky rotation. I can workaround this by adding a guessed "rotational" offset though. I read something about a Sky rotation reseting bug. I guess this is related?
Thx
I've never seen that on my own models. Do the computers you tested on share any components? It could still be an error, even if it's happening on more than one computer. Maybe your specs aren't high enough? Not sure what difference that makes...
(GTX 460M / GTX 480)
Like the default tangent space.
try putting anti-aliasing to 4x in the render tab, that should help. and then change the resolution to 2:1, which should eliminate it completely.
the shadows are affected by resolution. when taking your final shots, render out at crazy huge sizes, then size down in photoshop and you won't have the problem.
Notice around the collar, and on the lips, i have the same problem as you.
http://i.imgur.com/gCi00k4.png
And then i enable antialiasing (or double resolution) and it goes away.
http://i.imgur.com/Ih9C8gY.png
... I was not aware that capture resolution had quite such an impact, that'll change how I take my presentation shots then, cheers!
And as far as the OP's noise issue goes, I haven't seen anything even close to that severe even with a res of 1:1 with no AA, so maybe its not just a resolution issue, have you cranked the sharpen effect up super high or something?
Kind of looks like that's the culprit to me.
Yeah, I'm not sure what kind of math is going on behind the scenes. Seems like some kind of additive fresnel, judging by what happens when you input negative values into the Fuzz slider. Can't say for certain, though.
Being able to switch between different blending modes would be super cool.
Thanks for the help, however I already tried those settings. The thing is, I'm not using toolbag only for making pretty things, I use it also for testing the normal maps on my meshes and see if their shading behave correctly.
Unfortunately with the noise it's impossible because everytime you move the lighting the noise bump in your face, making it impossible to track changes correctly. Also performances : Temporal AA is a bit heavy.
I would really like some settings to at least disable the noise...
Ok thanks for the info, this just gets more and more confusing, there really isnt any reason why your system should struggle with this file. Im going to pass it on to our engineers to dissect for now.
Yeah, tiling is something that will probably make it in for a future update.
The scale and bias checkbox needs to be turned off if you load a float-point HDR normal map. Most people will never need to turn that off.
Not yet sorry, scaling will likely come in a future update.
Vertex color support is not in yet, youll have to bake it down to a diffuse map for now. GoZ is something we may look into in the future.
Yeah this is an interesting suggestion, we may look into it if there is a lot of interest.
Oh you don't know? Duplicate is in my build here now. lolol
You should be able to do this by entering negative values currently. I did a little test and it seems to work.
Its add, but if you enter a negative value its basically a multiply. Only thing to keep in mind is that it will invert the hue of your color/texture input if you set it to negative values.
Something like this will probably come eventually, if it's via detail maps or a layering system we still have to figure out.
This looks totally broken and is certainly not typical. So, a few things:
First off, the skin shader is scale dependent. Try rescaling your mesh so that it matches the scale of this cube (which is roughly the size of a 2m tall person): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/499159/scalecube.obj
Secondly, the skin shader blurs the shadow content, there is a slider for shadow blurring that controls this. The blurred shadows get dithered, in the viewport you may notice some noise, but the multi-sampling on image export should clear it up (similar story for local reflections).
If you still cant get it to look better, get me a copy of your scene and textures and Ill take a look.
Yeah sorry, there is a bug that snaps the sky rotation when you run a turntable. This is on our bug list, just havent had time to fix it yet.
What file format are you exporting? Make sure youre exporting mesh normals (not smoothing groups if from max). Toolbag reads the mesh normals saved in the mesh file.
This should not be the case, TB1 had some issues with overlapping UVs but as far as I am aware those are fixed in TB2. If you have a file where overlapping UVs are causing a problem, please get it to me so we can take a look.
In addition to the things I mentioned above about scale, try turning the shadow blur value down, the default may be a bit heavy.
For quick normal map preview you can also apply a standard material (ie: not the skin shader) and you shouldn't see any noise.
thank you. the format file is obj, and i try to smoothing group in max, and it is smooth all face in TB2. :thumbup:
I also tried taking that same VD diagnostic .obj test file into Maya and then back as a .obj and I also tried a .fbx. Same result.
Has anyone gotten zbrush Vector Displacement maps to work in tangent space in marmoset 2.0?
not sure if its in the latest version haven't tested it since 2.0,
anyway load the VD diagnostic file and rotate the enviroment and you should see all spheres moving around all wobbly.
Thanks a lot for the quick help. The scale of my mesh was definitively the issue here !
Ok cool, thanks it looks like we've got some work to do here. I've logged the rotation bug and asked about tangent space support. It is correct that we only support world/object space VD maps currently. This should get some love in a future update.
There is no help file type documentation yet, but we did put out a quick start guide a few days ago. More tutorials will come in the future as well.
http://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/getting-started
Also check out the Toolbag 1 tutorials, while the apps are very different many of the basic concepts are the same. http://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn
Check out the occlusion module, you can load an AO/Cavity maps there.
Can you get me a copy of that mesh exported both ways so we can have a look? Plus a screenshot of the exact export settings for each, thanks!
Yes, but currently only for the AO map. You can't have your diffuse and your normal map on different UV sets. This is something we may add in the future.
The AO map can be applied to the secondary UV channel in TB2, however this is not mandatory. If you've got unique uvs for your object, there is no reason to add a second UV channel.
Use the little UV Set drop down to pick the UV channel, 0= base uv set, 1= secondary uv set.
FBX is required though as the OBJ format does not support second UV channels (or I think more accurately, most 3d apps do not save multiple UV channels with OBJs).
if i use a metalness map then second spec does not get affected by metalness intensity. the fresnel seems to be working fine and independently.
This is by design. How do you like it?
I just checked and this appears to be working as expected. Is there something specific you would expect it to do?
Basically how secondary spec currently works is this:
It pulls the base reflectivity from the reflectivity input texture (specular or metalness map) and also the base settings (none for metalness of course). The secondary reflection/Fresnel settings then act as multipliers on that content.
i was expecting it to be completely independent like the car paint shader in mental ray. but it is ok since it is not a bug.
Ok cool, yeah I think there are probably some improvements we can make there at some point. We also might want to add a dedicated car paint type shader/reflectivity model as well.
Dithered diffusion doesn't really work for glass, as the highlights get all gross.
Add blend doesn't really work when you add texture variation, as diffuse is added as blend which = glowy dirt.
So my solution? DO BOTH!
I duplicated my glass planes, on the first chunk I've added a diffuse only material with dithered blending masked for the grime/dirt.
On the second chunk, I've got it set to add blend with the appropriate spec/gloss content.
A: No glass
B: Dithered diffuse
C: Additive Spec
E: Additive diffuse+spec for comparison
This shows the difference between the two layer method and simple additive blending a bit better
Big ol gif
Textures
Link to source files: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/499159/divinghelmetcontent03.zip
Polycount should get support for Gfycat embedding and this problem will be a thing of the past.
Here is your gif uploaded to their site and converted to an HTML 5 video:
You can also slow it down, step through frames, reverse it and do other things and its 9.6 times smaller than the original gif.
This would be awesome for polycount.
here is small chart
and here are meshes: (weird is, for second bug you need to load (any) normal map into normal slot, otherwise problem wont occur, also marmo1 did this with same mesh)
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/62830198/forums/marmobug.rar
Also, not sure if this is intentional, but if I update a .sbsar in SD4 I have to manually re-load it in Toolbag and then click "Place Textures" for it to update.
1. Make your undercoat material
2. Duplicate the mesh chunks that you want the car paint shader on
3. Set up a glossy material with additive specular. Add a displacement slot with a grey image and the smallest amount of displacement that pushes it past the base mesh
Works for carbon fiber clear coat type materials too.
[ame="
Having kind of a problem in the demo of toolbag2.
Doing an handpainted piece actually, setup everything so it would look good, but the last concern I'm having is the specular map...
when I load it, brighter values on it are supposed to appear white, like in T1, never got any problem.
Here, it appears dark... what am I missing ? Tried to tweak and mess around with it, still no result
I added a blinn-Phong on the Reflection Tab but it appears greyish, instead of pure white
I want my shiny edges back
Please help ^^