I wouldn't recommend it. There is a technical issue with the metalness maps. When transitioning from a metal to a dark no metal you get a halo around the edge of the transition. Reducing the resolution will just make that issue worse. You can however combine say gloss, metalness, and AO into one map. Each taking up an RGB channel.
I think I've read somewhere about that halo but didn't knew that was related to transition areas, thanks.
actually , i just found the solution while trying to prepare the scene and remove unnecessary stuff to zip it up and upload. (slow upload , so wanted to keep it as small as possible)
When i had only the fibres left and the artifacts remained , i also started removing parts from the material I wasn't using , Surface - normal map was active because it was was still the default mat , but no map was loaded so I didn't think much of it, I put it on "none" anywya and the artifacts went away. So it was definitely the surface shader causing it.
I also tried the import into cinema4d and export again, but that didn't help.
however , here's the marmoset file and the fibers2.obj if you'd still like to find out why it happens. As for me , it's not really a problem anymore , i will hardly ever need normal map on fiber meshes. I exagerated the bloom size ; because the smaller bloom size , the smaller the artifacts.
Depth of field works too, to get the artifacts to show up.
Just wanted to give an update here, we fixed this bug with our internal build so it should be fixed in the next update (though you will need to re-import your mesh).
The cause was zero-length vertex normals being generated from degenerate (also zero-length) edges in the mesh's triangles. Looking at the mesh, it looks like it had been decimated to the point where polygons were merged together until they the shape was a line and no longer a triangle, pulling back on the decimation amount should fix this (toolbag can handle a very high number of triangles).
Just wanted to give an update here, we fixed this bug with our internal build so it should be fixed in the next update (though you will need to re-import your mesh).
The cause was zero-length vertex normals being generated from degenerate (also zero-length) edges in the mesh's triangles. Looking at the mesh, it looks like it had been decimated to the point where polygons were merged together until they the shape was a line and no longer a triangle, pulling back on the decimation amount should fix this (toolbag can handle a very high number of triangles).
oh ok , I believe I did not edit (groom brushes) the fibres manually at all from zbrush, so they must have been generated in that state right from the fibres option. Tbh , I was already impressed that toolbag loaded them
Any opinion about Oren Nayar and if it will be implemented in TB2 (or any other kind of Diffuse math)? Or is it simply not 'functional' enough to be inserted at this point?
Oren Nayar is a possibility, it's more a question of implementation though. Typically you only use it when there is no specular present, how would you like to see it implemented?
1. would be nice, if you can pack the entire scene into one "exe" file and carry it arround. (like i want to share it with firends/clients or store a folio piece somewehre)
2. Would be nice, if you can "unpack" this scene and get the meshes, and textures in one folder back
3. if viewing/unpacking could be password protected - like you can only view and rotate everything but could only get to the files/settings/materials via pw ?
1. would be nice, if you can pack the entire scene into one "exe" file and carry it arround. (like i want to share it with firends/clients or store a folio peace somewehre)
That would be really cool. Or even the ability to export a turntable as an interactive turntable. So, you drag, and it cycles through the images.
Oren Nayar is a possibility, it's more a question of implementation though. Typically you only use it when there is no specular present, how would you like to see it implemented?
No real POV here, I was just curious since many people are all about fancy stuff and I have seen more then a few 'revamped' materials (like those of Mental Ray Skin for example) which got their own community Oren Nayar implemented in the code to help 'disperse' the scatter effect from looking too homogenized or hard cut (in the case of skin penumbra diffusion).
Again, nothing serious, was just curious if there was any value in it (especially since certain white papers from places like Epic) didn't implement Oren Nayar due and instead implemented some other diffuse therm.
Make sure that you turn Isoline Display off before you export/triangulate. If you triangulate with isoline display on Max does what Max does best and makes a mess.
I'm having some trouble with Marmoset Toolbag 2 (nothing major). I can't seem to get it to assign automatically to the cavity map output in Marmoset Toolbag 2 (I'm using 2.04)
I've tried using the curvature output in Substance Designer (I'm using 4.3.1) and I know I can export a curvature map (or ambient occlusion map with levels adjustment) as a separate map but that seems clunky (this is what i've had to do)
I also tried to make my own output but that failed miserably as well lol. The curvature output seemed to override my diffuse (albedo) output in Toolbag2??
I'm quite stumped by this. Any help would be awesome! Thanks
Toolbag2 sets AO and Cavity maps to multiply over the top of the layers they're on, when you multiply by black you get a black result.
The AO/Cavity inputs are designed to be used very subtly, if at all. As in practice you want to have as little static/baked lighting in your uv space.
I thought that was the case, but I think there's something either I'm doing wrong or that isn't working properly because even if I use a completely white map everything turns black
I thought that was the case, but I think there's something either I'm doing wrong or that isn't working properly because even if I use a completely white map everything turns black
the only time i saw this was when i had a black alpha channel in the AO texture and the channel input in toolbag2 was set to A (alpha).
if that is not the case with you, it could be a graphics card issue.
Ok, now I've screwed it. I updated my graphic card drivers and there was some open GL error and now even the default material is completely black. Please help!
could you do me a favor Cuvey, and email support@marmoset.co detailing what you've just posted, but also attaching the log file from marmoset.
the best way to make sure your log file has captured the error is to do the following:
1. open toolbag, and make sure the material is "black" as you describe.
2. go to help > dev > view log.
3. in the log file, go to file > save as > save it as "log.txt" somewhere on your desktop.
4. attach that file to your email.
could you do me a favor Cuvey, and email support@marmoset.co detailing what you've just posted, but also attaching the log file from marmoset.
the best way to make sure your log file has captured the error is to do the following:
1. open toolbag, and make sure the material is "black" as you describe.
2. go to help > dev > view log.
3. in the log file, go to file > save as > save it as "log.txt" somewhere on your desktop.
4. attach that file to your email.
I had just finished writing the mail when I saw the update thing and now it works fine. Do you think I should send it anyway?
Not specifically related to Toolbag 2, but I was wondering which resolution the Metalness Map could be used in relation to the other maps. Since it contains mostly black and white values could you get away with reducing the map's resolution and still achieve decent quality or would be advised to make it the same size as other maps?
It depends on the content really, there is an easy way to test though. Click on the magnify glass next to your texture to pop up the image preview, then adjust the mip bias slider to see how the texture looks at lower resolutions/mips. Or you can just resize the texture in PS and load it up. Save it as a copy, and make a duplicate of your material so you can toggle between the two.
don`t know where to put featurerequest so i`ll just do it in here. -Meshes that have the ability to update once the obj/fbx is updated. -meshgroup properties that control all of the submeshes (like a group toggle for cast shadow and cull backfaces) -a searchable wiki with all features discussed in detail
Hey guys, quick question. Any opinion about Oren Nayar and if it will be implemented in TB2 (or any other kind of Diffuse math)? Or is it simply not 'functional' enough to be inserted at this point? Cheers.
Like Lee says if there is a compelling use case we will consider it, the shader system is very modular so it should be feasible to plop in Oren Nayar, we just need to know how/why people want to use it.
No real POV here, I was just curious since many people are all about fancy stuff and I have seen more then a few 'revamped' materials (like those of Mental Ray Skin for example) which got their own community Oren Nayar implemented in the code to help 'disperse' the scatter effect from looking too homogenized or hard cut (in the case of skin penumbra diffusion). Again, nothing serious, was just curious if there was any value in it (especially since certain white papers from places like Epic) didn't implement Oren Nayar due and instead implemented some other diffuse therm.
Well, we’re doing a bunch of our own diffusion stuff for skin, so not sure if there would be much of a benefit in that case, but I can ask the guys here.
heyho - some suggestions: 1. would be nice, if you can pack the entire scene into one "exe" file and carry it arround. (like i want to share it with firends/clients or store a folio piece somewehre) 2. Would be nice, if you can "unpack" this scene and get the meshes, and textures in one folder back 3. if viewing/unpacking could be password protected - like you can only view and rotate everything but could only get to the files/settings/materials via pw ?
sorry if this has been brought up before but when I bring in a mesh that's been turbo smoothed, the wires are messed up. Is there a easy fix?
Could you please post screenshots of the issue? And upload the mesh in question (obj/fbx) as well as the scene file so I can take a look at it? Thanks.
hey guys I'm having some trouble with Marmoset Toolbag 2 (nothing major). I can't seem to get it to assign automatically to the cavity map output in Marmoset Toolbag 2 (I'm using 2.04) I've tried using the curvature output in Substance Designer (I'm using 4.3.1) and I know I can export a curvature map (or ambient occlusion map with levels adjustment) as a separate map but that seems clunky (this is what i've had to do) I also tried to make my own output but that failed miserably as well lol. The curvature output seemed to override my diffuse (albedo) output in Toolbag2?? I'm quite stumped by this. Any help would be awesome! Thanks
Yes, so currently we do not support a cavity input with substance designer content. So you will have to save out a map for that and load it into the cavity map slot manually. Do you know if SD has a standard cavity type output? If so it shouldn’t be too hard for us to support this.
Nope, I don't have a black alpha. In fact, the moment I add an AO everything turns black even if I don't choose a map Should I update my graphic card drivers? I've got an Nvidia GeForce GT 240 and so far I've never had a problem :S
Ok, now I've screwed it. I updated my graphic card drivers and there was some open GL error and now even the default material is completely black. Please help!
You could try rolling back your drivers, or perhaps swap out a different card if you have one available. While the 240 should technically support all of the DX10 features required to run Toolbag, it is really on the low end, and performance may be poor with more complex meshes.
I had just finished writing the mail when I saw the update thing and now it works fine. Do you think I should send it anyway?
So the issue is fixed then? Do you mean you solved the issue by refreshing the texture (as in, you had made changes to it, and updated it, and now it works?). Or do you mean you updated to the lastest version of TB? Just curious in case other people have a similar problem.
You could try rolling back your drivers, or perhaps swap out a different card if you have one available. While the 240 should technically support all of the DX10 features required to run Toolbag, it is really on the low end, and performance may be poor with more complex meshes.
That's what I did and the original problem returned. I know it's an old card, but so far it has managed pretty complex scenes in other programs without problems
So the issue is fixed then? Do you mean you solved the issue by refreshing the texture (as in, you had made changes to it, and updated it, and now it works?). Or do you mean you updated to the lastest version of TB?
Just curious in case other people have a similar problem.
Noob question, but is it still possible to create a non PBR in Marmoset 2.0? I was wondering whether I should stick with an older version of Marmoset if I wanted to render models that use diffuses with baked AO, etc...
Noob question, but is it still possible to create a non PBR in Marmoset 2.0? I was wondering whether I should stick with an older version of Marmoset if I wanted to render models that use diffuses with baked AO, etc...
It should be absolutely fine in Marmoset 2. Just load in the maps, and it should look fine. If you use a specular map and a gloss map, and you're getting results different than what you'd expect, you can toggle off "energy conservation" in the specular settings.
The big difference, really, with PBR as opposed to non PBR is, A: Energy Conserving specular (the rougher the highlight, the weaker. It doesn't reflect more light than it receives), B: As the specular gets more intense, the diffuse gets darker. and C: Better shader quality in general.
Cool, ty. My main concern was that I could be creating lighting issues even tho things look "fine" in the viewport.
Also just wanted to get confirmation on something you mentioned. The differences that you mention between PBR and non PBR are non existent when you toggle off specular energy conservation?
Also just wanted to get confirmation on something you mentioned. The differences that you mention between PBR and non PBR are non existent when you toggle off specular energy conservation?
Yeah, Andrew is on point here. If you turn off energy conservation, TB2's renderer will act a lot like TB1's. Theres a few more technical things like Fresnel behavior, but you can control Fresnel in a non-pbr way with the blinn-phong shader as well.
Overall it won't be drastically different, what most people probably don't realize is that with Toolbag 1, we were already doing a lot of the important stuff behind the scenes for PBR style workflows, mainly image based lighting with blurred cubemap reflections based on gloss/roughness.
A large part of PBR is the art content as well. If you're not loading logical/calibrated content into a PBR system, its not really PBR anymore. Art content using sound values and not eye-balled values is a big part of PBR workflows. However, if you're after a stylized look or something like that, you can easily set up non-pbr shaders in TB2 as well.
Thank you for your answers! Also, would it be recommended to use any of the Dota options for color, diffusion, specular, etc... for achieving a more "accurate" non-PBR shader within TB2?
Not sure if this has been discussed before, but I'll throw it out there anyway.
Is there currently a way, or would it be possible to add a new feature, that would let me transfer materials between scenes?
If I've got some sort of really sweet lighting setup in one scene and a super awesome material ready to go in another, I'd really love to be able to import a file that contains all the material settings so I don't have to fiddle with sliders and finding textures and stuff.
Not sure if this has been discussed before, but I'll throw it out there anyway.
Is there currently a way, or would it be possible to add a new feature, that would let me transfer materials between scenes?
If I've got some sort of really sweet lighting setup in one scene and a super awesome material ready to go in another, I'd really love to be able to import a file that contains all the material settings so I don't have to fiddle with sliders and finding textures and stuff.
You can export materials 1 by 1, but there isn't a way to merge scenes or anything though. Click the dropdown next to Duplicate in the material palette to import/export/load presets.
You can export materials 1 by 1, but there isn't a way to merge scenes or anything though. Click the dropdown next to Duplicate in the material palette to import/export/load presets.
I just wanted some feedback because I want it to look as good as possible (and in the Pimping & Previews thread people just ignore you)I know it has some seams, I still have to fix them
Although I'm also here because I'm having a slight problem.
Why do I get those weird shadows behind his glasses? Have I done something wrong?
Toolbag 2.0 doesn't seem to import Tangents and Binormals via FBX, can you add that to the wishlist?
It does actually, if tangents and binormals are detected it should load them up by default. When this happens the per-mesh tangent space setting shows up as blank I believe, but if you change it to something(maya, max, etc) else it clears it and you have to re-import the file to get the explicit tangents back.
If that isn't happening for you, please upload a test mesh and I'll look into it. Also as suggested by cptSwing, if you're using one of the standard tangent spaces/bakers that we support, that will likely give you the highest quality results.
Sorry, here's a close up. The shadows behind his glasses are... well, broken S:
Glad you like it ^^
That does indeed look odd, a couple things to try:
A. Turn off contact refinement on the light that is casting the shadow
B. Turn on high quality shadows in the render tab
If that doesn't help, please upload your scene and textures and I will have a look at it. (Obj/fbx for the mesh too)
As far as feedback goes, try posting your own thread in pimping, the WAYWO thread isn't a place for feedback so much as its just a stream of... what people are working on.
That does indeed look odd, a couple things to try:
A. Turn off contact refinement on the light that is casting the shadow
B. Turn on high quality shadows in the render tab
If that doesn't help, please upload your scene and textures and I will have a look at it. (Obj/fbx for the mesh too)
As far as feedback goes, try posting your own thread in pimping, the WAYWO thread isn't a place for feedback so much as its just a stream of... what people are working on.
You're right, if I turn off contact refinement it looks way better. Still not perfect, even with high quality shadows, but now it looks decent at least
Yeah, I'll try that. So far nobody ever answered one of my posts, that's why I don't do it anymore, but I'll try nonetheless
It does actually, if tangents and binormals are detected it should load them up by default. When this happens the per-mesh tangent space setting shows up as blank I believe, but if you change it to something(maya, max, etc) else it clears it and you have to re-import the file to get the explicit tangents back.
Here are the files: http://www.firedrive.com/file/B6349D8B15607470
includes low,high,cage and normal map baked in Xnormal with X+,Y+,Z+(I assume toolbag 2.0 is OpenGL base on the PC?).
If that isn't happening for you, please upload a test mesh and I'll look into it. Also as suggested by cptSwing, if you're using one of the standard tangent spaces/bakers that we support, that will likely give you the highest quality results.
Here is another cube FBX file exported with 1 smoothing group only(no tangents and binormals) Baked in Xnormal(X+,Y+,Z+), Xnormal tangent space set in ToolBag 2:
You're right, if I turn off contact refinement it looks way better. Still not perfect, even with high quality shadows, but now it looks decent at least
Yeah, I'll try that. So far nobody ever answered one of my posts, that's why I don't do it anymore, but I'll try nonetheless
Ok cool, glad that helped.
As far as posting, just keep at it, post updates as you work, eventually someone will post. Its a little unfortunately but there tends to be a bit of a curve, really bad or really good work gets a lot of attention, while average-good work doesn't get much.
Here are the files: http://www.firedrive.com/file/B6349D8B15607470
includes low,high,cage and normal map baked in Xnormal with X+,Y+,Z+(I assume toolbag 2.0 is OpenGL base on the PC?).
Thanks for the files.
A. Mesh resmoothed in Maya 2008 and baked there as well, with Maya TS (looks perfect)
B. Mesh imported with the tangents/normals in the file
C. Same as B but set to XN tangent space
I'm getting similar results to you when importing into UE4, so I will have our guys look into this further.
Here is another cube FBX file exported with 1 smoothing group only(no tangents and binormals) Baked in Xnormal(X+,Y+,Z+), Xnormal tangent space set in ToolBag 2:
Replies
I think I've read somewhere about that halo but didn't knew that was related to transition areas, thanks.
Just wanted to give an update here, we fixed this bug with our internal build so it should be fixed in the next update (though you will need to re-import your mesh).
The cause was zero-length vertex normals being generated from degenerate (also zero-length) edges in the mesh's triangles. Looking at the mesh, it looks like it had been decimated to the point where polygons were merged together until they the shape was a line and no longer a triangle, pulling back on the decimation amount should fix this (toolbag can handle a very high number of triangles).
oh ok , I believe I did not edit (groom brushes) the fibres manually at all from zbrush, so they must have been generated in that state right from the fibres option. Tbh , I was already impressed that toolbag loaded them
-Meshes that have the ability to update once the obj/fbx is updated.
-meshgroup properties that control all of the submeshes (like a group toggle for cast shadow and cull backfaces)
-a searchable wiki with all features discussed in detail
Any opinion about Oren Nayar and if it will be implemented in TB2 (or any other kind of Diffuse math)? Or is it simply not 'functional' enough to be inserted at this point?
Cheers.
some suggestions:
1. would be nice, if you can pack the entire scene into one "exe" file and carry it arround. (like i want to share it with firends/clients or store a folio piece somewehre)
2. Would be nice, if you can "unpack" this scene and get the meshes, and textures in one folder back
3. if viewing/unpacking could be password protected - like you can only view and rotate everything but could only get to the files/settings/materials via pw ?
That would be really cool. Or even the ability to export a turntable as an interactive turntable. So, you drag, and it cycles through the images.
Again, nothing serious, was just curious if there was any value in it (especially since certain white papers from places like Epic) didn't implement Oren Nayar due and instead implemented some other diffuse therm.
I'm having some trouble with Marmoset Toolbag 2 (nothing major). I can't seem to get it to assign automatically to the cavity map output in Marmoset Toolbag 2 (I'm using 2.04)
I've tried using the curvature output in Substance Designer (I'm using 4.3.1) and I know I can export a curvature map (or ambient occlusion map with levels adjustment) as a separate map but that seems clunky (this is what i've had to do)
I also tried to make my own output but that failed miserably as well lol. The curvature output seemed to override my diffuse (albedo) output in Toolbag2??
I'm quite stumped by this. Any help would be awesome! Thanks
I thought that was the case, but I think there's something either I'm doing wrong or that isn't working properly because even if I use a completely white map everything turns black
the only time i saw this was when i had a black alpha channel in the AO texture and the channel input in toolbag2 was set to A (alpha).
if that is not the case with you, it could be a graphics card issue.
Nope, I don't have a black alpha. In fact, the moment I add an AO everything turns black even if I don't choose a map
Should I update my graphic card drivers? I've got an Nvidia GeForce GT 240 and so far I've never had a problem :S
the best way to make sure your log file has captured the error is to do the following:
1. open toolbag, and make sure the material is "black" as you describe.
2. go to help > dev > view log.
3. in the log file, go to file > save as > save it as "log.txt" somewhere on your desktop.
4. attach that file to your email.
I had just finished writing the mail when I saw the update thing and now it works fine. Do you think I should send it anyway?
Sure, I'll send it right now. Thanks a lot for the help
It depends on the content really, there is an easy way to test though. Click on the magnify glass next to your texture to pop up the image preview, then adjust the mip bias slider to see how the texture looks at lower resolutions/mips.
Or you can just resize the texture in PS and load it up. Save it as a copy, and make a duplicate of your material so you can toggle between the two.
Thanks for the feedback.
Like Lee says if there is a compelling use case we will consider it, the shader system is very modular so it should be feasible to plop in Oren Nayar, we just need to know how/why people want to use it.
Well, we’re doing a bunch of our own diffusion stuff for skin, so not sure if there would be much of a benefit in that case, but I can ask the guys here.
Thanks for the suggestions.
Could you please post screenshots of the issue? And upload the mesh in question (obj/fbx) as well as the scene file so I can take a look at it? Thanks.
Yes, so currently we do not support a cavity input with substance designer content. So you will have to save out a map for that and load it into the cavity map slot manually.
Do you know if SD has a standard cavity type output? If so it shouldn’t be too hard for us to support this.
You could try rolling back your drivers, or perhaps swap out a different card if you have one available. While the 240 should technically support all of the DX10 features required to run Toolbag, it is really on the low end, and performance may be poor with more complex meshes.
So the issue is fixed then? Do you mean you solved the issue by refreshing the texture (as in, you had made changes to it, and updated it, and now it works?). Or do you mean you updated to the lastest version of TB?
Just curious in case other people have a similar problem.
That's what I did and the original problem returned. I know it's an old card, but so far it has managed pretty complex scenes in other programs without problems
I fixed it updating TB from 2.02 to 2.04
[vv]96853136[/vv]
Either way, great job as always!
It should be absolutely fine in Marmoset 2. Just load in the maps, and it should look fine. If you use a specular map and a gloss map, and you're getting results different than what you'd expect, you can toggle off "energy conservation" in the specular settings.
The big difference, really, with PBR as opposed to non PBR is, A: Energy Conserving specular (the rougher the highlight, the weaker. It doesn't reflect more light than it receives), B: As the specular gets more intense, the diffuse gets darker. and C: Better shader quality in general.
Also just wanted to get confirmation on something you mentioned. The differences that you mention between PBR and non PBR are non existent when you toggle off specular energy conservation?
Yep!
Overall it won't be drastically different, what most people probably don't realize is that with Toolbag 1, we were already doing a lot of the important stuff behind the scenes for PBR style workflows, mainly image based lighting with blurred cubemap reflections based on gloss/roughness.
A large part of PBR is the art content as well. If you're not loading logical/calibrated content into a PBR system, its not really PBR anymore. Art content using sound values and not eye-balled values is a big part of PBR workflows. However, if you're after a stylized look or something like that, you can easily set up non-pbr shaders in TB2 as well.
seriously, if you want to make things "non=PBR", just keep making them the way you always have, and turn off energy conservation.
Is there currently a way, or would it be possible to add a new feature, that would let me transfer materials between scenes?
If I've got some sort of really sweet lighting setup in one scene and a super awesome material ready to go in another, I'd really love to be able to import a file that contains all the material settings so I don't have to fiddle with sliders and finding textures and stuff.
Animated water with refraction and all of that? It isn't really possible atm.
You can export materials 1 by 1, but there isn't a way to merge scenes or anything though. Click the dropdown next to Duplicate in the material palette to import/export/load presets.
Ah, nice. I never noticed that before.
I just wanted some feedback because I want it to look as good as possible (and in the Pimping & Previews thread people just ignore you)I know it has some seams, I still have to fix them
Although I'm also here because I'm having a slight problem.
Why do I get those weird shadows behind his glasses? Have I done something wrong?
Have you tried setting the appropriate tangent space for each imported mesh?
the tangent space setting helps us define which renderer was used to create the normalmaps, and then sync our renderer with it.
tangents + binormals are "explicit" normals which differ from the averaged normals used in most import/export processes of the mesh itself.
Sorry, here's a close up. The shadows behind his glasses are... well, broken S:
Glad you like it ^^
Well yes. If there's a mismatch between your exported tangents and the setting within T2, it'll look odd, though.
It does actually, if tangents and binormals are detected it should load them up by default. When this happens the per-mesh tangent space setting shows up as blank I believe, but if you change it to something(maya, max, etc) else it clears it and you have to re-import the file to get the explicit tangents back.
If that isn't happening for you, please upload a test mesh and I'll look into it. Also as suggested by cptSwing, if you're using one of the standard tangent spaces/bakers that we support, that will likely give you the highest quality results.
That does indeed look odd, a couple things to try:
A. Turn off contact refinement on the light that is casting the shadow
B. Turn on high quality shadows in the render tab
If that doesn't help, please upload your scene and textures and I will have a look at it. (Obj/fbx for the mesh too)
As far as feedback goes, try posting your own thread in pimping, the WAYWO thread isn't a place for feedback so much as its just a stream of... what people are working on.
You're right, if I turn off contact refinement it looks way better. Still not perfect, even with high quality shadows, but now it looks decent at least
Yeah, I'll try that. So far nobody ever answered one of my posts, that's why I don't do it anymore, but I'll try nonetheless
So it looks pretty good with tangents and binormals, but I wonder if the reflection should be flat on top?
http://s2.postimg.org/ak05rk7nd/Toolbag.jpg
Same file baked in Xnormal with X+,Y-, Z+ in UE4.2 looks great: http://s1.postimg.org/wuyw1r1ny/Normal_not_sync.jpg
Here are the files: http://www.firedrive.com/file/B6349D8B15607470
includes low,high,cage and normal map baked in Xnormal with X+,Y+,Z+(I assume toolbag 2.0 is OpenGL base on the PC?).
Here is another cube FBX file exported with 1 smoothing group only(no tangents and binormals) Baked in Xnormal(X+,Y+,Z+), Xnormal tangent space set in ToolBag 2:
http://s23.postimg.org/lv5fp7z0b/cube_smoothing_group.jpg doesn't seem to be sync?
Here are the files: http://www.firedrive.com/file/200536AB8594F11E
*Both FBX 2014 files are exported from Maya 2015 with there respective settings*
Ok cool, glad that helped.
As far as posting, just keep at it, post updates as you work, eventually someone will post. Its a little unfortunately but there tends to be a bit of a curve, really bad or really good work gets a lot of attention, while average-good work doesn't get much.
Thanks for the files.
A. Mesh resmoothed in Maya 2008 and baked there as well, with Maya TS (looks perfect)
B. Mesh imported with the tangents/normals in the file
C. Same as B but set to XN tangent space
I'm getting similar results to you when importing into UE4, so I will have our guys look into this further.
Yeah, the xnormal/mikktspace support is about 95% there, Max/Maya tangents are perfect thought.