nVidia photoshop plugin VS. xNormal
polycounter lvl 12
Hey,
I was wondering which of the two was better for generating normal maps from textures? I used the nVidia plugin for a long time until recently, since it does not work on Photoshop CS4 64 bit. I applied the nvidia filter multiple times on any given texture, and then blurring them properly to get my normal maps the way I wanted them. Is there a way to do this in xNormal?
Is xNormal better in every way over the nvidia plugin? Or do both have their pros and cons?
Thanks in advance!
I was wondering which of the two was better for generating normal maps from textures? I used the nVidia plugin for a long time until recently, since it does not work on Photoshop CS4 64 bit. I applied the nvidia filter multiple times on any given texture, and then blurring them properly to get my normal maps the way I wanted them. Is there a way to do this in xNormal?
Is xNormal better in every way over the nvidia plugin? Or do both have their pros and cons?
Thanks in advance!
Replies
More here.
http://wiki.polycount.net/Normal_Map#P
If you are an out of work artist, i believe Ryan has something set up where you can get a free copy until you get work. (im not sure on the details 100%)
Hope that helps!
The xnormal PS texture to normal map to me, is easier to work with than the PS. It also will work with your x64bit.
I would say that Shadermap PRO is just as good as crazy bump, just not as pretty and only coasts $40 Aus for a full commercial edition.
IMHO, CrazyBump is just unbeatable when it comes to speed, creating volume and detail from images and just plain control over you normal maps.
Check out this test i just did with the new SMP beta (1.3.1) and the CB beta (1.2 beta 3)...they are both default settings captured from each applications 3d preview windows.
<hint>I think the only two things that could make CB better is a savable CB project file and a Photoshop Plugin...then i would truly be a happy bunny</hint>
then again i stopped using it, when it gone commercial, since i had always much fun with the nvidia workflow. until cs4 64 bit came out.
but you can still use the xnormal height2normal plugin, which functions the same way.
following the workflow, you will later end up with serious blurred images. for them you need a high intensity to convert to normal.
in the xnormal plugin you just have to lower the "smooth" value instead of raising an intensity value like in the nvidia tool.
the workflow then stays the same.
dont forget to convert your images to 16 bit before, to avoid banding artifacts.
true the default settings are better in CB.
but i am not sure if CB does batch processing (does it?)
and you can actually save a project with the settings you need in SMP to reuse them depending on the required result. You can also overlay images in SMP.
so guess they are about equal if they both do batch process.
SMP also has an option that says "To Clipboard" so copy paste is covered fully.
and then the next criteria would be the price.
as for the nvidia plugin, you can get nice results if you play with the settings a bit but it can't compare imo with CB or SMP.
its also very cool
yea, CB can do batch processing with folders and sub folders
You can save presets in CB so if you want the same settings, you can use those, but you cant save project files unfortunately (but you can use them with batch processing)
Copy and Paste is fully covered in CrazyBump also.
As for prices there are a range of options:-
Either way both programs have their uses and SMP is great if you are on a budget