Thanks EQ that was a good read and almost completely sums everything up.

What's weird is I always looked back at my old school bakes in Maya (I now use Max) and have thought, damn I was better at baking back then haha.

So it's all about what is synched. Because back then I would just throw everything into 1 SG, nowadays in max I think I'm pro by using multiple and that I was noob before >_>.

So when you did work for Brink, or for any other game, do you test how their engine handles normals prior to production? Or do you just go with what looks good with say the 3ps?

How do I know if I'm "Synced" with my game engine, Ie Max/CE3 or Maya/CE3, is there no tricks but to just play with if you need SG or not and do a load of test bakes?

Thanks you, you're a geeeeenius

Originally Posted by snow

Thanks EQ that was a good read and almost completely sums everything up.

What's weird is I always looked back at my old school bakes in Maya (I now use Max) and have thought, damn I was better at baking back then haha.

So it's all about what is synched. Because back then I would just throw everything into 1 SG, nowadays in max I think I'm pro by using multiple and that I was noob before >_>.

Well Maya's viewport(HQ mode) dispaly is perfectly synced with maya's baker. So by default, if you're just viewing in maya, you will get perfact(as perfect as is possible) bakes without doing much work.

So when you did work for Brink, or for any other game, do you test how their engine handles normals prior to production? Or do you just go with what looks good with say the 3ps?

How do I know if I'm "Synced" with my game engine, Ie Max/CE3 or Maya/CE3, is there no tricks but to just play with if you need SG or not and do a load of test bakes?

For Brink specifically, we were told that the engine was Synced to maya, so we used maya for all of our baking, and what looked good in maya looked good in the game. Splash Damage has some pretty smart guys, so they had a very polished workflow in place.

Generally, most game engines aren't synced up to anything, so you'll have to hack it up to get good results. Hopefully in the future more developers are going to start noticing this, and sync up with Max or Maya.

So yeah, you just need to do a lot of test bakes. I do a lot of test bakes when i'm doing a complex asset, to check for things like:
A. To make sure I have enough geometry so the model doesn't look jagged/lowpoly, and to avoid excessive waviness(generally goes hand in hand).
B. To make sure I have supporting geometry to avoid skewed floaters and detail
C. To check for resolution issues, IE: make sure I have enough resolution for details to show up, and then tweak the low or high accordingly if I dont.
D. For smoothing errors etc.

Woot - I finally get it! +1 for your patience. This is amazing help, I can't thank you enough for your time .

Can you make two different low polys, one that you bake off (with fixed edges and so forth) and then one that you apply the normal map to that is lower polygons with hard edges. Would that work? :P

Originally Posted by ikonane

Can you make two different low polys, one that you bake off (with fixed edges and so forth) and then one that you apply the normal map to that is lower polygons with hard edges. Would that work? :P

Don´t do that...ever

Originally Posted by ikonane

Can you make two different low polys, one that you bake off (with fixed edges and so forth) and then one that you apply the normal map to that is lower polygons with hard edges. Would that work? :P

Originally Posted by SpeCter

Don´t do that...ever

This.
If you bake a map from one mesh and then apply that map to a mesh with different vertex normals, it would be compensating for vertices that no longer exist and wouldn't light correctly. It would only work in very specific circumstances.

Originally Posted by metalliandy

This.
If you bake a map from one mesh and then apply that map to a mesh with different vertex normals, it would be compensating for vertices that no longer exist and wouldn't light correctly. It would only work in very specific circumstances.

Thanks for the answer! I was just wondering what would happen.

No problem

How do I fix this?

I did some tests:







The file:
3ds max 2011:
http://db.tt/r4g8ELe2

Add more sides to the circumference of the tyre.

Originally Posted by metalliandy

Add more sides to the circumference of the tyre.

Haha, yes of course. I totally forgot about that topology of the tire
My bad and thanks!

Offtopic:
Does anyone know what to do when "shaded" in projection mapping - cage does not work - how to fix?

No problem

Originally Posted by ikonane

Does anyone know what to do when "shaded" in projection mapping - cage does not work - how to fix?

I've found that the shaded option won't work correctly if you are using hardware rendering (shadows/AO) in the viewport. Make sure that it's turned off.

You could also easily fix this with Photoshop.
Only thing you have to do for this is to change the UV-Layout.

Pics:
Before


After


Old Normal Map


Using the "Smudge" Tool in Photoshop with a strength of about 50%

Originally Posted by Pac_187

You could also easily fix this with Photoshop.
Only thing you have to do for this is to change the UV-Layout.
After
Old Normal Map
Using the "Smudge" Tool in Photoshop with a strength of about 50%

The whole point of this thread is to teach people why the waviness happens and how to fix it without resulting to hacks like the smudge tool ;)

Sure, things like that work to a certain extent, but its laborious because not only do you have to fix the normal...you need to do it on AO too. Then we have multiple bakes and revisions. What if someone else needs to work on something you did and then has too rebake?

Its much more efficient and attractive to increase the number of sides

Okay, thanks for clarification

Awesome thread.
just thought to push it, cuz it contains a shitload of information

I'm glad this is stickied. I was having this problem a few years back and it was blowing my mind. This is very important info, especially for people learning their first few bakes.

Thanks!

EDIT

Nevermind ive gone back through this thread and learned a few things

Wicked helpful, thank you to all!

Okay, I read through this entire thread, I am a noob, and a lot of it kinda confused me as well as I didn't understand a few things.
By hard edge, this means two smoothing groups, correct? On say a 90 degree angle.

2. I am really struggling with this bake:

I have been at it for hours and tried everything I can think, it just will not bake right, I can make so much more complex objects but I can't seem to do this:/ I tried even making a higher poly one, I did a test bake, one with 28 sides, and one with 18, both had similar amounts of wavyness. That isn't as big an issue as my top part not working, I have literally been at this for hours, I must be tired or retarded or something. I have tried one smoothing group also. I am truly at a loss.
Those edges at the top I have tried making the high so the lip is thicker and ugh I just can't think. I need sleep.
It's just about the worse thing I have ever made ever. Here are the meshes




I have tried about 6 different varations or more.
I really tried to understand the welth of information presented to me in this thread, but I didn't even fully comprehend the first post to be honest.

I am just getting into baking normal maps. I had my first bake where I actually put effort into learning and to learning to texture and it turned out alright, but this... Since I don't really have a poly limit for this prop (at all) I'm just making a super retarded 30 sided one, Unless someone can tell me how I can fix my other one. I know I seem like I'm dumping my issues, but I truely tried to understand, I really did. I am super new to baking normal maps.
If someone has any advice I would be grateful.

Originally Posted by AlexCatMasterSupreme

I really tried to understand the welth of information presented to me in this thread, but I didn't even fully comprehend the first post to be honest.

This is why you're having trouble.

In the 1st image, EQ is explaining that a highpoly model works better for normalmapping when it has more slope for its bevels. The two cylinders at the left/front have very vertical bevels, so they bake poorly. Your barrel highpoly suffers because of this.

This post goes into more detail about that point. You're always going to get some waviness with cylinders, but you can reduce that.

Another issue with your barrel, the lowpoly model has too many indents in the middle area. These are unnecessary. The wireframes in this post, the ones marked 212 and 244, show how to solve this... don't model every highpoly dip into your lowpoly model. Most of the insets on your highpoly barrel can be flat in the lowpoly.

Feel free to ask more questions. But also, spend some more time examining his images, and trying to understand what's different between the examples. There's a wealth of information there.

Originally Posted by Eric Chadwick

This is why you're having trouble.

In the 1st image, EQ is explaining that a highpoly model works better for normalmapping when it has more slope for its bevels. The two cylinders at the left/front have very vertical bevels, so they bake poorly. Your barrel highpoly suffers because of this.

This post goes into more detail about that point. You're always going to get some waviness with cylinders, but you can reduce that.

Another issue with your barrel, the lowpoly model has too many indents in the middle area. These are unnecessary. The wireframes in this post, the ones marked 212 and 244, show how to solve this... don't model every highpoly dip into your lowpoly model. Most of the insets on your highpoly barrel can be flat in the lowpoly.

Feel free to ask more questions. But also, spend some more time examining his images, and trying to understand what's different between the examples. There's a wealth of information there.

I normally wouldn't leave all the indents in, but I would like to have them for some of the parts due to a band that wraps around a set of barrels I had modeled originally, I want that inset slightly.

I have read that post several times, but I don't want to bevel the top and bottom of the barrel to remove this:

I don't have any other 90 degree angles, like in that image of A, so I'm not trying to bake like that, I understand what he is saying, but besides leaving my indents modeled, I don't see how that is an issue. I mean, I would like them too, the prop doesn't have a poly limit so I don't really wanna make it lower. If I have to in order to make it bake better that's fair enough, but I still don't get what is causing my bake to have this artifact. I actually don't really have much waviness in my map at all it's that top region that is really giving me the trouble.

No limit? Then add more geometry, use a cylinder with 128 sides.

Originally Posted by Eric Chadwick

No limit? Then add more geometry, use a cylinder with 128 sides.

I could, but at that point it would be pointless, I was thinking 30. Basically it's for a mod using x3 680's, by the time it's done it will be using the next generation of cards, so the limit is pretty damn high. It's not really to be used on anything lower. Like I said, the waviness wasn't my real issue, I thought it was at first, I actually didn't have really any noticeable waves.