Home Adobe Substance

tiling uv display issue

polycounter lvl 15
Offline / Send Message
Popeye9 polycounter lvl 15
I have a mesh that tiles outside the 0-1 area. when bringing it into painter it wont display the the material.


If I take it into designer then its fine. I would expect that painter should work like other applications that when tiling uv it displays but painting in the 0-1 range would tile to corresponding areas. I have tried several fbx versions and obj with the same issue. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

Replies

  • Fabian Fischer
    Offline / Send Message
    Fabian Fischer polycounter lvl 8
    Hey Popeye,

    you should stick to the 0-1 UV space, when possible.

    Best Regards
  • Popeye9
    Offline / Send Message
    Popeye9 polycounter lvl 15
    Yeah I do try to stick to 0-1 when possible but sometimes its more efficient to mirror or tile outside 0-1 and this is where i run into the display issue. 
  • Froyok
    Offline / Send Message
    Froyok greentooth
    You can only paint between 0 and 1 in Substance Painter, however tilling texture should work fine for UVs that are outside of this default area. However object space projection (like the tri-planar in some fill layers) or some mask generators won't work properly in your current setup.
  • Popeye9
    Offline / Send Message
    Popeye9 polycounter lvl 15
    Thanks Froyok. I am using uv projection in this example not tri-planar. The uv layout is an extreme case and I would not expect it to paint correct since its outside the 0-1 space. If I take this same mesh into designer and apply the same material with same uvs it displays like this.  
    As you can see it looks correct. I was wondering why the discrepancy between painter and designer.
  • Nexinumbra
    Offline / Send Message
    Nexinumbra polycounter lvl 12
    Popeye9 said:
    Thanks Froyok. I am using uv projection in this example not tri-planar. The uv layout is an extreme case and I would not expect it to paint correct since its outside the 0-1 space. If I take this same mesh into designer and apply the same material with same uvs it displays like this.  
    As you can see it looks correct. I was wondering why the discrepancy between painter and designer.
    In comparing your two images it seems like all of the UVs in Painter are rotated 90 degrees and tiled more. If you're dropping your wood substance as a Fill Layer, be sure to check the settings on the layer. I know when I add a fill layer it defaults to tiling 3 times in the "UV Scale" setting, and maybe yours is doing that and defaulting to 90 degree rotation? Just a long-shot guess.
  • Popeye9
    Offline / Send Message
    Popeye9 polycounter lvl 15
    Nexinumbra- thanks for the suggestion. I tried that and its still an issue with corrupted faces. Probably what I will do is just work in designer when I run into this problem <span>:smile:</span>
  • Froyok
    Offline / Send Message
    Froyok greentooth
    Can you send me your mesh file ? (By PM for example)
  • Froyok
    Offline / Send Message
    Froyok greentooth
    Okay, I have looked into your mesh. What you see is Substance Painter is normal. Substance Painter take into account only the UV that in the range 0-1 (you can't paint outside this range). From there it projects/paints your textures and then use the UVs to determine which parts are textured and which aren't. Therefore it will generate padding outside of the UV islands in the range 0-1. 

    In you case the UVs outside 0-1 don't match (aka it's not mirrored geometry that you shifted away) therefore these UVs display the padding (like you have in your screenshot). Substance Painter is mesh centric, while Substance Designer is more focused on tilling textures. Therefor in Substance Designer you will not have the problem.

    It's not really a bug, it's more a matter of design. I don't see how we could easily change that in Substance Painter. I would recommend switching to Substance Designer for this specific case.
  • Popeye9
    Offline / Send Message
    Popeye9 polycounter lvl 15
    Thanks for looking into this. It makes sense now what I was seeing. 
Sign In or Register to comment.