Hi, I'm trying out this program with a friend. She's had no trouble, but I can't get it working properly. I'm using a texture that needs to tile across the mesh, and Marmoset applies it only once, resulting in it looking awkward and huge. Is there a way to get it to tile a texture several times instead of just once across the whole UV space?
I've only found one post on this that says you just need to setup your UV coordinates, but not how to do that. As far as I know, my UV coordinates are set up just fine... it works in Max, but in max I have told the texture to tile itself. Does anyone know how to do this?
Edit: ... Still having this issue, and I've also just noticed that it tiles SOME materials like CRAZY. I have yet to discover any rhyme or reason, or any hints from searching google + these forums. I would greatly appreciate any help because this looks like a spectacular program and I'd love to use it.
ok, I've managed to figure out what my problem is. I think my tangents/bitangents are somehow split.
this picture demonstrates
now from what I've learned, there's only supposed to be one normal,tangent, and bitangent unless the smoothing is broken, or there's a UV seam.
however, there is neither (much inspection of UV maps and unifying normal etc. has proved this)
so, what would cause this to happen? any clues?
@bonebrew, looks like your vertices could very well be exploded (according to your latest screenshot posted). Try running a vertex weld in your modeling app with a very low threshold (as to not mistakenly merge too many vertices), unify normals, then reexport. If using 3DS Max, your normals must all be in one smoothing group.
Thanks for the tip man.
Unfortunately if you look at the normals you'l notice they are welded just fine (I ran through my model looking for exploded verts as you say anyways, just to be sure)
but the problem is in the tangents/bitangents. This causes the model to smooth fine when there is no texturing of any kind, but it introduces hard edges once you apply a normal map/diffuse.
Thanks for the help.
Ok, I feel a little dumb, but TBH it was not clear to me what I was exporting with the .FBX options.
I found out that unchecking Tangents and binormals in the export options fixed it.
phew, thanks so mutch for making me go back and check that stuff Getawesome.
Thanks for the fast reply, but no thanks, there must be something causing it because i experienced it in the past with older Fix or Beta Driver releases. :P
ATI's poor driver support is what causes it, IE: changing/fixing something breaks something else.
You've gotta either find that magical version of ATI's drivers that actually works with all of your apps, and stick with it until the end of time or get an nvidia card, which has much more stable drivers.
Its an endless cycle of, release a new build of toolbag, new ati drivers, new toolbag, new ati drivers, etc etc etc.
Anyway that is my experience, I'm sure Jeff or someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
this cant get reported to ati and get it fixed on a next driver release? Im sick tired of the problems Modo has with Ati drivers and I hope Marmoset doesnt go the same path, modo has been broken for a long time with ati cards and its still not fixed.
Believe or not, I think it was about a year ago or two that they fixed a bug for Fable (1st one for PC) on ATI cards. There also the case in which they release a really buggy driver that took a full driver cycle to get updated.
Yeah, ATI has some nifty power in their cards, but considering how half of it is lost as raw power vs. refined, due to the drivers, don't get your hopes up. No one was able to figure out the driver patterns for ATI or how they patch things up.
this cant get reported to ati and get it fixed on a next driver release? Im sick tired of the problems Modo has with Ati drivers and I hope Marmoset doesnt go the same path, modo has been broken for a long time with ati cards and its still not fixed.
It's in all probably not a fault with Marmoset, ATI just have shitty drivers
In all likelihood, ATI prob broke something in their latest update, which in turn broke Marmoset.
ATI drivers cause issues with everything related to 3d creation...Blender has had problems with ATI drivers for as long as I have been into 3d...it's a moving target.
That error message is usually the result of out-of-date graphics drivers. By any chance are you on an ATI card? Try updating your drivers and give it a whirl again. If you have any further issues with crashes, or not starting up, send any toolbag_*.log files to toolbag@8monkeylabs.com and we'll be happy to help you debug!
To anyone with the dynamic lighting/specular issues (that we have not emailed yet), it is a shader issue on ATI cards that we discovered with 103. It will be fixed in our free 104 update that will be out later this week.
@Kudagras - Access violation errors are typically driver related, especially on rigs with an ATI card. Try updating your drivers and that should fix the problem.
Wow, that's messed up. We have seen a few glitches similar to this on some newer ATI hardware & drivers here at work, and we're really not sure what is going on at this point. It is likely a driver issue of some sort. We will look into it for the next point release in case it's a bug in toolbag its self, but since most machines don't do it it's kind of doubtful that that's the cause.
I've been writing graphics code for years and the persistent trend has always been: ATI cards with visual glitches. Those of you considering buying new video hardware, take from that what you will.
It does seem like the latest ATI driver release is causing some problems, we've been hearing this quite a bit lately. We'll look into it and see if there's something we can do on our end to help.
Well I can tell you that's the AO, and its rendering upside down. This is a problem we had in the engine a long time ago, and it was eventually fixed for us by video driver updates. On an ATI card by any chance? :-P
If you've got an ATI card and it doesn't boot, it's probably the driver bug many of our users have been experiencing. Video driver updates have helped most folks, so I'd give that a shot.
etc.
etc.
etc.
See the pattern?
Unfortunately, if you want stable 3d you have to go green. (Plus CUDA is ftw )
It's true, ATI/AMD drivers have been a big problem for us. I think part of the reason is that we are using OpenGL and not Direct3D (many other 3D modeling apps are in the same boat). I feel a lot of emphasis is placed on driver quality for games (Direct3D), which keeps most of their customer base happy, but the 3D artist community and just OpenGL users in general get kind of left out in the cold.
We'll keep doing the best we can with updates to stay on top of things for ATI card users. Sorry to hear people are having these troubles :-/
this cant get reported to ati and get it fixed on a next driver release? Im sick tired of the problems Modo has with Ati drivers and I hope Marmoset doesnt go the same path, modo has been broken for a long time with ati cards and its still not fixed.
ATI only cares about gamers who play the most popular games, ATI cards are great to run HL2 or whatever, but terrible for running obscure art apps or less popular games. Again.... Nvidia... There is a reason ATI is very rarely use at dev studios, and then, only to attempt to make sure your game runs on ATI. =P
Is there a way to pin the lights to the mesh so they follow the model when you rotate mesh in viewer? I have a spaceship with a bunch of lights (using them mostly for the spec and the little lens flare) and I cannot get the angle I want without rotating the mesh.
Apologies if this has been asked before, I tried several searches and read through a bunch of posts but couldn't find anything.
Great my driver messes mine up.... is there any way to roll back the CCC or whatever driver?
Same. Just updated to 11.9 to play the battlefield beta. I think you've got to completely remove the drivers, then install one that works with marmoset. Anyone know what the most recent stable version is?:
Hopefully judging from the release dates, you should be able to pick out a driver version that works well for you. Again, sorry for this. We'll see if we can get a patch out soon!
11.08 WHQL was the last stable release that worked with marmoset, since marmoset uses OpenGL it would not be that hard to mod 11.09 to have the GL drivers from 11.08.
Does anyone know how to "increase" the amount the normal map is affecting the model?
I don't think there is any way to increase the strength of the normal map in Marmoset, so you would have to render a stronger normal map from the start.
But this is a good thing, as you really should be re-baking your maps from a modified HP mesh, if you are not getting the result that you are looking for initially.
I don't think there is any way to increase the strength of the normal map in Marmoset, so you would have to render a stronger normal map from the start.
But this is a good thing, as you really should be re-baking your maps from a modified HP mesh, if you are not getting the result that you are looking for initially.
Cheers for the help. Looking at it my bakes from xNormal seem to be giving me an odd colour anyway. I think I have something configured totally wrong anyway!
I found a better solution, to avoid future problems, you only have to take 3 files from the driver set that works with marmoset, and put them in marmoset folder next to the executable, those files are ATIDEMGX.dll, atio6axx.dll and atioglxx.dll you find them by extrating the Ati Driver package with 7zip and then searching the files by their name, you will find them as atio6axx.dl_ you only need to open them with 7zip and extract them, then just put the 3 files next to toolbag.exe and done. i guess i will not fear Ati driver updates anymore
i mean if ill make it look good in this tool, will it reflect what it would look ingame? or the game engine gonna take much different materials setup?
EQ is right, it's a different system and won't look the same. But the basic stuff like diffuse and normal maps will match pretty well, specular is a little less easy to match.
Hi to all, some days ago I have installed the new Ati driver for the BF3 Beta, everything seemed to go well until I've runned Marmoset (1.04 Trial).
The only result I received is a black model (with no light added to the scene), with light a strange colored model, now, reading this thread I've understand that the solution is to install old driver (I tried the 11.7 - 11.9 - Rage optimized driver) but the problem is still there.
Solutions?
I found a better solution, to avoid future problems, you only have to take 3 files from the driver set that works with marmoset, and put them in marmoset folder next to the executable, those files are ATIDEMGX.dll, atio6axx.dll and atioglxx.dll you find them by extrating the Ati Driver package with 7zip and then searching the files by their name, you will find them as atio6axx.dl_ you only need to open them with 7zip and extract them, then just put the 3 files next to toolbag.exe and done. i guess i will not fear Ati driver updates anymore
I recently bought M.T 1.04 and I'm using it daily to do my work. I'm currently working on a desert M1025 US Humvee, and I've come across something that I don't seem to be able to get around.
Looking at this picture, you can see how the hood is not shiny, but rather washed out and not reflective at all.
The look I'm going for is clearly like the picture above, but my results with the specular map makes the car look quite plastic, and way too shiny. The thing is that if I turn down the specular of the paint, it looks very dull.
Here are some pics:
As you can see it looks quite OK on image #3 but rather plastic on the others.
I will attach my specular map and diffuse as well if that might help anyone to figure out what I should do.
In regards to glossyness, I've tried going into the alpha of the Specularity channel and painting white/black or grey tones to test the gloss, but the results I'm getting is not that the gloss really gets washed out like in the first photo, but the specularity just disappears the darker I'm painting.
- The lighting conditions in your photo are very different from your choice of environment light in Toolbag. You'll want to pick a lighting environment in Toolbag that is much closer to an overcast sky if you're intending to closely match the appearance in the photo for presentation of your model.
- Next up, it sounds like you're thinking about gloss and specular maps as two somewhat unrelated features, this is incorrect. The Specular map determines the color and intensity of specular reflections for the object, but you also want to control the sharpness of the specular reflections. To set the sharpness, you will need to first set the 'Specular Sharpness' slider bar in Toolbag. After that, the grayscale values in your "Gloss" map - the alpha channel of spec map in Toolbag - will modulate the specular sharpness using the value set on the sharpness slider as the upper limit (white pixels in your Gloss Map).
In your case, a really low intensity and sharpness will be needed to pull of a dull metal look.
- The lighting conditions in your photo are very different from your choice of environment light in Toolbag. You'll want to pick a lighting environment in Toolbag that is much closer to an overcast sky if you're intending to closely match the appearance in the photo for presentation of your model.
- Next up, it sounds like you're thinking about gloss and specular maps as two somewhat unrelated features, this is incorrect. The Specular map determines the color and intensity of specular reflections for the object, but you also want to control the sharpness of the specular reflections. To set the sharpness, you will need to first set the 'Specular Sharpness' slider bar in Toolbag. After that, the grayscale values in your "Gloss" map - the alpha channel of spec map in Toolbag - will modulate the specular sharpness using the value set on the sharpness slider as the upper limit (white pixels in your Gloss Map).
In your case, a really low intensity and sharpness will be needed to pull of a dull metal look.
Thanks for the tips! I experimented alot with painting in the alpha for the different materials on the car, treating rubber, metal, glass etc as different materials now both in the spec but also the glossmap. It's taken me along time to get here since I've been unknowingly trying to make it look like a glossy sportscar, but if you check out the pictures of any military car, the surface is not glossy at all.
What I'm about to do now is create a texture for the glass windows, and I'm wondering if there's any tips to get before starting?
I'm thinking of using specular map in the ComplexRefraction diffuse slot for the windows as well, since it's the alpha of the specular that actually makes it transparent. It seems easier that way.
Anything I should know before placing mud/dirt on the windows? Should the diffuse color for the glass be black or white? The Shader itself seems to work best if the diffuse is black, but then it also get's quite invisible unless you watch an animation of it. On a still frame it's easy to mistake it for 100% transparent.
Replies
I've only found one post on this that says you just need to setup your UV coordinates, but not how to do that. As far as I know, my UV coordinates are set up just fine... it works in Max, but in max I have told the texture to tile itself. Does anyone know how to do this?
Edit: ... Still having this issue, and I've also just noticed that it tiles SOME materials like CRAZY. I have yet to discover any rhyme or reason, or any hints from searching google + these forums. I would greatly appreciate any help because this looks like a spectacular program and I'd love to use it.
this picture demonstrates
now from what I've learned, there's only supposed to be one normal,tangent, and bitangent unless the smoothing is broken, or there's a UV seam.
however, there is neither (much inspection of UV maps and unifying normal etc. has proved this)
so, what would cause this to happen? any clues?
Unfortunately if you look at the normals you'l notice they are welded just fine (I ran through my model looking for exploded verts as you say anyways, just to be sure)
but the problem is in the tangents/bitangents. This causes the model to smooth fine when there is no texturing of any kind, but it introduces hard edges once you apply a normal map/diffuse.
Thanks for the help.
ill look into it thnx
I found out that unchecking Tangents and binormals in the export options fixed it.
phew, thanks so mutch for making me go back and check that stuff Getawesome.
In future I will use .fbx for all my stuff.
You've gotta either find that magical version of ATI's drivers that actually works with all of your apps, and stick with it until the end of time or get an nvidia card, which has much more stable drivers.
Its an endless cycle of, release a new build of toolbag, new ati drivers, new toolbag, new ati drivers, etc etc etc.
Anyway that is my experience, I'm sure Jeff or someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
Yeah, ATI has some nifty power in their cards, but considering how half of it is lost as raw power vs. refined, due to the drivers, don't get your hopes up. No one was able to figure out the driver patterns for ATI or how they patch things up.
It's in all probably not a fault with Marmoset, ATI just have shitty drivers
In all likelihood, ATI prob broke something in their latest update, which in turn broke Marmoset.
ATI drivers cause issues with everything related to 3d creation...Blender has had problems with ATI drivers for as long as I have been into 3d...it's a moving target.
etc.
etc.
etc.
See the pattern?
Unfortunately, if you want stable 3d you have to go green. (Plus CUDA is ftw
We'll keep doing the best we can with updates to stay on top of things for ATI card users. Sorry to hear people are having these troubles :-/
ATI only cares about gamers who play the most popular games, ATI cards are great to run HL2 or whatever, but terrible for running obscure art apps or less popular games. Again.... Nvidia... There is a reason ATI is very rarely use at dev studios, and then, only to attempt to make sure your game runs on ATI. =P
Apologies if this has been asked before, I tried several searches and read through a bunch of posts but couldn't find anything.
Same. Just updated to 11.9 to play the battlefield beta. I think you've got to completely remove the drivers, then install one that works with marmoset. Anyone know what the most recent stable version is?:
vista/7 64: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/windows/previous/Pages/radeonaiw_vista64.aspx
vista/7 32: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/windows/previous/Pages/radeonaiw_vista32.aspx
xp: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/windows/Legacy/previous/Pages/radeonaiw_xp64.aspx
Hopefully judging from the release dates, you should be able to pick out a driver version that works well for you. Again, sorry for this. We'll see if we can get a patch out soon!
But this is a good thing, as you really should be re-baking your maps from a modified HP mesh, if you are not getting the result that you are looking for initially.
Cheers for the help. Looking at it my bakes from xNormal seem to be giving me an odd colour anyway. I think I have something configured totally wrong anyway!
You want the swizzle in the normal map settings to be X+Y+Z+ for marmoset, if that helps
http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/GPU121AMDCatRagePerfDriver.aspx
Worth a spin maybe for those of you who have had compat issues.
Works
i mean if ill make it look good in this tool, will it reflect what it would look ingame? or the game engine gonna take much different materials setup?
Completely different engine, lighting, material system etc.
cant get smooth turn (i use manually camera turntable )
EQ is right, it's a different system and won't look the same. But the basic stuff like diffuse and normal maps will match pretty well, specular is a little less easy to match.
played with the demo today, cool stuff
couple more here
http://www.lonewolf3d.com/images/Mp5/MP5RAS.html
:thumbup:
any chance youll update the sky maps to high res? not that its important.. :P
The only result I received is a black model (with no light added to the scene), with light a strange colored model, now, reading this thread I've understand that the solution is to install old driver (I tried the 11.7 - 11.9 - Rage optimized driver) but the problem is still there.
Solutions?
Strange, normally they are in hi-res :
This is the same setup scene before the driver update:
Did you try that?
I don't know what else to do.
some high some low, the one u posted is hires for me too (there are 2 forest maps there)
Get those files from 11.8 drivers.
The following are in pretty low resolution :
Of course the latest skybox are in hi-res (pavement and so on).
Sorry, I have forgotten to say that I've tried this method, but the problem is still there.
EDIT: Problem solved, other than remove the driver from panel control I've used Driver Sweeper 3.2, then installed Ati 11.10 v2 Preview Driver.
Looking at this picture, you can see how the hood is not shiny, but rather washed out and not reflective at all.
The look I'm going for is clearly like the picture above, but my results with the specular map makes the car look quite plastic, and way too shiny. The thing is that if I turn down the specular of the paint, it looks very dull.
Here are some pics:
As you can see it looks quite OK on image #3 but rather plastic on the others.
I will attach my specular map and diffuse as well if that might help anyone to figure out what I should do.
In regards to glossyness, I've tried going into the alpha of the Specularity channel and painting white/black or grey tones to test the gloss, but the results I'm getting is not that the gloss really gets washed out like in the first photo, but the specularity just disappears the darker I'm painting.
I'd really appreciate some tips here.
Kind regards
- The lighting conditions in your photo are very different from your choice of environment light in Toolbag. You'll want to pick a lighting environment in Toolbag that is much closer to an overcast sky if you're intending to closely match the appearance in the photo for presentation of your model.
- Next up, it sounds like you're thinking about gloss and specular maps as two somewhat unrelated features, this is incorrect. The Specular map determines the color and intensity of specular reflections for the object, but you also want to control the sharpness of the specular reflections. To set the sharpness, you will need to first set the 'Specular Sharpness' slider bar in Toolbag. After that, the grayscale values in your "Gloss" map - the alpha channel of spec map in Toolbag - will modulate the specular sharpness using the value set on the sharpness slider as the upper limit (white pixels in your Gloss Map).
In your case, a really low intensity and sharpness will be needed to pull of a dull metal look.
For further reference, always a good read on specularity: http://www.manufato.com/?p=902
Thanks for the tips! I experimented alot with painting in the alpha for the different materials on the car, treating rubber, metal, glass etc as different materials now both in the spec but also the glossmap. It's taken me along time to get here since I've been unknowingly trying to make it look like a glossy sportscar, but if you check out the pictures of any military car, the surface is not glossy at all.
What I'm about to do now is create a texture for the glass windows, and I'm wondering if there's any tips to get before starting?
I'm thinking of using specular map in the ComplexRefraction diffuse slot for the windows as well, since it's the alpha of the specular that actually makes it transparent. It seems easier that way.
Anything I should know before placing mud/dirt on the windows? Should the diffuse color for the glass be black or white? The Shader itself seems to work best if the diffuse is black, but then it also get's quite invisible unless you watch an animation of it. On a still frame it's easy to mistake it for 100% transparent.
Regards