Really need help with normal maps
polycounter lvl 3
UPDATE ON POST #7, improvement, but still a few issues.
I just can't seem get this normal map looking okay using just 3DS Max. I feel like im close to solving it but i have literally been stuck on this for weeks. If anyone could walk me through this im having a couple of issue. Im going from 3DS max to Xnormal to EU3 (Chivalry).
First, what are the proper FBX settings for the LP and HP?
For the LP ,according to this from UE4 documentation (which i just now discovered ) the LP should have:
1. Smoothing groups
2. tangents and bi-normals
3. convert deforming dummies to bones
4. Preserve edge orientation (wth is this?)
What about the high poly, which setting should i have checked there??
Below are the settings in question and my result in 3DS MAX using render to texture.
Replies
.max file 6.8MB
Current results in Chivalry editor (UE3)
UVs
High Poly
Low Poly
-First the creasing on the zoomed in portion of the first picture in my second post.
-The seam line along the side of the crossguard in the same pic. Thats two UV islands joining there. I exported the LP with 1 smoothing group using the settings according to UE4 documentation, like in the screenshot in my first post ( except split vertex unchecked )
- The blade body halves look slightly rounded (concave). I made the HP flat which was the goal, but its hard to tell in the veiwport if the turbosmooth perhaps rounded it. Looks flat to me, but its hard to tell on my small 17" 1080p monitor.
-Weird shadowing all over the place.
Should the model that goes into UE3 have one smoothing group?
XNORMAL SETTINGS
HIGH POLY
Exported from 3DS Max using the built in exporter using the UE4 rec settings
Settings checkmarked:
Average normals
ignore per vertex color
LOW POLY
Exported LP and CAGE with same UE4 doc settings for FBX
Both triangulated and identical
LP has one smoothing group
Settings checkmarked:
Use cage
Average normals
Highpoly normals override tangent space[/quote]
BAKING SETTINGS
Closest ray hit: check
ignore backface hits: check
edge padding:6
AA: 4x
UPDATE: I solved issue 2 and the weird shadowing by using another model having all one smoothing group, which i sorta thought this did, but i guess maybe not...
Okay, i realized that the documentation said to have "use exported normals" in Xnormal checked for the LP. I re-baked to much better results, but still have some issues below. I linked to a copy of the normal map i rendered this time.
1. Still have one slight crease on the either side of the face of the cross guards. I guess you all would fix this in photoshop?
2 One abrupt edge running all the way down in-between the two UV islands.
3. Weird shadowing.
I gave the material a constant vertex color node in the editor. I am new to UDK and new'ish to normal maps in general so if it looks like i am overlooking something incredibly simple, i probably am. These are UDK3 viewport renders and the normal map resolution is 2048x512.
I had triangulated the best exploded result i had, using 1 smoothing group when exported, which only had the one minor issue left mentioned in the previous post which i can probably fix in photoshop. However, the finished blade model now exhibits a crease in another spot, despite being derived from the same model, with the same vertex positions and having the same triangulation and i used the same export/import setting afaik. Im just curious why this would be.
The "good" one is on the right.
As for the FBX export options, I don't recall having split per-vertex normals on, but I don't think that's the culprit.
Also do refrain from fixing normal map issues in photoshop. I've done over 50 bakes in the past two months and it ALWAYS comes down to messing up some of the settings, inverted normals, split vertices, etc.
I tried to use Textools to apply a smoothing group per uv island to the LP in Max, changing nothing else, but now the model looks horrible so something is obviously still wrong. I will go with what i have for now.
@ZacD, checked out this July 2012 thread on UE, which i assume pertains to UE3. http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=102838
It quotes the EU documentation saying to use 1 smoothing group as well, but in the following commnts there is quite a bit of disagreement.
I frickin hate normal maps now. It seems like we should have a constantly updated normal map workflow guide with detailed settings for each possible combination of program. I wish i had more time or it would make a great way for me to pay back the community for all their tutorials and advice.