Xnormal, Normals and photoshop!
Hey guys, so I was doing some doodles on PS and I notice I had Xnorm actually on filters at the bottom. I used the height one and it gives me a normal map looking thing. I saved it out and applied it to the model I was working on and it defined my texture!
So to my understanding the 2 ways I know of to get normals :
Zbrush- Normal mapping projection
Photoshop Normals (I just had a texture and used the height option and gave me a set of normals which defined my texture more)
My question is that is using this perfectly valid? Is it popular? I've always wanted to know how to actually pump up your texture. I used to see mechanical models with sets of diffuses and spec maps and such, then I saw the normals and I'm thinking who do you do that? I only knew of the Zbrush technique which I know pretty much everyone uses. But is this a real valid technique? Can it be used to pump up mechanical like textures/ even organic?
Sorry for all the writing - Just wanted to know..
Later Polycount.
So to my understanding the 2 ways I know of to get normals :
Zbrush- Normal mapping projection
Photoshop Normals (I just had a texture and used the height option and gave me a set of normals which defined my texture more)
My question is that is using this perfectly valid? Is it popular? I've always wanted to know how to actually pump up your texture. I used to see mechanical models with sets of diffuses and spec maps and such, then I saw the normals and I'm thinking who do you do that? I only knew of the Zbrush technique which I know pretty much everyone uses. But is this a real valid technique? Can it be used to pump up mechanical like textures/ even organic?
Sorry for all the writing - Just wanted to know..
Later Polycount.
Replies
(as in : try further, you'll quickly see why!)
Is it used for bumping up textures or not? I mean every time I do a detailed texture max displays it blurry and big... I was hoping this was a way too.
Important:
I also see some peoples normal maps without orgranics in them and I think "How do they make straight edged, clean mechanical looking stuff to pump up there model" Cant be the layer tool in Zbrush?
Chaos, here is a simple way to look at it :
Normalmaps are a way to add extra surface angle (aka, 'normals') to a game-resolution object.
Some of that information can be very well extracted from a height map (where black is deep and white is high). This is what the Nvidia filter, the Xnormal filter (photoshop) and Crazybump all do, in different ways. (more or less advanced). You can even setup photoshop actions that convert brush strokes to normalmaps! And boy you can make cool stuff with that.
However simply 'painting' (painting them, or converting them from BW) such maps doesnt get very far. Like I said, try it yourself : there is certain things one can paint, other stuff just does not work. This is as far as I managed to go with that technique :
http://pioroberson.com/images/3d_pior_bobodemon.jpg
It's a mix of painted normals, but also a lot of copy pasting from older maps I had. And it works because its a funky wrinkly monster. You could do cool brickwalls and wood planks that way, but you'll never get a SFiV Cammy smooth butt that way :P
The reason why you cannot get very far with that and also the reason why you need baking from highpoly : the intricate interaction between the lowpoly outline (more technically put : the shape and the way it is shaded) and the complex highpoly equivalent is all extremely subtle, and just cannot be cheated in the case of complex non-tiling geometry (characters, important props, weapons). Like Kevin said in his GoW2 thread, in the end you just throw tricks away and brute model pretty much everything.
Just jump in and do stuff, you will quickly see the benefits and shortcomings of the two techniques. Many game artists and many engine programmers still don't have a clear grasp on such subtleties anyways, you're not alone here so don't worry :P Just mess around and try stuff.
Also about straight edges. Yup you can do some of that in Z, using stencil techniques, the layer brush, or projection master. But this will only work for details added on top of a main shape (boots, military gear, buckles and so on). Observe more epic kind of models and you will quickly see that most interlocking shapes cannot be done like that. Before Zbrush existed, highpoly models were already being made ; intricate hard surface models are still being done like they were decades ago. It's is a misconception to believe that Z or Mud can do that too. You can get close, but not that far/clean.
Good luck!
I already new the purpose of normal mapping and how it works but I guess I just needed some validation to which one was the correct/proffesional one (I've always known the Zbrush-Projecting method) The thing that still bothers me (and could probably be saved by a noobish zbrush thread) but its how I can apply straight/tech looking lines on a model. I've been trying to find an example of this and the best one I could find is : http://www.digisaur.net/games/images/gun_norm.jpg. Is this purley zbrush detail, mix painted normals or just painted normals?
Also http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=SFiV%20Cammy&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi ?
Like Pior said, playing around with the two will probably help you the most. Also, like Gav said the "Be All End All Normal Mapping thread" here on polycount is good and covers everything, but if your like me, it goes into way too much detail.
My personal favorite source for learning normal mapping is Ben Mathis's write up here: http://www.poopinmymouth.com/tutorial/normal_workflow.htm
It's a really quick read, and I am confident if you follow along you will have an answer to all your questions. Good luck man.
Do you mean just modelling the parts in high poly then baking it over the low for a more technical boxy feel when needed ?
Just to reiterate : if these lines you want to add simply lay on a relatively flat surface, yes you can do it in Zbrush the sculpty way :
http://sebleg.free.fr/2006/shoes.jpg
http://sebleg.free.fr/2006/gear.jpg
http://sebleg.free.fr/2007/Zsnipe05c.jpg
(on that last image, you can clearly tell that the small details are Zbrushed in, laying on the flat surface. But the large components have all been modeled separately, because there is no way you could extrude that cleanly in Z alone)
If your shapes need accurate surface definition and wedge into one another, you need to model all this.
http://www.3pointstudios.com/img/3ps_xxx_m7_realtime.jpg
http://www.3pointstudios.com/img/3ps_xxx_cw_realtime.jpg
Also the sculpty approach works better with a loose concept. When you need to follow a mechanical model sheet accurately, you need actual modeling most of the time.
Go do stuff! theory is not enough for all this.