Baking curvature map: xnormal VS Painter

Kyalie

Hi guys,
Like i mentioned in another topic, i usually use xNormal to bake my mpas, but i'm moving to Substance Painter and would like to be able to do everything with it.
Problem is, the curvature maps don't look anything alike (left xNormal, right SP)

As you can see, the curvature from xNormal has sharp transitions but smoother inner parts, and smoother shading in general (most visible on the rope part), it looks way subtler; the one from Painter looks more like a cavity map imho.
I've tried mixing it with the ambient occlusion but it has (obviously) light info that i don't want on that map.

Do you guys know of a way to get a similar result? Thanks!

gnoop

Usually it's  enough to work with SP default one. Use Global balance and global contrast of smart masks  to  adjust curvature based masking.   

Still I am pretty sure  you can export curvature map to photoshop and do some  curve editing  closer to  Xnormal since the difference looks just like gamma one.     You can export it as 32 bit exr  for more convenient 32 bit  curve  editing  in Blender composer for example  if you would  make  an export template for that.  By default SP exports it as 16 bit png .

Kyalie

The thing is i'm not using the curvature map as a mask, but as a part of my diffuse map (we're not using PBR over here), and i'm trying to see how much of my compositing process in photoshop would be transposable to SP.
Been trying to adjust the map in Photoshop but it's definitely two different maps entirely, i will never get these smooth shadows around the rope part 'cause they're just not here.

Joopson

Usually there should be a "radius" or "spread angle" or "search distance", or something like that, within the curvature options? xNormal for sure has it. Not sure about substance programs.

It's worth noting that xnormal generates curvature from the mesh; do you know if SP does, or if it just generates from the normal map?