Fast Organic UV Mapping

[Magian]

Originally Posted by Craig Lewis

pullin shapes - Roadkill UV Tool

Roadkill was made using blenders code. It's primarily a maya/3ds max plugin, but is also a standalone tool, and can be helpful for unwrapping.

I see that it has a version which can be called from within XSI but I don't know if this works in XSI 7. I e-mailed Francis and he is not sure either.

At first glance I do not see the link for the standalone version. Where is it on the website?

[Jonathan]

I enjoy using 3DSMax's unwrapping tools, and Polyboost adds a little more flexibility to it as well. Pelt-mapping + relaxing by face angle/center, etc. and things go rather quickly.

[Magian]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

I enjoy using 3DSMax's unwrapping tools, and Polyboost adds a little more flexibility to it as well. Pelt-mapping + relaxing by face angle/center, etc. and things go rather quickly.

Thanks for the tip, but I have no intention of buying Max. I just purchased XSI Essentials a few months ago and I am extremely happy with it. The UV tools in it are very good, I am just looking for something that will allow a very quick unwrapping of an organic model and then let me tweak the UVs with XSI's existing tools.

[lefix]

i checked out roadkill and i am loving it. big thanks for the link
works pretty much like blenders unwrapping tool. but having a little standalone tool is pretty nice for people not working with blender. i'm pretty sure i will use this more often from now on.

whoever was looking for the standalone link. i downloaded the latest maya version and it had both the maya plugin and the standalone installer in it.

[Craig Lewis]

Ah, sorry about that. didn't really look into it much, it's just a program someone gave me at work (because mayas unwrapping tools are shite). I find it really useful, but it does have a lot of problems. It at least speeds up my workflow though.

[Magian]

I've been working with the Unwrap tool in 3D-Coat and it is extremely easy to use. It utilizes the LSCM algorithm, which I believe is somewhat different from a "pelt-mapping" type of unwrap. Nevertheless, it is simple to use and looks pretty good so I am happy with it.

I think I will also try the UV tools in Blender just to compare the two. However, unless the unwrap in Blender is much better then I think I will stick with 3D-Coat because it is much nicer to be able to unwrap within 3D-Coat and then start sculpturing and finally texturing in the same application. Using Blender would add another application to my pipeline and I would rather not do that.

EDIT---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After checking out the Blender video tutorials it seems that it, too, uses a LSCM unwrapping algorithm. The only significant difference apparent to me between the LSCM unwrap in Blender and the LSCM unwrap in 3D-Coat is the inability to pin vertices in 3D Coat. Using 3D Coat is without a doubt simpler and certainly more convenient for me. This combined with the possibility that Andrew may incorporate vertex pinning into 3D Coat within the next ten minutes makes the choice obvious for me.

Thank everyone for responding.

[germball]

Originally Posted by Magian

Thanks for the tip, but I have no intention of buying Max. I just purchased XSI Essentials a few months ago and I am extremely happy with it. The UV tools in it are very good, I am just looking for something that will allow a very quick unwrapping of an organic model and then let me tweak the UVs with XSI's existing tools.

The XSI Roadkill tool is essentially a python script, so it should work with XSI 7, though it might need a recompile to ensure 100% stability. Though from what I hear rumour wise, Softimage are planning something on the UV side, hopefully using their ICE tech, which would be awesome. The UV tools in XSI are very underated and alot better than Maya's, whose toolset hasn't really been looked at in a while. Max's are slightly better, but have been iffy for years. For me right now XSI has the overall edge, but it just lacks a properly implemented unwrap tool.

Good choice in buying XSI too. Investing in Max for the long term games market is not a smart idea.

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by germball

The XSI Roadkill tool is essentially a python script, so it should work with XSI 7, though it might need a recompile to ensure 100% stability. Though from what I hear rumour wise, Softimage are planning something on the UV side, hopefully using their ICE tech, which would be awesome. The UV tools in XSI are very underated and alot better than Maya's, whose toolset hasn't really been looked at in a while. Max's are slightly better, but have been iffy for years. For me right now XSI has the overall edge, but it just lacks a properly implemented unwrap tool.

Good choice in buying XSI too. Investing in Max for the long term games market is not a smart idea.

I would say that is a little pretentious, wouldn't you?

XSI used to be the program of the 3d industry, but a few missteps on their part sorta ruined that for them in the 90s. Now 3DSMax is the clear dominant program in game production, and after that, I would say Maya is more ahead of XSI, which both are owned by Autodesk.

Sure, I'm glad to see XSI is gaining ground, and wouldn't mind learning more of it, but I wouldn't be focusing on XSI if you're goal is to work in the industry, unless you have a specific studio in mind you want to work for that uses XSI.

[germball]

pretentious? no not really. But my point was this.

It's true that Max has been a popular choice for may years. It became the main choice in the 90's purely down to cost and also that it only used windows. It was also easier to crack. The likes of Alias PowerAnimator, and Softimage3d were only on Unix until quite late in the 90's. And the software/hardware was not cheap. But despite these factors, surprisingly many of the big games titles back then, did not actually use Max.

The fact of the matter is that in terms of market, alot comes down to country and type of market. In the global Media&Entertainment market (incl games) Maya is dominant. Max is still there with good numbers, but perhaps not to the amount people think. Max still has a good foothold in games and is still used, but its nothing like it was, and its share is not really growing that much either.

It can often come down to the country and numbers of installed seats. In CAD arch vis, Max is totally dominant, with Maya hardly anywhere. In terms of the overall total 3D market both Max and Maya control most it, with XSI in a solid 3rd. I work with some ex-Alias and Autodesk people, so I'm confident of the facts.

A few years back when it was still Alias Maya, and Softimage had dropped their ball, it was Max and Maya that were essentially going head to head. Max lost this battle, and Maya started taking over the market. Max could of easily died off, but in reality it got most of is revenue from the CAD and arch vis market, which is the real back bone, and the core business of Adesk, which still very much kept it alive. Adesk bought there way back into the games and broadcast by buying Alias. The M&E section of the Autodesk business also only accounts for a very small part of its total revenue.

Max needs to jump along way to compete with Maya and Soft. Maya and XSI's environment is far more open ended as a platform to build and develop tools for. There are lots of plugins for Max, some of which are very good, but in my experiance, I am yet to meet a games tools programmer who actually likes Max.

Max is still out there and people continue to use it with great success it must be said, but if I was looking long term in the next round to consoles and technology step I'd have big doubts over Max and even Maya to some extent. Both packages are starting to look old.

Autodesk don't seem to have the savvy for Media&Entertainment. They are not really a media company, their business was not founded on it, and you often wonder about what goes on in their own M&E division. Maya has never really progressed that much since Alias was bought out. And Autodesk seem to be focusing Max and Maya in the core markets where each one is strongest. Just look at the more recent versions and feature lists.
All of Maya's features are aimed at the games and broadcast market.
Look at Max's and they are all aimed at improving the lighting, shading, rendering, which is essentially improving their overall rendering feature, which in turn is being aimed at the CAD and arch vis market. There's no major character features - rigging etc, no Nucleus, no ncloth, no major scripting support for languages like Python. And with the recent Max product split, this is not a package that is being aimed at games and broadcast anymore.

I do feel sorry for Max users. A great many people have stayed loyal to the package, despite the dominance of Maya, and yet I feel that Autodesk just haven't rewarded that loyalty. Debating which if the current software is best is pointless, as its an arguement that can never be won. A more interesting question would be, which one have you got your money on for a future investment. How confident can you be on the future of the product in terms of new versions, support, new features, etc etc.

[Magian]

Originally Posted by germball

Good choice in buying XSI too.

Thanks for the commendation, but I certainly had no intentions of starting a debate about 3D applications.

It is true that I am very happy with XSI. I spent a lot of time researching what I wanted and I have used all of the big three applications: Max, Maya, and XSI. In my opinion I made the right choice based on my needs and goals. However, all of these applications are merely tools and each tool will benefit the user in different ways. It is up to the individual users to weigh these benefits and determine how well they align with the user's goals.

Anyway, back to the original topic, I am far more interested in efficient texturing and I agree that XSI's UV tools are excellent. I just want to come up with a usable UV layout very fast and then be able to tweak it. So far I am very happy with 3D-Coat but I have not yet exported the mesh back to XSI to check the UVs there. I doubt this will be a problem but then again I have had stranger things happen.