Hey dude! just wanted to pop by again and say great progress! you have a great attitude to learning and improving, if only more poeple could following your example : )
Thank you to both @3DREAPER and @CODEFERBLUE for this thread! As someone who still fumbles with baking this thread was fantastic! Both of you have talked through multiple common issues, which requires a lot of dedication.
Hm, I'm sure you can do exactly that on the intuos!? Also, I just feel as if there is such little difference in painting on same screen you are looking at, since in theory, with the Intuos, your eyes are at your screen, and your hands are simply paintin on the Intuos. For such a high price, I kinda feel that there isn't much of a difference. In the case an Intuos would definitely be more worth it.
Haha you came back! Thanks a lot for the kind words. Yeah I really want to be able to start creating 3d realtime art without asking many questions. I know I'm asking a lot from @3dReaper, but I'm asking a whole lot less than I was doing before. I feel like I'm rapidly improving. With enough effort and harassing @3dReaper, I should be able to stand on my own two feet soon when it comes to creating 3d art. I'm getting there.
Btw, keep those youtube vids coming, they're an inspiration.
Thanks, but you should mostly be thanking @3dReaper. He has a high tolerence for teaching people who know barely anything. Since I started asking him, I've learned a whole lot.
Haha, good to know you're there to answer my questions. Yeah I think I will most likely go for the Intuos 5 Pro medium size. Not 100% sure yet though.
Currently, I'm not working on my 3rd model, I'm actually taking the course that I told you about. I'm 3/4 of the way through and I'm learning SO MUCH. I'm on the texturing stage in substance painter and I'm actually getting an idea of how to use the software (finally 'bout time I did). I shouldn't have many knowledge gaps when texturing my wooden shed model in SP. Learned lots of tips n tricks in the modeling and UV sections too. I'll post a picture of the model when it's done. Here is WIP of it right now:
You really should separate those metal bands away from the actual barrel portion as that should have hardened edges. This will not only be easier for you to have optimized UVs but also to remove bleeding that may occur. Also separate the top and bottom of the barrel, unless there is not a bottom.
Sew that entire middle as well on the barrel, regardless if the course does not do it, the seam will be very blatant otherwise. Only sewing the middle might end up looking odd.
Hm... interesting. I'm quite a good way through the texturing portion, so optimising it would set me back a whole lot. But I've made a note of it. Thanks for letting me know. Also, the bottom and the top are the overlapping circles at the top of the UV. Also, the bands aren't a straight 90 degree angle, I've tapered them a bit to make them POP out more. And it's not a high to low poly workflow. I'm painting the normals in substance painter.
I've nearly finished the course. I definitely do understand painter a lot better. Yet still, I need a whole lot more know how and practice if I'm to be more confident and self independent when using it. Here's some of my progress:
Oh! I forgot to ask you. I know this is a study model, but do you think this kind of model would sell? This level of detail and optimisation? I mean, everything looks great, the only un-optimised thing are UV's. The model is well optimised and efficient, can be used in both games and film. Is well textured. Would it sell? Is it 'buyable' <--- no idea if that's even a word, ?
Since I could sell a good amount of high quality models such as this on the Unreal Marketplace, Unity Asset Store, CG Trader, 3DExport... etc. I could cleverly use the cash to fund my 3d equipment such as software and such.
Would this sell? Hmm, well you need a non education version of max to sell meshes first off and a non indie license for painter (if you plan on raking in cash).
The unreal marketplace is (apparently) quite difficult to get on, there are plenty of packages with barrels and crate type set dressing assets, so you would have to have some differentiation. I think the quality is there, perhaps some more love could be worked into the barrel. Change color tone on the boards, make sure the area the bands meet are not all at the same vertical area, change board size, have variations of barrels (dark, light, raw, stained, small, large, add logos, etc.). The unity store is a bit easier, to get on, however it is still worth trying to add detail. Undercutting the competition could help as well.
Yeah, you confirmed my thoughts. I know there are barrels and crates everywhere. But taking an original idea and adding your own unique style and flare to it, special details, could be ideal to a customer/client. The quality is there. I'm just trying to devlope a standard for the quality of things. Specifics like "make sure the area the bands meet are not all at the same vertical area" are things to think about when I've developed a standard of quality, if that makes any sense to you.
Getting the commercial versions of software is not a problem what so ever. And where I sell isn't a problem either, I've got that figured out. I'm mysteriously confident about my knowledge on where to sell and good selling eithics such as presentation customer support (e.g helping a customer out if they have any problems with my work/assets).
So it is at a sell-able quality? I did a 'wooden barrel' search on a few sites, and the best barrels they had were standard, kind of bland. Good quality, but not unique. My barrel does look unique, looks weathered and teared. I've created an effect that shows that the barrel has been fighting the elements such as weather. I can obviously make any changes I want, add more, take away things. Just trying to develope a quality standard. I don't want something that somebody will chuckle at, won't even look at twice, and move on. If that makes any sense.
Hey, I believe this is a nice looking barrel. I would be happy to use it in an environment. But the big problem is that these marketplaces are heavily saturated. Artists have built many assets like you and over time bundle them all together, selling them for relatively cheap.
I wouldn't look at it as selling a single piece, but to build a library and sell a whole pack of assets. Again the market for this is saturated, which in turn the artists mark down their pieces lower than what they should be for the amount of time they put into them. This brings up the whole idea on how artists should value their talent and to not take a job that undermines what you invest your whole life into
You really should separate those metal bands away from the actual barrel portion as that should have hardened edges. This will not only be easier for you to have optimized UVs but also to remove bleeding that may occur. Also separate the top and bottom of the barrel, unless there is not a bottom.
Hi guys,
Sorry for jumping into the thread, I actually teach the course that Codeferblue is taking so I thought it would be good to explain the reasoning not to split the metal bands and overlap the top-bottom of the barrel UV wise:
- metal bands and wood together: If you're only doing the model as is, to use in pre-render or reference, by all means split it and you can even use different materials for metal and wood - makes the whole process faster and as 3dReaper says, the UV is a lot cleaner. But if you're planning on using this asset in games/ realtime, you have to consider the object will have LODs, and splitting the texture in bands will limit how much you can simplify your LOD. Ultimately I want my last LOD to be a very plain cylinder but still have all the texture information, and that's why it pays to have the mesh and UV continuous.
I can't say I ever had any problems with UV bleed in situations like this, and this UV setup is very common in games. You can make the edges hard by using smoothing groups or smooth/ hard edges, depending on the software you're using.
- overlapping textures. Again, another game trick to save UV space. Since you'll rarely ever see the bottom of the keg - if ever - having a unique texture for it is very expensive. By overlapping, you save UV space you can use for other textures instead, and what I suggest in the course is that this texture space be used to create other variations of kegs/ similar wood objects sharing the same texture. For instance, you can have open kegs and the contents be painted in the same UV space.
They're all small things, but work towards optimizing the game for performance
Haha, what a surprise. Thanks for the help! It's interesting, it makes a lot more sense when you bring LOD's in to the question. I always knew things like the the top and bottom of the barrel should be overlapped, that does make sense. Really good course btw, it's helped me out in substance so much.
Yeah I've noticed that. Asset packs sell better than single items. Thanks for the tip. it's mainly quality I'm concerned over. It was always a matter of 'does this look good enough?'
could you expand on last part? Idea of how artists should value their talent? Nice PP btw.
@Natsta good to hear, I was speaking more from a portfolio level rather than a LOD in game viewpoint. If that is the intent then for sure keep everything simple as possible and optimized for LOD purposes. When I was referring to bleed, I have often come across people that may not be very familiar with Substance Painter, therefore keeping separate UVs at different material instances would ensure this would not happen. If utilizing ID masks and masks in general of course that will not happen. Also, the reason for separating the bands was for hard edge and proper Hi-Low baking purposes, for a clean bake. I realize that is not the process being shown, nevertheless.
Regarding the UV optimization, if there is indeed a top and bottom to the barrel, and there is space (which it most certainly appears so) it would be fine to separate the top and bottom of the barrel considering you are not sewing the edges as they do not connect. Either way it will cost the same in verts, added benefit would be unique detail to the top and bottom and the ability to use the barrel in various positions. If there was an intent to use or create alternate versions of the barrel then certainly optimizing in that fashion would be ideal. Going further, overlapping half of the barrel over itself would save even more space, plus sewing the entire side would also save space and vert count.
Just want @CodeferBlue to understand the reasoning for both sides.
Absolutely @3DReaper, at the end of the day there are always pros and cons with each pipeline, and every project is unique It's one of the things I really enjoy about working with games, you learn something new every day.
@3dReaper Understood. Thanks for the explanation. Cleared a lot of questions I had. Even though I've had no experience in creating LOD's ever. I'm hoping to grasp the concept fast and effectively. Learning what, why and the how's. I should be able to finish the course today and will post results afterwards.
Hey guys, so I've just completed the course. My barrel looks amazing. I'de never think I could be creating stuff that looks this good this quick. The power of Substance Painter. There's only one issue I have. The barrel in SP looks amazing, but when put into Unreal Engine 4, it doesn't look even half as amazing. Now, I know the lighting conditions are different in SP, but the default UE4 lighting conditions aren't that bad. My metal doesn't even shine like metal. I've made sure the texture maps are plugged into the right place. The pictures will show you what you need to see:
Substance Painter: Unreal Engine 4:
See? pretty big difference. Even though the textures are 2048 in the Substance Painter viewport, and I've exported them as 4K textures into unreal engine, they don't look as good as they are in substance painters viewport. I guess the wood looks nice. But the metal looks horrible. What is up with that?
I have a feeling it's purely the lighting, but I have my doubts that lighting isn't the only thing? Or maybe my maps are plugged in incorrectly!?
Double click your Roughness and Metalness (PMSK) in the content browser, in the window that pops up find the Texture setting area. There you will find a checkbox that says "sRGB" Uncheck this box and save the texture.
Okay it's made somewhat of a difference, but my metal rings still look very blackish? They don't look like the silver shining metal that's in painter. They look like more a dark steel. ???
I'm not liking how their is an illusion between the two workflow stages, Substance Painter and Unreal Engine 4. SP gives you a really nice looking material, you put it in UE4 and it looks like complete shit. Maybe the first time a bit of tweaking with lighting or textures is necessary in UE4, but I don't want to tweak my assets when they come out of SP constantly unless they need to be tweaked.
I see, but if I wanted to create a environment, I would have to configure the lighting to make all the assets in my scene look optimal? How they're supposed to? Because... in painter, I'm viewing a single prop, it looks great. But for me, the magic happens when I put a asset in an environment engine such as UE4, since, ultimately, I'm going to want to create whole environments out of assets such as this.
EDIT: Yeah to confirm, it's the Metallic channel that's giving this really odd black material. I found this out after messing around with the texture nodes. The base colour + roughness + AO + normal look really good together, they just don't have the reflectivity that the Metallic value give. But when plugged in, the material looks like shit.
Damn, thats a sweet looking barrel, good job! my only crit is I think you could make the metal sliiigthly darker, and maybe the wood a bit less saturated.
as for your painter to UE workflow, dont trust the painter viewport too much. I always have my engine open in another tab while I texture, and pop back in every 10 minutes or so just to check how its actually gonna look, its a good habit to get used too.
as for your actual black metal problem, Im sorry I cant really help, im a Unity guy myself. but the point of PBR is to have all the assets work in every lighting condition, so you are probably doing something wrong in the export, you shouldn't have to edit textures for specific lighting situations.
As For the crit, the thing is, it's meant to be vibrant and saturated. See, I'm going for a FPS fantasy medieval environment that you can walk around in and interact with things. But for environments like that, I usually see very rustic, grimey hardcore realistic themes, and I see vibrant saturated on rather 2D games or in 2D art. So my theme is basically WOW on steroids. I know WOW has a stylized theme. But both stylized and non stylized textures, as long as they are well saturated (not too saturated) look great in my opinion.
And, I do agree, PBR is supposed to be a compatible uniform workflow. I do think I'm doing something wrong in the export. I don't really understand how the painter export works. It's all so new and confusing to me. I really do think I've done something in the export of my textures from painter. But I dunno.
ok, now im just throwing things out there. so no idea if this is stuff you already know or have checked.
- make sure you use the same shader mode, blinn-phong or GGX in both programs - make sure you are using the correct export preset from painter, you can choose from different setups, I think there are a few UE4a settings there. - check to make sure your using the correct channel to mask your metalness n stuff, for example if its exported into the alpha channel or something. - make sure your using the correct specular/metallness workflow in both programs. also check if your normals are correct in both programs, it might be a flipped green channel somewhere. - do you have reflection capture actor in your UE4 scene?
Ooookay lets see. I do have a relfection capture actor in my scene. I'm using a modified version of the unreal engine 4 preset to tailor for the maps I have. Aaaand I am using the correct channel to mask my stuff. Here's a picture of my painter export setting if that helps by any chance:
by the way, do you by any chance use 3ds max to create your art?
The main reason you're probably getting black is because of how reflections work in UE4. If you're using a reflection capture actor at default settings (no hdri) then it will look for other things within the scene to reflect. If your albedo is dark and you have nothing else in the scene to reflect against it it can come out looking like that.
I suggest one of two things: - While testing assets just toss them into marmoset toolbag 2. It's a great tool that's easier to go back and forth between programs for than Unreal. - The other thing I would do is temporarily use an HDRI in your scene instead of using the scene reflections until you get your scene more fleshed out.
Here's a quick tutorial on how to do that. If you're still having issues afterwards then it may have to do with the textures.
If you don't want to download that package you can just add an HDRI to your skylight (you won't see the sky sphere update). You have to enable engine visibility though in the bottom right hand corner of the content browser to see default HDRI's that come with unreal.
Hmm, interesting, I'll try it out. This looks promising since the effect that hdri gives, I'm looking for. Thanks!
i also checked out your YouTube channel, it's amazing. So many good looking tutorials haha.
EDIT: Okay so I've tried using UE4's HDRI's and no difference. I downloaded Osmans HDRI blueprint, dragged the Showcase folder into the content folder of my project, relaunched UE4 and no difference what so ever. Still getting a yucky black non reflective material.
Oh shit... shits gone real now huh? Haha. Okay I'm not 100% sure what you mean, do you mean upload the single Targa file textures? Because they're 4k and it hits the size limit.
Sorry but I'm clueless on how to remove the metalness and roughness out of the PMSK channel mask. Export each individual map from Substance? I'm afraid I don't know the substance exporter well enough to even to do that. I just followed the course, it didn't teach me much about export though.
Wait wtf?! You simply added more reflection spheres and you baked the lighting? How would I bake the lighting? And why do I need multiple reflection spheres? And will I need to do this every time I want a reflection like that? And how do I get that result in my engine? Many questions... Much confusion. Lol.
Hey man, this is weird. I added more reflection spheres, a shit ton more. I made sure sRGB was off on the PMSK and I hit build. But no difference in the viewport. HOWEVER, if I go into mesh viewing mode in UE4, the reflections show up as they're supposed to! What!? but they don't in the viewport:
There also something else that's weird. In the texture map types (e.g Normal, Colour, Linear Colour) the PMSK was on colour. The course instructor said I should have that map's map type as LinearColour. I changed it to LinearColour and that's when the reflections started showing up correctly in the UE4 mesh viewer. But no change in the viewport. The texturemaps are also giving me error messages forcing me to change the map types back to what they were.
Replies
Btw, keep those youtube vids coming, they're an inspiration.
The cintiq is nice because its like drawing on a piece of paper. I have no complaints about my intuos so, you cannot go wrong.
Keep the harassment coming @CodeferBlue
Yeah I think I will most likely go for the Intuos 5 Pro medium size. Not 100% sure yet though.
Currently, I'm not working on my 3rd model, I'm actually taking the course that I told you about. I'm 3/4 of the way through and I'm learning SO MUCH. I'm on the texturing stage in substance painter and I'm actually getting an idea of how to use the software (finally 'bout time I did). I shouldn't have many knowledge gaps when texturing my wooden shed model in SP. Learned lots of tips n tricks in the modeling and UV sections too. I'll post a picture of the model when it's done. Here is WIP of it right now:
You really should separate those metal bands away from the actual barrel portion as that should have hardened edges. This will not only be easier for you to have optimized UVs but also to remove bleeding that may occur. Also separate the top and bottom of the barrel, unless there is not a bottom.
Sew that entire middle as well on the barrel, regardless if the course does not do it, the seam will be very blatant otherwise. Only sewing the middle might end up looking odd.
I'm still in shock that it looks THIS good. :O
Keep at it man, definitely making progress.
Since I could sell a good amount of high quality models such as this on the Unreal Marketplace, Unity Asset Store, CG Trader, 3DExport... etc. I could cleverly use the cash to fund my 3d equipment such as software and such.
The unreal marketplace is (apparently) quite difficult to get on, there are plenty of packages with barrels and crate type set dressing assets, so you would have to have some differentiation. I think the quality is there, perhaps some more love could be worked into the barrel. Change color tone on the boards, make sure the area the bands meet are not all at the same vertical area, change board size, have variations of barrels (dark, light, raw, stained, small, large, add logos, etc.). The unity store is a bit easier, to get on, however it is still worth trying to add detail. Undercutting the competition could help as well.
https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/medieval-props-pack
https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/industry-props-pack
Getting the commercial versions of software is not a problem what so ever. And where I sell isn't a problem either, I've got that figured out. I'm mysteriously confident about my knowledge on where to sell and good selling eithics such as presentation customer support (e.g helping a customer out if they have any problems with my work/assets).
So it is at a sell-able quality? I did a 'wooden barrel' search on a few sites, and the best barrels they had were standard, kind of bland. Good quality, but not unique. My barrel does look unique, looks weathered and teared. I've created an effect that shows that the barrel has been fighting the elements such as weather. I can obviously make any changes I want, add more, take away things. Just trying to develope a quality standard. I don't want something that somebody will chuckle at, won't even look at twice, and move on. If that makes any sense.
Hey, I believe this is a nice looking barrel. I would be happy to use it in an environment. But the big problem is that these marketplaces are heavily saturated. Artists have built many assets like you and over time bundle them all together, selling them for relatively cheap.
I wouldn't look at it as selling a single piece, but to build a library and sell a whole pack of assets. Again the market for this is saturated, which in turn the artists mark down their pieces lower than what they should be for the amount of time they put into them. This brings up the whole idea on how artists should value their talent and to not take a job that undermines what you invest your whole life into
Hi guys,
Sorry for jumping into the thread, I actually teach the course that Codeferblue is taking so I thought it would be good to explain the reasoning not to split the metal bands and overlap the top-bottom of the barrel UV wise:
- metal bands and wood together: If you're only doing the model as is, to use in pre-render or reference, by all means split it and you can even use different materials for metal and wood - makes the whole process faster and as 3dReaper says, the UV is a lot cleaner.
But if you're planning on using this asset in games/ realtime, you have to consider the object will have LODs, and splitting the texture in bands will limit how much you can simplify your LOD. Ultimately I want my last LOD to be a very plain cylinder but still have all the texture information, and that's why it pays to have the mesh and UV continuous.
I can't say I ever had any problems with UV bleed in situations like this, and this UV setup is very common in games. You can make the edges hard by using smoothing groups or smooth/ hard edges, depending on the software you're using.
- overlapping textures.
Again, another game trick to save UV space. Since you'll rarely ever see the bottom of the keg - if ever - having a unique texture for it is very expensive. By overlapping, you save UV space you can use for other textures instead, and what I suggest in the course is that this texture space be used to create other variations of kegs/ similar wood objects sharing the same texture. For instance, you can have open kegs and the contents be painted in the same UV space.
They're all small things, but work towards optimizing the game for performance
could you expand on last part? Idea of how artists should value their talent?
Nice PP btw.
Regarding the UV optimization, if there is indeed a top and bottom to the barrel, and there is space (which it most certainly appears so) it would be fine to separate the top and bottom of the barrel considering you are not sewing the edges as they do not connect. Either way it will cost the same in verts, added benefit would be unique detail to the top and bottom and the ability to use the barrel in various positions. If there was an intent to use or create alternate versions of the barrel then certainly optimizing in that fashion would be ideal. Going further, overlapping half of the barrel over itself would save even more space, plus sewing the entire side would also save space and vert count.
Just want @CodeferBlue to understand the reasoning for both sides.
Understood. Thanks for the explanation. Cleared a lot of questions I had. Even though I've had no experience in creating LOD's ever. I'm hoping to grasp the concept fast and effectively. Learning what, why and the how's. I should be able to finish the course today and will post results afterwards.
Substance Painter:
Unreal Engine 4:
See? pretty big difference. Even though the textures are 2048 in the Substance Painter viewport, and I've exported them as 4K textures into unreal engine, they don't look as good as they are in substance painters viewport. I guess the wood looks nice. But the metal looks horrible. What is up with that?
I have a feeling it's purely the lighting, but I have my doubts that lighting isn't the only thing? Or maybe my maps are plugged in incorrectly!?
Sorry about that.
Should fix the issue.
I'm not liking how their is an illusion between the two workflow stages, Substance Painter and Unreal Engine 4. SP gives you a really nice looking material, you put it in UE4 and it looks like complete shit. Maybe the first time a bit of tweaking with lighting or textures is necessary in UE4, but I don't want to tweak my assets when they come out of SP constantly unless they need to be tweaked.
My sRGB is off:
And the horrible black steel:
I would put single props and the like in Marmoset as it is faster to view a completed piece compared to UE4.
EDIT: Yeah to confirm, it's the Metallic channel that's giving this really odd black material. I found this out after messing around with the texture nodes. The base colour + roughness + AO + normal look really good together, they just don't have the reflectivity that the Metallic value give. But when plugged in, the material looks like shit.
my only crit is I think you could make the metal sliiigthly darker, and maybe the wood a bit less saturated.
as for your painter to UE workflow, dont trust the painter viewport too much. I always have my engine open in another tab while I texture, and pop back in every 10 minutes or so just to check how its actually gonna look, its a good habit to get used too.
as for your actual black metal problem, Im sorry I cant really help, im a Unity guy myself. but the point of PBR is to have all the assets work in every lighting condition, so you are probably doing something wrong in the export, you shouldn't have to edit textures for specific lighting situations.
As For the crit, the thing is, it's meant to be vibrant and saturated. See, I'm going for a FPS fantasy medieval environment that you can walk around in and interact with things. But for environments like that, I usually see very rustic, grimey hardcore realistic themes, and I see vibrant saturated on rather 2D games or in 2D art. So my theme is basically WOW on steroids. I know WOW has a stylized theme. But both stylized and non stylized textures, as long as they are well saturated (not too saturated) look great in my opinion.
And, I do agree, PBR is supposed to be a compatible uniform workflow. I do think I'm doing something wrong in the export. I don't really understand how the painter export works. It's all so new and confusing to me. I really do think I've done something in the export of my textures from painter. But I dunno.
- make sure you use the same shader mode, blinn-phong or GGX in both programs
- make sure you are using the correct export preset from painter, you can choose from different setups, I think there are a few UE4a settings there.
- check to make sure your using the correct channel to mask your metalness n stuff, for example if its exported into the alpha channel or something.
- make sure your using the correct specular/metallness workflow in both programs.
also check if your normals are correct in both programs, it might be a flipped green channel somewhere.
- do you have reflection capture actor in your UE4 scene?
by the way, do you by any chance use 3ds max to create your art?
I suggest one of two things:
- While testing assets just toss them into marmoset toolbag 2. It's a great tool that's easier to go back and forth between programs for than Unreal.
- The other thing I would do is temporarily use an HDRI in your scene instead of using the scene reflections until you get your scene more fleshed out.
Here's a quick tutorial on how to do that. If you're still having issues afterwards then it may have to do with the textures.
If you don't want to download that package you can just add an HDRI to your skylight (you won't see the sky sphere update). You have to enable engine visibility though in the bottom right hand corner of the content browser to see default HDRI's that come with unreal.
i also checked out your YouTube channel, it's amazing. So many good looking tutorials haha.
EDIT: Okay so I've tried using UE4's HDRI's and no difference. I downloaded Osmans HDRI blueprint, dragged the Showcase folder into the content folder of my project, relaunched UE4 and no difference what so ever. Still getting a yucky black non reflective material.
I will take a look at them in my editor.
I baked lighting and added additional reflection spheres, it then turned out like so:
Add 1-3 additional reflection spheres and increase the scale.
Disable sRGB for your PMSK.
Bake lighting is on the top shelf, Build. Just hit Build it will compute everything AI, lighting etc. (This is for light maps)
Should work fine.
but they don't in the viewport:
There also something else that's weird. In the texture map types (e.g Normal, Colour, Linear Colour) the PMSK was on colour. The course instructor said I should have that map's map type as LinearColour. I changed it to LinearColour and that's when the reflections started showing up correctly in the UE4 mesh viewer. But no change in the viewport. The texturemaps are also giving me error messages forcing me to change the map types back to what they were.
Actually, one should be enough but even having the amount you do, should not give this result.
https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Resources/Showcases/Reflections/index.html
Make sure to hit update capture in the settings for the sphere as well, under reflection capture. Also make sure its properly scaled.
Regarding the error messages, you need to change the setting for LinearColor in the material as well, sampler type.
This should make everything display properly now, linear color was indeed a factor.