How do you make a road normal map?

JordanN

In my texture, I try to provide high quality surface detail, so the asphalt and road markings are visible upon close up (like this)



Now I need a normal map to go with it for extra depth. I tried playing with invert settings in photoshop and baking it through the xnormal filter but it just comes out ugly. I'm thinking of going into mudbox and using one of the pre-made brushes to create some kind of bumpy material, but it wouldn't be 100% authentic (i.e it wouldn't capture the subtle rock detail or paint chips).

Joshua Stubbles

If you're just looking to convert it, you can also try nDo (Quixel Suite), Knald or Crazybump. You will likely have some editing to do though. You won't get a drop-in with perfect results.

Chimp

You should also consider whether a normal map really makes sense considering it's potential cost. Do you have moving light sources that are going to actually demonstrate the normal map or are you doing it cos it looks good in marmoset or whatever when you move the IBL around?

Joost

Find an asphalt texture without any direct lighting and then use Ndo or knald.
And use a detail texture if you want close-up details.

JordanN

Chimp wrote: »

You should also consider whether a normal map really makes sense considering it's potential cost. Do you have moving light sources that are going to actually demonstrate the normal map or are you doing it cos it looks good in marmoset or whatever when you move the IBL around?

I'm trying to create a next gen (PS4/XBO) scene, so having a normal map is very important.

But I understand where you're coming from though. Even though my scene is small, I cut back on the texture resolution to save performance (from 4k texture to 2k) and will use a lot of tiling/instances. But even with the high resolution, it still looks very flat without a normal map.

leleuxart

Use NDO, Knald, or CrazyBump like others suggested and either smooth the normals in whatever software you pick, or smooth it beforehand. Asphalt is pretty noisy and converting any regular photo to a normal map will be a nightmare. Something like "Surface Blur" in Photoshop works pretty well.

Chimp

Well you missed my point, normal maps don't automatically WORK in all situations - even on the new consoles. They're dependent on certain kinds and uses of lighting. If your lights aren't moving, you aren't going to actually SEE the benefit of normal maps, it's not a performance thing, it's a visuals thing.

Ultimately though, look into B2M.

Quack!

Chimp wrote: »

Well you missed my point, normal maps don't automatically WORK in all situations - even on the new consoles. They're dependent on certain kinds and uses of lighting. If your lights aren't moving, you aren't going to actually SEE the benefit of normal maps, it's not a performance thing, it's a visuals thing.

Ultimately though, look into B2M.

This is not true at all. Static lights affect normal maps plenty and should always be used to sell every surface if it fits within your style.

Also Jordan, pictures of your attempt will help us help.

passerby

Quack depends on how it is implemeanted, valves radiosityNrms use it to great effect with static lighting, but in most engines normals have no effect on baked lighting. but what the normal maps are doing is comparing agaisnt the dot product of the closest light vector to the normal map. Specular is often done the same way so ya the normalmap would effect the specular highlight, but most engines only the closest light is effecting it in that way

Quack!

Sure, baked lighting doesn't use normals often.

But static lights still take the normals and spec into account.

JordanN

Quack! wrote: »

This is not true at all. Static lights affect normal maps plenty and should always be used to sell every surface if it fits within your style.

Also Jordan, pictures of your attempt will help us help.

I actually couldn't be bothered to use crazybump. Tweaking the texture was way too annoying that I rather sculpt it by hand instead.

Here's what I did instead (the normal map was a rush job).

Quack!

The normal map does not look like it is lining up with the detail of your diffuse.

Gravel is actually a prime candidate for crazybump/substancedesigner/ndo2 and I would recommend that.

You could sculpt this for the most accurate normals but that doesn't seem to be working out for you.

When using image normal map generators, think of creating a bunch of layers of high frequency details, low frequency details and in between, then combining them after wards. Try not to get 1 normal map out of 1 image, you want a bunch of normal maps that describe the surfaces details and then have those combined later.

kurt_hectic

Chimp wrote: »

Well you missed my point, normal maps don't automatically WORK in all situations - even on the new consoles. They're dependent on certain kinds and uses of lighting. If your lights aren't moving, you aren't going to actually SEE the benefit of normal maps, it's not a performance thing, it's a visuals thing.

Ultimately though, look into B2M.

Quack! wrote: »

This is not true at all. Static lights affect normal maps plenty and should always be used to sell every surface if it fits within your style.

Also Jordan, pictures of your attempt will help us help.

Standard conversion through CrazyBump and then using output as a normal map could gives nothing more than a visual noise.

Method should depend on:
-game type
-camera type
-output resolution of the screen- for mobile devices it's even not worth to bake so tiny details. More, that will look bad.

example of bad normal map, looks like huge goose bumps + that paint with 5cm of thickness:
http://xbox.create.msdn.com/assets/cms/images/XNA_Racing-Game_02_large.jpg

example of good normal map, not visible at all :
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BYMheY3pw0A/UVoHq4Gn4PI/AAAAAAAABCA/DppY2wAzjm8/s1600/Screen+Shot+2013-04-01+at+8.16.46+PM.png