Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:15:05 +0100, Patrick Elliott 
> <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote:
>>
>> Oh, and what is it with applications that can "unwrap" a mesh to a UV 
>> map, but do so either using an ugly form that you can't be precise 
>> with (since all the surfaces have curves that prevent it), or a 
>> completely flat one, where you can't tell what surface you are 
>> *actually* looking at? lol Got to be a better way to do that, even if 
>> its just "let me paint some basic colors on this damn thing, then 
>> export the mesh *with* the colors, so I can tell what the hell I am 
>> doing."
> 
> Something like this?
> 
> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Doc:Manual/Materials/Vertex_Paint
> 
> 
> 
Well... Yes and no. Problem here is I want to export the "mesh" UV map, 
with the color overlayed, so that when I take it into a more complex 
application, which I can use real image editing, etc. on, I can see, 
generally, where things where in the 3D version. Closest you can 
probably get is to export the vertex paint map, and the mesh map, 
separate, then overlay them in the application. Depending on which sort 
of export you use though, this isn't going to necessarily work.

Actually, better idea would be something that let me treat the 3D 
surface as a canvas, while still *using* the tools from something like 
Paintshop Pro. I am sure there is something out there, in the $500-$1000 
range that supports this, maybe, but for the rest of us... All you have 
is exporting of the edge lines, in one of several forms, and *trying* to 
match what ever you are editing on the image to those lines. 
Unfortunately, in something like PSP, you are stuck with the flat 
version, unless you hand draw everything, because it has no awareness 
that the lines define curvature, so you can't bend your textures to fit 
the shape. Tools to do that, for the most part, don't exist, except, 
again, in the same high-level apps that probably already work with 3D.

Given what I do most 3D in, most of my time is spent making things 
"look" like they have more structure than they do, without being *able* 
to add real geometry. This puts me in a conundrum. Either I have to 
unwrap something into a flat surface, then apply details, which is 
frustrating, since its hard to tell which bits you are working with, 
or.. a better solution would be some way to take a "real" 3D result, 
warped to fit the "shape" I need, then applied that way. Needless to 
say, while POVRay's camera system is real neat, it doesn't have a "make 
a camera whose lens looks like an entire {insert general shape of the 
object needed}. lol I can't think of a good way to manage that, at least 
not with anything that has any sort of complexity. A sphere, cylinder, 
or other simple object, fine, you just make it reflective, sit the 
camera in the middle, with 360 degrees of view, then make the object you 
are trying to "copy" have no image. All you get is the reflection. But 
something with dips, bumps, or other complex shapes? Just really doesn't 
work, in most cases.

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message