Home Marmoset

Marmoset Toolbag 2 | FAQ & Support

13456
Frequently asked questions:

Q. Where do I load my diffuse map?

A. Your diffuse map should be loaded into the albedo slot.

Q. Where do I load my roughness map?

A. Your roughness map should be loaded into the gloss map slot. If you're using a roughness map where white = most rough and black = most glossy, click the invert checkbox.

Q. Does Toolbag 2 support animation?

A. Not at this time, though we do plan to add animation support in a future update.

Q. How do I use transparency?

A. Transparency can be enabled in the transparency module in the material editor, select a transparency mode from the dropdown. Your transparency mask must be placed in the alpha channel of the diffuse/albedo texture.

Q. Does Toolbag 2 support soft alpha blending?

A. Not exactly. Toolbag 2 current supports 3 types of transparency, all of which are order-independent (which means they do not have sorting/popping issues as standard alpha blending generally does):
  1. Dithered, which is best for hair or other objects that need semi-transparency and soft fading. It will look noisy in the viewport but renders out much smoother. Render double size to improve quality even further.
  2. Cutout, standard on/off alpha-testing, black = transparent while white = opaque
  3. Additive, additive blending is great for glass and wet or secondary layers on top of other materials (eyes for instance). Additive blending works by adding the specular reflections onto the render. Does not work correctly with the depth of field effect.
Q. Does Toolbag 2 have a refraction shader?

A. Not currently, however, this is something we will likely add in a future update.

Q. How do I scale my mesh?

A. Per-mesh scale is not currently supported, though we do plan to add it in a future update. Global scene scale can be adjusted in the scene object properties.

Q: Is there a floor or shadow casting object feature?

A. Not currently, but we do plan to add this in a future update.

Q: Can I hide the light GUI?

A. Yes, hit CTRL+U, or toggle show guides in the view menu.

Please feel free to post any support questions directly in this thread, or make a new thread in the Marmoset sub-forum.

Replies

  • Rikk The Gaijin
    Offline / Send Message
    Rikk The Gaijin polycounter lvl 6
    I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but... I just got my Oculus VR DevKit2, but I can't figure out how to make it work with Marmoset.
    I go to Render, and I switch to Oculus but the device doesn't connect to Marmoset, I don't see anything in my led display... Any help?
  • EarthQuake
    I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but... I just got my Oculus VR DevKit2, but I can't figure out how to make it work with Marmoset.
    I go to Render, and I switch to Oculus but the device doesn't connect to Marmoset, I don't see anything in my led display... Any help?

    First off, yes this is the correct place to ask. Secondly, unfortunately we do not yet support the second gen Oculus, we need to get our hands on a devkit.
  • Jandokenpon
    Hey EQ, I have a shading problem on the bags of my model. The bags start having a weird shading when I add a plane in the scene, I've tested that there's no issue with the texture map or dither settings because I removed them when troubleshooting. Any idea what's going on? Thanks.
    eePas1I.png
  • EarthQuake
    Interesting, could you get me a copy of this scene and the meshes so I can have a look?

    First thing that pops into my head: Do you happen to have thin straps modeled where you're seeing the issues? There are some problems with the shadowing system when you have faces on either side of an object that are very close together. In that case, you could try plumping those bits up with a push modifier (or whatever the equivalent is in your app).
  • Jandokenpon
    I added a push modifier, and it seemed to have fixed the problem. I didn't think they were that thin of a strap, thanks.
  • Rikk The Gaijin
    Offline / Send Message
    Rikk The Gaijin polycounter lvl 6
    EarthQuake wrote: »
    First off, yes this is the correct place to ask. Secondly, unfortunately we do not yet support the second gen Oculus, we need to get our hands on a devkit.
    Ah ok, thank you for the reply.
    I hope you guys will get yout DK2 soon, because is way better than the first one! :)
  • Froyok
    Offline / Send Message
    Froyok greentooth
    I noted a little problem with the tangent space settings on the meshes today. It seems the dropdown menu is broken whatever setting I use. If I import a mesh without enabling any compatible space, my rendering is fine.

    I triangulated the mesh in Maya 2013, exported it as an FBX 2013 with normals, tangents and binormals. I baked in xNormal 3.18.8 with the binormals override enabled.

    On the screenshot attached : the left object is just imported with the tangent space setting being empty, on the right it's the same mesh but with the tangent space set to mikkt. I didn't duplicated the object, I imported it twice.

    You can see some artifacts on the right object on the top of the little cube faces. The middle edge of the quad is sometimes visible and the reflection seems not planar.
  • EarthQuake
    Froyok wrote: »
    I noted a little problem with the tangent space settings on the meshes today. It seems the dropdown menu is broken whatever setting I use. If I import a mesh without enabling any compatible space, my rendering is fine.

    I triangulated the mesh in Maya 2013, exported it as an FBX 2013 with normals, tangents and binormals. I baked in xNormal 3.18.8 with the binormals override enabled.

    On the screenshot attached : the left object is just imported with the tangent space setting being empty, on the right it's the same mesh but with the tangent space set to mikkt. I didn't duplicated the object, I imported it twice.

    You can see some artifacts on the right object on the top of the little cube faces. The middle edge of the quad is sometimes visible and the reflection seems not planar.

    That is working as expected, if TB2 finds bi-normals/tangents in the file it will load them automatically, and the tangent space will show up as blank. Its a little confusing that it doesn't show "custom tangents" or something though.

    When you select another space, it recalculates the tangents, so its not surprising that the results change at that point. Meshes baked in XN w/o imported tangents look great when using the XN/mikktspace tangent option.

    So just leave the tangent space blank if you want to read the bi-normals/tangents from the file.
  • Froyok
    Offline / Send Message
    Froyok greentooth
    Ha ! I see, thanks for the explanation ! :)
  • Fisher007
    Offline / Send Message
    Fisher007 polycounter lvl 8
    Hi,

    I just got into trouble with the transparency (as always). I tried to make a glass with texture on it but the additive blending won't use the alpha from the diffuse. Is this normal or am I making something in the wrong way?

    Cheers,
    Fisher
  • EarthQuake
    Fisher007 wrote: »
    Hi,

    I just got into trouble with the transparency (as always). I tried to make a glass with texture on it but the additive blending won't use the alpha from the diffuse. Is this normal or am I making something in the wrong way?

    Cheers,
    Fisher

    Can you post a screenshot of what you've got and a reference photo of what you're trying to accomplish?

    The way I do texture variation with glass is to add the variation to the spec and gloss maps.

    No, if you want some opaque areas as well what you can do is duplicate the mesh, and give it a new material with dithered blending and use the alpha channel to mask where the transparent and opaque areas are.

    I'm writing a tutorial specifically on this which should be out soon, but for now you can check out the diving helmet content which is set up how I've described above. Files: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/499159/divinghelmetcontent03.zip
  • Fisher007
    Offline / Send Message
    Fisher007 polycounter lvl 8
    Yeah I felt that it is normal so I made some workarounds as well. Although IMO dithering is pretty bad. I just put the gloss map into the emissive, it gave far better results for me. :) The way I have done was to duplicate the mesh and the material 3 times. The first material is the highlight; gloss map is plugged into the microsurface, specular and emissive. The second material is the diffuse boost, same as earlier but the microsurface is inverted. Had a third one for overall boost, same as the first just played with the transparency for desired strength.

    This is what I wanted but with more dirt:
    m1QZ0dM.png

    This is the result:
    IHlzGWo.jpg

    Not the prettiest but it is acceptable. :) The only major problem I couldn't solve was the artifact that happens when a light casts shadows.

    With shadows:
    vq5mYkj.jpg

    Without shadows:
    XZdRePC.jpg

    It is hard to describe properly so I uploaded to Dropbox. Here

    Also, this is my first proper work with baked normals and hand made textures so if you happen to have any critique or comment I would be glad to hear it. :)
    Btw, your diving helmet looks absolutely stunning, learnt a few neat tricks from it. Can't wait for the tutorial! :)

    Thanks EQ! :)
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    I'm pretty sure this is down to material blend modes.

    alpha test, alpha blend, blend-add etc. are all different blend modes that affect the entire material. this isn't just a marmoset limitation, i'm pretty sure.
  • EarthQuake
  • Fisher007
    Offline / Send Message
    Fisher007 polycounter lvl 8
    Haha, I was writing the response for your PM and I sent it just right now. :) As the tutorial is public now, if you feel that others would benefit from our discussion, we can continue it here. :)

    Edit: LOL I thought that I get instant email alerts from the subscribed threads and not daily, I thought you wrote the post just now. I should go to bed now. :poly105:
  • EarthQuake
    Fisher007 wrote:

    Hi EQ, thanks for the link. Great tutorial, it was very informative. Finally I know how to use the dithered blending. :) Also I realised why it wasn't working for me at all. My feeling is that it can't really be used to set general transparency/opaqueness but I aimed at this from the start. It seems that you have to have prominent rather opaque shapes with clear borders and rather transparent parts around it. I would call it maybe a softer version of cutout. That's why the dirt looks really good on the glass of your helmet. But my problem is that if the secondary layer (the additive) won't give any highlights, only the dithered is visible. Which is fully transparent at the other parts. For me this is really breaking the immersion, as you wouldn't expect an old, dirty diver helmet to be as transparent as an astronaut's glass. Also looking at if from the sides the dithered starts to lose lots of details. So I played around to achieve something different.

    This is the result:

    LbSGmbU.jpg

    rtpwd4A.jpg

    Dithered 1 is yours. Dithered 2 is the one where I tried to give the map less transparency (so not 100%). The additive has an added diffuse. I found that darker colours are act like if they were more transparent, so I modified your diffuse, made the background much darker. Also I added the diffuse to the emissive (with black glow), the dark colours useful here as well.

    For even more popping details I added your dithered on top of this (second picture far left). If you interested I can send you the scene.

    I hope you won't find this as pulling down your method as I never had anything like that in mind. It just happened to be more suitable for my taste, so I thought I would share it. But as I'm an ultimate newbie compared to you, my taste can be absolutely wrong. :)

    Keep up the good work and thanks everything EQ! :) :thumbup:

    Fisher

    Hey I hope you don't mind that I post this here.

    First off, you make some very good points about how I approached the glass, and you're right it doesn't make much sense that the glass would be totally transparent. I think the changes you made make a lot of sense so I've posted that here as an example of how to do glass with various opacity.
  • Fisher007
    Offline / Send Message
    Fisher007 polycounter lvl 8
    That's absolutely fine. :) Thanks!
  • SeveredScion
    Offline / Send Message
    SeveredScion polycounter lvl 12
    Hi Marmoset guys. First off thanks for the hard work making great tools and tuts. I have a question about the cavity map in the occlusion slot.

    Would it be advisable to use in this slot a map generated by xNormal's normal-to-cavity-map tool? Or to stick with a baked cavity map?

    As far as I understand, a baked cavity map is more physically accurate. However this takes far more time than converting normal map to cavity map. I've used normal-to-cavity maps in the past, but that was as a mask for overlays that became part of the diffuse map used in a non-PBR rendering environment. Since Marmoset's cavity slot uses the map in a different and more accurate way, I'm wondering if there would be a definite benefit to sticking with baked maps.

    Thanks!

    Edit: whoops not sure if I posted this in the right forum. Admin, feel free to move to FAQs or something if more appropriate
  • EarthQuake
    Hi Marmoset guys. First off thanks for the hard work making great tools and tuts. I have a question about the cavity map in the occlusion slot.

    Would it be advisable to use in this slot a map generated by xNormal's normal-to-cavity-map tool? Or to stick with a baked cavity map?

    As far as I understand, a baked cavity map is more physically accurate. However this takes far more time than converting normal map to cavity map. I've used normal-to-cavity maps in the past, but that was as a mask for overlays that became part of the diffuse map used in a non-PBR rendering environment. Since Marmoset's cavity slot uses the map in a different and more accurate way, I'm wondering if there would be a definite benefit to sticking with baked maps.

    Thanks!

    Edit: whoops not sure if I posted this in the right forum. Admin, feel free to move to FAQs or something if more appropriate

    If the map is baked or generated later from the normal map it shouldn't make too much of a difference. The more important thing is that the map is mostly white, with darker values to represent the cavities. Certain apps like crazy bump can give you a "cavity or detail map that isn't really correct for this input, where its grey with bright content for the convexity and dark for the cavity.

    Basically, your cavity map should look something like this:
    cavity01.jpg

    Image from this tutorial: http://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/pbr-practice

    Generally I will make the cavity map from the normal map, after extra details have been added to the normal map in 2d, this way you catch all the detail that may not be in the bake.
  • SeveredScion
    Offline / Send Message
    SeveredScion polycounter lvl 12
    Great, thanks for the quick response! I'd read that tut before--should have checked before posting. I think results can vary a lot, whether you're baking or converting from normals--I've definitely seen some cavity maps that were grey-ish overall. The "mostly white with darker values to represent the cavities" is the guideline I was looking for. Thanks a bunch!
  • Eric Williams
    Offline / Send Message
    Eric Williams polycounter lvl 16
    Are a light's size/softness setting supposed to affect the ggx shader or would that not be physically accurate? Cause that setting has no noticeable effect on the ggx shader for me. All the other shaders in the reflection drop down show an obvious change.

    edit - it's there, just very slight changes. No real effect on the main highlight, just the outter edge of the ggx falloff seems to get tighter. Just curious if that's correct or not.
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    the lights size/softness setting was a crude hack to simulate a spherical area light.

    you can look forward to actual area lights in the next update, and they work properly regardless of the reflection type!
  • Hatred
    Offline / Send Message
    Hatred polycounter lvl 18
    Im having a problem with adding decals
    as you written:
    "Additive, additive blending is great for glass and wet or secondary layers on top of other materials (eyes for instance). Additive blending works by adding the specular reflections onto the render. Does not work correctly with the depth of field effect."

    no mater what i do i cannot find the ability to only add only dirt to the base texture. it seems no mater if cut the area with alpha it adds something to the base :/ (i tried different colors of the non dir area but still no luck, either its to dark or to bright.)

    dirt.jpg
  • EarthQuake
    Hatred wrote: »
    Im having a problem with adding decals
    as you written:
    "Additive, additive blending is great for glass and wet or secondary layers on top of other materials (eyes for instance). Additive blending works by adding the specular reflections onto the render. Does not work correctly with the depth of field effect."

    no mater what i do i cannot find the ability to only add only dirt to the base texture. it seems no mater if cut the area with alpha it adds something to the base :/ (i tried different colors of the non dir area but still no luck, either its to dark or to bright.)

    Additive blending works be adding (add means to make brighter in this context) the specular pass from the material. The diffuse can be included too, but it will add (make brighter) as well. This is useful for transparent materials like glass (see more about that here: http://www.marmoset.co/toolbag/learn/glass).

    For solid decals like you're trying to create here, you most likely want to use the dithered blend mode instead of additive blending. Dithered will look a bit noisy in the viewport, but renders out cleaner. You can render an extra large image to reduce noise further (there is more about this in the tutorial link above as well).

    I hope this helps.
  • Hatred
    Offline / Send Message
    Hatred polycounter lvl 18
    Thanks a lot mate! I'll test that out today!
  • blong
    Offline / Send Message
    blong polycounter lvl 6
    Hi guys,
    I just update to the 2.06 build, but I get a very weird default startup scene. I have attached the screenshot of the startup with a model and a rendered version of that model. They look totally different. Look like the startup is way darker than it should be. I was told that it is the brightness/ gamma issue, but I don't know how to fix it.?
    u98fdde.jpg
    vSbjpw3.jpg

    I have updated my graphic card driver. I'm using GeForce 555M. driver version 344.48
    the model is from tf3dm.com
    Thanks guys
  • Bubba91873
    Offline / Send Message
    Bubba91873 polygon
    When I do rendering in 3DS Max I use 16 pixel edge padding on 4096x4096 textures for best results.

    If I were to use Marmoset in the future, would this software require a similar edge padding or can I reduce that ?

    Kinda related:
    Can I reduce the edge padding for Quixels software if anyone knows the answer to that for it's viewer to be compatible with Marmoset as well.

    It is easier for me to ask this question then to spend days baking out textures only to find that they do not have adequate edge padding.
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    Hi Bubba,

    As a general rule you should use as much edge padding as possible in all textures. There's a fairly simple reason for this: Mipmaps!

    As you zoom in/out, just about every engine out there (including toolbag, although we have a checkbox to disable this) will render different mipmap levels, the higher the level the lower the resolution of the image, at a low enough resolution, without padding you'll start to see white/black seam lines on your model.

    It's good practice to keep your padding in, regardless of the final rendering software.
  • Bubba91873
    Offline / Send Message
    Bubba91873 polygon
    Hi Bubba,

    As a general rule you should use as much edge padding as possible in all textures. There's a fairly simple reason for this: Mipmaps!

    As you zoom in/out, just about every engine out there (including toolbag, although we have a checkbox to disable this) will render different mipmap levels, the higher the level the lower the resolution of the image, at a low enough resolution, without padding you'll start to see white/black seam lines on your model.

    It's good practice to keep your padding in, regardless of the final rendering software.

    I find that 16 pixel edge padding is the minimum to use when rendering in 3ds max with vray if it is a 4096x4096 texture.Anything less and I will get the white seam issue.

    I was hoping that if I migrated over to Marmoset, that I might not need as much edge padding for hard surface models.
    This isn;t for game art or any engine so mip mapping ingames isn;t a concern for me.

    So if I understand you right, I should just stick to 16 pixel edge padding as I am already doing.

    Also was looking around and there doesnt seem to be any hard/fast rules for edge padding on textures sizes 4096 and above that can be applied to any rendering engine that isn;t game related.

    Thanks in advance.
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    Well, as a general rule you should stick with edge padding, however in Toolbag2 we have a per-texture option for disabling mipmaps.
  • EarthQuake
    Yeah as Lee says, pixel padding is generally required for purposes of mip-mapping in all applications. This is something you will always want to add especially if you're creating content for games.

    There are actually two issues here.

    The larger your texture, the more space you should have between your uv islands. This is because as the model is viewed from farther away, the texture resolution is sized down and what was 8x8 pixels is now 4x4 pixels, one mip down and 4x4 pixels is now 2x2, etc. At some point what was a healthy amount of space between uv islands results in two uv islands blending together at the edges and causing seams. This is UV spacing.

    The second issue is pixel padding, when baking normal maps, ao, etc you want a lot of pixel padding. The reason for this is similar to the above, when those edge pixels blend you want them to blend to a similar color, not to the white or black of the background (also you should avoid white or black backgrounds for the same reason). This sort of padding has no adverse affect on anything, except for the few seconds it takes to calculate while baking or to add in photoshop when you are done with your texture (xnormal plugin is good here). Pixel padding added by your baker/plugin has no negative effect on anything, so you can use a really high value, I usually use like 64 or something so most of the empty space is filled in.

    Again as Lee says, you can disable mip-mapping on a per-texture basis in Marmoset Toolbag, but it isn't recommended to stop using uv spacing or pixel padding.
  • EarthQuake
    Having trouble with Dota specular in Toolbag 2.06?

    There was a bug with the new area lights feature when used in combination with the Dota shader and Blinn-Phong where the specular exponent (gloss) value for dynamic lights was locked to max glossiness. This will be fixed in the 2.07 update, but we decided to release the updated shader file if anyone wants to patch the problem manually in the mean time.

    Download the shader file here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/499159/dotashaderfixtb206.zip

    Installation instructions:
    • Extract dota.frag from the zip file
    • Replace dota.frag in <install directory>\data\shader\mat\reflectivity with the new dota.frag from the zip file
    • Restart Toolbag, or press shift+ctrl+r to reload shaders

    For Windows, your install directory will typically be C:\Program Files\Marmoset Toolbag 2\. If unsure, right click on the shortcut to Toolbag in the start menu, select properties, and then click open file location.

    For OS X, your install directory will typically be Macintosh HD\Applications\Marmoset Toolbag\

    Any issues, feel free to post in this thread or contact support@marmoset.co
  • dzibarik
    Offline / Send Message
    dzibarik polycounter lvl 10
    For some reason my reflections are very blocky. Baked in Xnormal with smoothing groups, cage and so on. What may be a reason for that?
  • EarthQuake
    dzibarik wrote: »
    For some reason my reflections are very blocky. Baked in Xnormal with smoothing groups, cage and so on. What may be a reason for that?

    Hmm, try baking 16 bit (tif) and then converting to 8-bit (tga, png, etc) and see if that helps.
  • dzibarik
    Offline / Send Message
    dzibarik polycounter lvl 10
    EarthQuake wrote: »
    Hmm, try baking 16 bit (tif) and then converting to 8-bit (tga, png, etc) and see if that helps.

    Tried it but it's still the same. It has improved after I baked it from highly subdivided cube but there are still problems. I wonder if it's repairable or is it the best you can get from normal maps.

    edit: somehow making a new mesh fixed that. Oh well.
  • tach
    Is there a way to scale a mesh up and down in all axis at once? Unless I'm missing something there's one slider for each axis but no option for global scaling.
  • EarthQuake
    tach wrote: »
    Is there a way to scale a mesh up and down in all axis at once? Unless I'm missing something there's one slider for each axis but no option for global scaling.

    Yes, go to the scale mode (ctrl+r) and use the central scale gui element.

    If you want to type in scale numerically to a specific value you will have to enter it 3 times.
  • tach
  • Zarakun
    Offline / Send Message
    Zarakun polycounter lvl 7
    Hi there! I'm actually working on a scene and I'd like to showcase my assets in Toolbag 2 as I progress but today I encountered a problem with the reflection of objects on a glass material surface. V0haD0dF

    As you can see, the reflection seems to be clipped and the clipping line move as I move the lamp down. I double-checked my scale and units and they seem to be correct, the whole lamp is around 50 cm high. Then I tried to activate or deactivate the backface culling but it doesn't change anything.

    Sorry if this problem has already been reported here.
  • EarthQuake
    Hi Zarakun,

    Unfortunately this is a technical limitation with screen space reflections. The reflection content is generated from what is visible in the frame, so areas of the mesh that are not visible an any particular angle, like the underside of that section on your lamp there, will not show up in the reflections because the rendering doesn't "see" that area.

    Screen space reflections are really fast and look good in a lot of situations, however, what you're seeing here is the technique's Achilles heel.

    You could try setting up a different angle to limit the issue. Sorry, I don't have any sort of solution to offer you other than that.
  • Zarakun
    Offline / Send Message
    Zarakun polycounter lvl 7
    Thank you for the technical explanation, it's good to know that :)
    With a proper lighting and a wood texture underneath the glass top, this should be less visible. I'll make sure to take screens at a grazing angle.

    Thanks for the answer.
  • Fisher007
    Offline / Send Message
    Fisher007 polycounter lvl 8
    You could try to make a secondary object in your 3D package that has some special form or rotated in a way that it looks properly in the reflection. Then remove it, make another render and merge the two pictures in Photoshop. :)
  • Brygelsmack
    Offline / Send Message
    Brygelsmack polycounter lvl 11
    Does anyone know what's causing this and how I can fix it? It's a high res model and I've made sure normals are soft. No textures applied, just the default material. Can't figure out what it is.

    Thanks.

    [ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ef75xW1eiU[/ame]
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    do you have a wireframe of your mesh available to see?
  • Brygelsmack
    Offline / Send Message
    Brygelsmack polycounter lvl 11
    It's pretty messy but it subdivides without issues in Maya. It kinda looks topology related though, some of the edges are going right over areas with artifacts.

    TWPYKTy.jpg

    3xDI8ps.jpg
  • Brygelsmack
    Offline / Send Message
    Brygelsmack polycounter lvl 11
    Sorry for double post. I cleaned up the mesh a bit, this should definitely be considered decent I think... But still having issues in Marmoset. It seems topology related because the artifacts changes as you can see. Top one is the new mesh.

    fdMQ2Rh.jpg

    N4CV3oi.jpg
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    yeah this is a little weird. it points to dodgy normals, but without having the mesh to look over myself that's about the only guess i can give!

    if you don't mind emailing the scene over to support@marmoset.co for debugging that'd be awesome, and if you don't mind us seeing the source mesh as well. I'll try to reproduce this over the weekend.
  • Brygelsmack
    Offline / Send Message
    Brygelsmack polycounter lvl 11
    I sent it your way as an unsmoothed .obj. It'll be interesting to see if you get the same results. I'll be going out of town for tomorrow so I won't be able to test any potential solutions until Sunday, but I appreciate all the help I can get.
  • Fisher007
    Offline / Send Message
    Fisher007 polycounter lvl 8
    I can't really look into it right now, but if I remember right when I had this it was related to the normal bake and actually the texture output. Are you using jpeg? Try something lossless, play around with the settings. I hope I will have some time tomorrow and then I can dig out the files that were affected back then.
  • almighty_gir
    Offline / Send Message
    almighty_gir ngon master
    He's just using a high poly mesh with no normalmap, this is an unrelated issue.
13456
Sign In or Register to comment.