How do you uv hi-poly models?

johanz

I have a high poly prop model, but I have no idea how to uv map it.
I use 3ds max 2009 and 2010. I tried uving "cage" and then turbosmoothing it, but that creates stretched checkers on edges of the model. And mapping hi-poly mesh is nearly impossible since it makes my pc very slow in UV window.

CrazyMatt

I would recommend you UV map the lower resolution version before you add turbo smooth, or mesh smooth to you're modifier stack.

An effective method if you've already collapsed your stack and cannot go down in resolution. Would be to export your model out of Max and use a UV editing package like "UV Layout, Roadkill, or unfold3d, ect."

[HP]

Why would you want to UV a highpoly model? you don't need to to bake normal maps.

Justin Meisse

If you want to paint on the highpoly model to bake a diffuse after I recommend using Zbrush, I recently used polypaint and Zapplink to paint a diffuse and bake it down to my low poly. You can autogenerate UV's in zbrush and bake the polypaint down to that.

I planned on doing alot of tweaking to it in photoshop but it came out great, I just put in some baked AO and cleaned up a little bit.

Shogun3d

Probably for high poly 3rd party renders?

CheeseOnToast

johanz wrote: »

I have a high poly prop model, but I have no idea how to uv map it.
I use 3ds max 2009 and 2010. I tried uving "cage" and then turbosmoothing it, but that creates stretched checkers on edges of the model. And mapping hi-poly mesh is nearly impossible since it makes my pc very slow in UV window.

Give the Headus UVLayout demo a try. It has an option which takes into consideration a model's subdivision when UVing the cage, hopefully preventing or at least lessening the stretched areas you're getting.

johanz

Ok, I will NOT use this for baking normals or anything. It's meant for good looking render with minimal blocky edges.
I have the low poly model UV-mapped, the problem is, when I turbosmooth it, my uvs get deformed in some places. I tried uv layout, but it's really strange tool. If I uv map it in "geometry" mode, it distorts after smoothing, if I uv map it in subD mode, then it's distorted when I import it in max without even the need of turbosmooth.
I think I am doing something wrong.

EarthQuake

johanz wrote: »

if I uv map it in subD mode, then it's distorted when I import it in max without even the need of turbosmooth.
I think I am doing something wrong.

I haven't used this tool, but i imagine that this is what you want to happen. As it is distorting it in preparation for sub-d. So try applying sub-division to that mesh, it should give you better results than the standard method.

If you need clean uvs on both the sub-divided and pre-sub-divided mesh, you will have to use a 3d app that handles sub-d uvs correctly like modo.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/499159/modosubduvs.jpg

Richard Kain

I pretty much do them the same way I do low poly models. Of courese, this is for the 10,000 - 20,000 poly range models. If you are talking about full-on sculpted models, then yeah, I would never want to UV map those.

For those I usually just define the UV mapping in one of the pre-subdivision levels, and then let the program extrapolate the mapping from there. I use Blender, and I've found that as long as you stick to quads, this is a perfectly valid approach, that avoids any distortion. As soon as you throw tris into the mix, it messes everything up.

AreDub3D

What's the most popular UV layout plugin or standalone that Max users use? Roadkill? Do folks consider UVLayout and Unfold3D to be worth the $$$? Any opinions on these external tools for Max?

Also, on a similar subject, is there any need for Topogun, etc., with the new Freeform tools in Max 2010? Does Topogun do anything the new built-in tools can't?

CrazyMatt

I would consider UV Layout as one of those apps that would be on my personal purchase list. It's a very very good package, if you are looking for something outside you're standard package.

Topogun is another great package, one that I purchased. It keeps re-topologizing extremely simple, and texture baking from high>low resolution objects simple, efficient and effective. It's really a point and click type of program.

AreDub3D

Thanks, Matt.
I'm coming to Max from Maya and I feel like I'm going to need another tool for UVs -- though it's too early to tell for sure. I think I'll try the newly-released TexTools 3 before I buy anything.

Good to hear your thoughts on Topogun. How does the quality of the baked maps compare with xNormal?

renderhjs

the max build in UV editor is not suited to unwrap something with a high density or rather highpoly because it is based on very old and dated software routines to display the UV's. I noticed when relaxing complex stuff Headus for example responds about 8x quicker. Sometimes I was even forced to use Headus because the max UV editor would relax with 1 frame a second and it would take ages to get a decent result.

Headus has been build from the ground up towards maximum performance and it is pure joy unwrappping something impossible with it.
If you use TexTools I can advise to split up stuff to relax or work on and stitch it together later on if you need to. And use things such as the mirror tool to transfer half's across an edge loop axis. And rather avoid the pelt mapping on super dense stuff as it just takes forever to relax back the ring pulled seams.

disanski

I use the new polydraw tools in max 2010 and I love them. Actually they are very similar to topogun. Then again I am sure topogun must have some extras.

Valandar

Renderhjs forgot to mention how hypnotic watching a moderately complex shell flatten in UVL can be - watching the pretty colors shift from red and bright blue to a minty green... it's quite relaxing, actually. :P

JohnnySix

Richard Kain wrote: »

I pretty much do them the same way I do low poly models. Of courese, this is for the 10,000 - 20,000 poly range models. If you are talking about full-on sculpted models, then yeah, I would never want to UV map those.

For those I usually just define the UV mapping in one of the pre-subdivision levels, and then let the program extrapolate the mapping from there. I use Blender, and I've found that as long as you stick to quads, this is a perfectly valid approach, that avoids any distortion. As soon as you throw tris into the mix, it messes everything up.

AH - no tris.. that's what happened here, am using the mental-ray archi textures, and they require UV mapping - otherwise you get nasty faceted effects like below.

I used tris when creating the five-sided flint wheel :

r_fletch_r

JohnnySix wrote: »

AH - no tris.. that's what happened here, am using the mental-ray archi textures, and they require UV mapping - otherwise you get nasty faceted effects like below.

I used tris when creating the five-sided flint wheel :

Thats bizarre!
i use mia_material all the time and i've never once had that problem are you using maya of max?

JohnnySix

Max, 2008.

Odd, I re-checked my topology and re-UV'd it, it's all quads after all, and the starting model, pre-sub-D is mapped into planar islands or strips for the cylindrical parts, and it still shows the crazy facet thing.

And it's all one smoothing group.

AreDub3D

I may be asking the obvious, but did you try rendering it without mentalray? As a Maya/MR user, I would suspect it's a setting in MR. No idea how approximation and the like are implemented in Max, though.

@renderhjs, sianki and Valander -- thanks for the thoughts on the 3rd party tools. Sounds like UVLayout and Topogun are pretty great.