Impressions
I bought Shadermap some days ago and I'm still very happy with it. No idea why Crazybump got so popular - Shadermap is far better and got far better user experiance, modern interface and better functionality. I strongly recommend this tool to every 3d artist out there. I'm usually not the type who tends to become fanboyisch ... but I made for Shadermap an exception. My compliments goes to the Rendering Systems Inc. team for designing this extraordinary program!
What a pitty that I'm not allowed to post the results. I think you would find them very convincing. I'm working in the games industry so I'm bound to the NDA until the game is released.
Where great light is, there is also shadow ... or some workflow parts I stumble over. Here's my feedback.
- The normal map generation could use some more options. This is the only part where crazymap got more functionality then shadermap. Being a professional artist means to control every detail and tweak it until you got the perfect result. For this reason I need more control over the process. Maybe some type of gama curve adjustment could do the trick. typically you need to adjust the values of the displacement and how they are interpreted by the normal map generation.
- I long searched how to open a specular map. Only diffuse, normal and displacement are listed. So it confused me a lot. Later I just noticed that I can use the diffuse map but it's still strange.
- What I miss is a refresh button for reloading images. As an artist I don't like to got an automatically generated copys to work on. Would you trust em? I really don't. And the typical texturing pipeline uses always the same files to work on and overwrite 'em until they are in the final stage. This is how every professional artist works. And trust me after almost 30 years of industry experience and over 50 games productions I met planty of artist. We never ever would accept artificial made copys to paint on them in photoshop. This is where it really hurts.
- Normalpainting is in general an good idea. But no one except programmers would use meshes as brushes. In the introduction video I first thought - hey, cool! Fast followed from the second thought - how useless! Do you got some artist to test shadermap? Please ask them which tools they need to paint normalmaps. You will be surprised. We wish simple 2d brushes made out of grayscale images - displacement maps. Very low tech but the way to go.
Don't take me wrong. Overall shadermap rocks and is the strongest tool in competition. And it's got a lot of potential to become an even better tool. My three cents are the attempt to give you the starting points for optimization. I really, really love shadermap.
What a pitty that I'm not allowed to post the results. I think you would find them very convincing. I'm working in the games industry so I'm bound to the NDA until the game is released.
Where great light is, there is also shadow ... or some workflow parts I stumble over. Here's my feedback.
- The normal map generation could use some more options. This is the only part where crazymap got more functionality then shadermap. Being a professional artist means to control every detail and tweak it until you got the perfect result. For this reason I need more control over the process. Maybe some type of gama curve adjustment could do the trick. typically you need to adjust the values of the displacement and how they are interpreted by the normal map generation.
- I long searched how to open a specular map. Only diffuse, normal and displacement are listed. So it confused me a lot. Later I just noticed that I can use the diffuse map but it's still strange.
- What I miss is a refresh button for reloading images. As an artist I don't like to got an automatically generated copys to work on. Would you trust em? I really don't. And the typical texturing pipeline uses always the same files to work on and overwrite 'em until they are in the final stage. This is how every professional artist works. And trust me after almost 30 years of industry experience and over 50 games productions I met planty of artist. We never ever would accept artificial made copys to paint on them in photoshop. This is where it really hurts.
- Normalpainting is in general an good idea. But no one except programmers would use meshes as brushes. In the introduction video I first thought - hey, cool! Fast followed from the second thought - how useless! Do you got some artist to test shadermap? Please ask them which tools they need to paint normalmaps. You will be surprised. We wish simple 2d brushes made out of grayscale images - displacement maps. Very low tech but the way to go.
Don't take me wrong. Overall shadermap rocks and is the strongest tool in competition. And it's got a lot of potential to become an even better tool. My three cents are the attempt to give you the starting points for optimization. I really, really love shadermap.
Comments
Specular maps are generated from displacement. There are no maps that can be generated from a specular map, hence it is generally not used as a source map.
Great idea, I will add it to each source map for regeneration.
Since I programmed it, yes I do trust the copy. You can define the export copy as a PSD file which is lossless. I do understand your concern however and will be adding the refresh button as stated above.
ShaderMap doesn't paint with geometry exactly, users are painting with colors (normals that are encoded into colors). World space vectors from the geometry are transformed into tangent space then color encoded into the brush. You are painting with colors. A displacement map is used behind the scenes for z testing when stroke mode is enabled.
There are currently two kinds of normal brushes, the first uses geometry or normal maps as a brush (N-brush), the other uses 2d brush shapes for painting single directional normals (V-brush). Perhaps you might have a third thought? Does anyone else think it is useless?
And furthermore you propose using 2d brushes in grayscale (displacement) to paint normals. Do you mean to paint the displacement prior to normal generation? If so you will be pleased to note that a displacement editor is in the works.
I'm currently working to add lines, circles, and box modes for each brush as well as a new tool for erasing normals (all, painted, and last stoke only).
Thanks for your feedback. I will take your suggestions into consideration when mapping (pun intended) out the future of ShaderMap.
Regards,
Neil
But with that said here are a couple things on my wish list:
Blur Tool - Sometimes the normals aren't all that smooth. So some sort of blur or smudge tool that allows me to just soften the normals would be helpful.
Stencil Tool - I'd like to be able to create a png with shape and a transparent background. I could then use that shape to stamp/emboss the normal map. Where the intensity would control the depth of the push or pull. This would be a handy way to add some texture to a normal map.
Advanced Brush Controls - Set the size of the brush. Set the distance of the normal transition around the outside of the brush. Be presented with a profile curve for that transition with the ability to set sharp points or smooth points along that curve. (Being able to do this with the stencil tool above would be wicked awesome!)
First, thank you Hexodus and thank you shirokuma. Your feedback on the normal editor has been very helpful.
I took the night to really think about this topic. There is a lot of gold in the stencil brush idea. I didn't get it at first because I was thinking in black and white.. ("We wish simple 2d brushes made out of grayscale images - displacement maps. Very low tech but the way to go.")
Then it became clearer.. ("I'd like to be able to create a png with shape and a transparent background. I could then use that shape to stamp/emboss the normal map.")
So.. A brush defined by a stencil PNG where the alpha defines displacement and the difference in displacement pixels defines the normal vector. The intensity sets the max height of the displacement.
It seems so obvious now... And I was really proud of my geometry paint implementation too
2.0.6 will be out this week and adds some really cool interface changes as well as the FBX importer and bug fixes.
Next week I'm starting on 2.0.7 and will focus mostly on the normal editor. Here is an image displaying some of the new tools:
Not sure if brush rotation and Wacom sensitivity will make it into this round but they are in the works.
Feedback welcome.
It looks like there are going to be lots of new things coming up. I can't wait to try them out.
Will those Polyline and/or Spline tools be able to reconnect to themselves so that you can create filled shapes?
I'm also interested in how that Eraser will be implemented too. Currently that's really the only thing I use the V-brush tool for.
I've also been thinking about some sort of Bulldozer tool. For example with your image above. What if you wanted to increase the size of one of those veins, or add a new one. I'd like to be able to click on a spot to define the normal/height, and then be able to paint out keeping everything under the brush the same normal/height. (Kind of like level terrain in the Sims)
They will be able to connect to themselves but as for fill it will depend on the brush. V brush and the Eraser will allow for fill but not N brush or the Stencil brush (for now).
The Eraser will erase in 3 modes, all pixels, last thing painted, all painted (but not the original normals). My guess is that you are V painting (0,0,1) vector (127,127,255) to 'erase'. That is more like painting. The Eraser will allow you to undo parts of painted strokes and stamps without changing the base vectors.
Thanks for the suggestion. Sort of pushes vectors that define the edges outward. This would require some thought and may make it into a later version. First I'll need to spend a great deal of time implementing many of the new features listed above.
You are welcome. It's actually a lot of fun for me. I appreciate all the feedback you and other artists are giving. In the end it's your tool.
I have an old curve control - uses catmull-rom splines with a n-knot curve (used extensively in another project). It could be adapted to take linear break points for creating sharp edges as suggested by shirokuma.
I like the program, but don't see how it's much better than PixPlant...save from the AO map generation. What none of these programs seem to have is a way to paint in specularity at various values, like you can in Mudbox. Mudbox isn't my favorite program, but even ZBrush can't paint in specularity, as far as I can tell.
Thanks for your suggestion Rob.
At the moment we are working hard to complete the changes to the normal editor. We have considered placing a generalized greyscale editor to be used on maps such as AO and specular. For now users can one-click export the specualar map to Photoshop (or any editor), save changes, and see the results in SM2 immediately.