Home Technical Talk

Cloth modelling headaches

Hi, I am a junior 3d artist, working in games. A lot of the work I do now revolves around making characters and therefore, clothing too.
Some questions I just can't seem to find an answer to, need someone to point me in the right direction.

   1. Should my model be a single object - I was told it's easier for the rigger this way, but I always get baking artifacts along the lines where different clothes are connected, so that could be avoided if the model was split. Also the model just looks fake when it's 1 piece. (sreenshot1)

   2. What's the best way to deal with thickness? My approach makes it so that it's really hard to do and control properly and also seemingly impossible to bake (screenshot1)

   3. I just can't seem to get the high poly folds baked on to the lowpoly so that they look correct, they always seems squished and square-like. (screenshot1).

   4. Why do some pros cut up their model into triangles along the folds? Does that help with the form, is that practical? In general I try to keep characters with symmetrical topology so that rigging would be easier and all quads just because I don't know when I can use triangles. Would adding triangles like that break the symmetry functionality in rigging? Attaching an image of Ilya Gagarin's piece, he tends to make a lot of triangles along the folds, love his work btw. (screenshot2)

   5. How important is it to keep the polygons as square as possible? There's always some variation and unless I start some extra loops midway the polygons at the bottom of a dress get twice the width of the top ones - so not that good for animation right?

   6. Hard edges and loops - when and where to add them. Is hard edges the same as a "creased" edge in zbrush, and is that ever usable in making clothing?



My workflow atm is as follows:
1. Make the base mesh of the body for the character in zbrush
2. Make the clothing base in marvelous designer on top of the body, export as thin for multiple objects.
3. Retopo and add thickness along the visible edges in maya
4. Reproject the high poly details + add extra details in zbrush
5. Bake in substance painter (is marmoset a better baker?) get artifacts along the edges and paint them out...\ end result looks kinda messy around the edges.
Any tips on how I could improve the workflow would also be appreciated.

Replies

  • Kanni3d
    Offline / Send Message
    Kanni3d ngon master
    Extremely partial answer, apologies, as I don't do much characters/rigging/animation - but yes, marmoset is much more versatile of a baker, and could even possibly mitigate the issues your describing, as you can hand tweak the cage to reduce artifacting between elements in certain areas, rather than adjust the cage globally in substance, which is less desireable. 
  • rollin
    Offline / Send Message
    rollin polycounter
    Kanni3d said:
    Extremely partial answer, apologies, as I don't do much characters/rigging/animation - but yes, marmoset is much more versatile of a baker, and could even possibly mitigate the issues your describing, as you can hand tweak the cage to reduce artifacting between elements in certain areas, rather than adjust the cage globally in substance, which is less desireable. 
    Substance allows the use of custom cages too
  • Alex_J
    Offline / Send Message
    Alex_J grand marshal polycounter
    It's too many questions and a lot of them have the dreaded "it depends" answer. But I'd suggest looking up Georgian Avasilcutei. I don't know if he is still streaming on twitch all the time, but he has a few gumroad tutorials that will show examples of answers to all of those questions.
    He was making characters for the dishonored games, which looks similar to what you showed so I think that might be a good fit for you.

    I would recommend getting marmoset toolbag. It makes baking so much quicker and easier, it's a major game changer for me.

    Also consider doing the blockout of your clothes in 3d app. You can then morph the UV shells into patterns. Even the sewing is taken care of automatically (though it's only so smart, you do need to do some cleanup). I've found this saves a lot of headache compared to starting patterns from scratch in MD.

  • pao_viko
    Sorry fur such a long list of questions. Feel that they are connected somewhat.

    Kanni3d  - OK so I tried baking in Marmoset, it's really fast and powerful, but painting skew and offset on the cage does not solve this particular problem. However this functionality alone makes it worth using, and as for the quality of the maps they seem on-par with the ones baked from Substance, so I will try to make Marmoset my main baker from now on and see how it goes.
    Alex Javor -  I checked him out and it seems he has a plethora tutorials for those who support him on patreon. stuff looks solid and I'll dive right into it next week - thank you
    I never even considered doing the block out and then making it into a garment. Could I make a thick piece of clothing that has correct topology and then sim it in Marvelous designer ? If that is the case then holy f. that would save a lot of time, almost sounds too good to be true.
  • Alex_J
    Offline / Send Message
    Alex_J grand marshal polycounter
    I'll make a video to show it. It's a total game changer of a workflow for me. Pretty simple but too many steps to list in a post.
  • Kanni3d
    Offline / Send Message
    Kanni3d ngon master
    rollin said:
    Kanni3d said:
    Extremely partial answer, apologies, as I don't do much characters/rigging/animation - but yes, marmoset is much more versatile of a baker, and could even possibly mitigate the issues your describing, as you can hand tweak the cage to reduce artifacting between elements in certain areas, rather than adjust the cage globally in substance, which is less desireable. 
    Substance allows the use of custom cages too
    Yeah, true, but it's pretty finnicky with not a whole lot of visual feecback. If your custom cage you modeled in 3d doesn't work, you've got to go through a bunch of processes to try again, rather than simply troubleshooting good/bad cage distances by painting them in viewport :smile:

  • Alex_J
    Offline / Send Message
    Alex_J grand marshal polycounter
    i just did this off the cuff so maybe go at 2x speed cause theres a lot of ummmmms, but give this workflow a try I think it takes a lot of the headache out of using MD


    and regarding thickness, I don't see why you couldn't make a two sided model and work like that. but I think it's easier to add thickness from MD at export.
  • musashidan
    Offline / Send Message
    musashidan high dynamic range
    pao_viko said:
     Could I make a thick piece of clothing that has correct topology and then sim it in Marvelous designer ? 
    Modeling a fully thick/shelled mesh? 100% no reason to. Thickness is only needed where it will be seen(including animation), i.e: rim and/or inside of cuffs/collar, etc. Basically any part of the geo that is visible at any time. Why would you want a fully thick piece of clothing that most of the interior will never be seen and waste geometry and valuable UV space? Also, rigging would be more painful and thickness could lead to geo penetration/collapse when animating.
  • musashidan
    Offline / Send Message
    musashidan high dynamic range
    @Alex Javor , yes this is a useful feature, but clothes will sim much more realistically with real-world pattern shapes. An important step in this workflow is adjusting all the UV island/patterns with real-world curves and recreate the pattern panels as they would be cut in the real world. Nevertheless, this is definitely a great headstart and will avoid the painful experience of MD's horrible transform gizmo. ;)
  • Alex_J
    Offline / Send Message
    Alex_J grand marshal polycounter
    yeah that is the main thing. just using familiar tools to get a headstart. but you do still have to develop experience in order to make better patterns.
Sign In or Register to comment.