OBJ WITH DISPLACEMENT GRAPHIC EXPORT is possible to use in STUDIOMAX?
CLO File is exported to OBJ and FBX, not sure if texture is ok as it is to use in Studiomax. I opened files in Blender, Graphic is not showing in FBX at all.
It was displacement effect on rendering in CLO, this shows in OBJ. But they said OBJ file is not texture embedded to garment, so difficult to work with it.
They are ok with FBX but Graphic is missing.
Can anyone advise which part is incorrect? I want to export all texture/graphics in OBJ or FBX.
-
Hi Ottoline,
Thanks for kind reply, the problem is, I am not a user of Studiomax, but it is other side of tech, and I am supposed to send FBX or OBJ for their next work.
They say Graphic is missing on FBX, and also I don't see it when I check FBX. Different depth level can be adjusted(I guess so), but complete Missing is different thing.
I am trying to figure out how to help this. to make Graphic wording visible in FBX export, what should I do?
0 -
Try not to guess.
That is entirely dependent on the next persons specification for the shader.
FBX based on a myriad of software vendors.
0 -
You are right, there should not be guess, but as beginner of 3D, I can not say I can figure out all of step and detail.
I have been a apparel production QA manager/director for 20 years, meaning I had pretty long history and credit as a professional person in my area, but to be honest, every single of 3D graphic word are all new and guess. There are lots of people who don't know how it should be like me. I agree there should be more professional way start, but not all of company and people can have professional people like you at all trial stage. Even if it is lousy start, people will understand at some point from trial and error. This project is just trial level, and I know the other side Studiomax is not helping much, but before challenging back or saying No go, I wanted to find what I don't know first or what I can do. Just saying No is the easy thing always. But there is circumstance always I don't want to. Plus, I can not say No for the thing I don't know much, and also until I really do and try, I would not know what I don't know.
I really appreciate you spend valuable time to explain and you are the key person of this community support, but sometimes very difficult to understand.
I mentioned I can not see Graphic at all in blender after exporting to FBX unlike OBJ. I still don't find the answer. When I don't see graphic at all, how can I think technical spec is needed?
They were ok with all texture effect of FBX, only Chest Logo is missing.
0 -
There is a growing body of information out there to draw from regarding how to approach digital fashion and pipeline cross over with systems data exchange, trial and error is not the way to go (too many possible permutations to explore) until you have refined your choices based on fundamental pipeline drivers - that could be costly compared to some web clicking and reading about integration approaches.
Structure the trial, demand to hit key milestones in performance, fill the holes in the know-how and specialist vocab and meet the technical quality you outline - even if vague at first). Unstructured time is fine - but it is not open ended without some well define constraints. The language that comes with this territory is broad and that is where research wrapped up in some technical brief will help focus the scope of what you need to find out or dive deeper into and help you stay focused.
When you export as unified UV co-ordinates the decal will be baked into the UV layout (0-1) for the pattern pieces as per your UV.
Similar deal when you export as .object you can select the graphic (decal) as a specific object.
You arrange your patterns to pack into a UV map when you bake the textures to the UV on FBX/OBJ unified UV texture options.
So in this instance the graphic is baked to the UV image map at the resolution you specify for end purpose and there is no mesh (decal) hovering above the shirt.
Above you can see this better in this view. Note the quality of the graphic (pixel resolution) and the texture map both play a roll in the combined effect. See here when the graphics resolution is too low yet the UV map is quite high ... a mis-match if you were to take a close up camera render shot. So again this is where your technical specification outlines the quality for the texel you need to meet.
When you toggle off unified co-ordinates the decal will be exported as a separate mesh object hovering above the pattern as per the setting in the z offset (default 0.05mm) This now appear as a material with mesh vertex surface you can separate out (based on material separation) downstream and assign the image to that mesh UV element.
So your graphic (decal) material is a mesh group material ID relative to that graphic in CLO3D.
Which is assigned relative to material as exported based on there being no UV or baking of the mapped texture tiles (fabrics) to the UV layout. (apply the library shader PBR from that render system >drag and drop) In that case the UV is not used.
So it is very dependent on the texturing pipeline workflow integration as to which way you go and setting the quality with your export of the material fabric shaders. In blender you can pick these up automatically and assign PBR shader nodes as you need. And this is also where material texture libraries might cross over with custom shader interpolation to speed the process. For CLO3D vray and blender for example the Unified 3D Material (u3m) files are a mechanism to transport a common material within a shared library resource. I don't favor that as the shader they set as that standard actually lacks technical rigor in the additional factors that fabric textures generally need, for example yarn ID maps, weave gap masks and emission - which means you still have a lot of shader setup to manually configure from that standard. A whole lot of woe and work - based on them not thinking it out very well.
So many options - many pros- and cons, many technical constraints to factor in ... decisions to make.
0
Comments