Author : korpehn


Reply
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
mightybake's Avatar
Old (#1)
Hi Polycount,

I'm Rob, the developer of a new texture baking tool, MightyBake. You can check it out at mightybake.com. It's a new tool and we would appreciate hearing your feedback and any way we can make it better.

You can download it here.

Our custom baking engine can bake large meshes really quickly with a simple intuitive interface.We can bake the following maps currently.

- Normal maps (object & tangents)
- AO maps
- Material ID maps
- Displacement maps
- Height maps
- Vertex colour maps

It will read FBX's for the high or low poly surfaces. It also reads OBJ files out of Z-Brush, including vertex colours.

We also bake right to the target game engine and do all the conversion internally. Lastly, we bake in 16-bits per channel, so you get all the depth you need for later modification. We currently support both FBX & OBJ. We have a custom Maya shelf to make exports easier.

Check out our development roadmap here.

A very kind Polycount user, Malcolm, has provided some helpful video tutorials here - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...jMM1w7quKi6Ih9.

Rob
MightyBake Developer

Last edited by mightybake; 04-06-2015 at 12:23 PM..
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

Bek's Avatar
Old (#2)
Sounds cool, is there a list of supported tangent spaces/game engines? I ask because that's really the only feature that seems unique, and that alone is not worth $99 to me. Any future plans you have that might get attention? Because currently between xN and Handplane all my baking needs are taken care of, for free. If you could prove MightyBake is significantly faster or better than those programs in some way though I'd be interested.

Also link for the lazy: http://www.mightybake.com/demo/
Ben Redmond | Portfolio | modo for game art
Online , dedicated polycounter, 1,448 Posts, Join Date Jun 2012, Location Australia  
   Reply With Quote

repete's Avatar
Old (#3)
Hi Rob

Can we see some torture tests done with MightyBake ?

I like how clean & simple the UI is but I am on the same boat as Bek, if it matches or surpasses xNormal then you can consider me sold
Offline , polygon, 614 Posts, Join Date Oct 2012,  
   Reply With Quote

EarthQuake's Avatar
Old (#4)
Cool, some feedback:

Clown maps lolol. You might want to consider calling this something else, like Material ID or simply color maps, as this is the first time I've heard someone refer to them as clown maps, so thats probably going to be confusing to your end users.

It would be nice to see 3ds Max tangent support.

Quote:
No need to triangulate your mesh before baking, MightyBake can triangulate it internally
Also this is not correct. You will still need to triangulate in your 3d app for best results, the reason for this is very simple, if your internal triangulation differs from the user's trinagulation in their 3d app or game engine, you will get X shaped smoothing errors. Additionally, some apps (like maya) change the mesh normals when you convert from quads to triangles, its all sort of messy. I would take this bullet point off the site as it is misleading.

Last edited by EarthQuake; 11-08-2014 at 10:01 AM..
Online , Moderator, 11,234 Posts, Join Date Oct 2004, Location Iowa City, IA  
   Reply With Quote

thomasp's Avatar
Old (#5)
i agree with Bek, needs to be clear how this tool is better than xnormal to be worth the trouble.

EarthQuake: clown map/pass is already a known term for these masks.
Offline , dedicated polycounter, 1,501 Posts, Join Date Nov 2004, Location Germany  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#6)
Wow! Thanks for the feedback!

I'll get to work on some torture tests. We did many while we were developing to make sure it was faster than the other software. We'll put together some comparisons and post it back here.

@Bek Our plan is to be the fastest with the cleanest results. If you find that any model or bake is slower than another package and we will work to make it faster. I hope you'll be happy with the results. While xN and Handplane are both great pieces of software, we have worked to streamline the workflow and reduce the opportunities for mistakes and rework, as well as making baking faster. We totally understand that it's hard to compete with free software, so MightyBake may not be right for everyone, but we hope we can make it as appealing an option as we can.


@EarthQuake: You're absolutely right about the triangulation needing to match, that's why we've done a lot of work to get the workflow smooth. With our Maya export tools, you can model using n-gons and you can choose to bake maps back for the Maya viewport or for whatever engine you want without re-exporting, and we take care of matching the triangulation. If you want perfect control, you always have the option of triangulating yourself, but our workflow makes this easy for most cases.

@EarthQuake (again): Lol, clown maps. My original name for it was Material ID, but I got feedback from the artists using it that it's called a clown map now . So I changed it. I'm happy to change it to whatever the going term is.

@thomasp Our core proposition is faster, higher quality with dead simple workflow that will work in any major target engine without hassle. If that's not enough for people, then xN & Handplane are a great option. We also have a Mac OS X build for mac users, which I don't know how many there are, but we provide it.

Thanks a lot for the comments and feedback. We will work to put together some stats and examples.

Rob
MightyBake Developer
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

Cube Republic's Avatar
Old (#7)
I really like the hardware ambient occlusion bakes from topogun.
Offline , line, 71 Posts, Join Date Mar 2012,  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#8)
Oops, missed one:

@Bek - Our plan is to support the tangent spaces of any major available engine. Currently we have tested:

Maya's Viewport 2.0
Unreal 3
Unreal 4
Source
Unity

We can add more as needed requested.
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#9)
@Cube Republic - Thanks! We'll check it out.
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

EarthQuake's Avatar
Old (#10)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mightybake View Post
@EarthQuake: You're absolutely right about the triangulation needing to match, that's why we've done a lot of work to get the workflow smooth. With our Maya export tools, you can model using n-gons and you can choose to bake maps back for the Maya viewport or for whatever engine you want without re-exporting, and we take care of matching the triangulation. If you want perfect control, you always have the option of triangulating yourself, but our workflow makes this easy for most cases.
If this is specific to maya workflow/plugin you should mention that, right now its a blanket statement that claims artist's don't need to triangulate. What if a quad mesh is exported from Maya but then loaded into an engine that triangulates differently than your app? What about from max or modo or blender or another app? There are a lot of cases where the assumption that triangulation is not needed could be false.

Quote:
@EarthQuake (again): Lol, clown maps. My original name for it was Material ID, but I got feedback from the artists using it that it's called a clown map now . So I changed it. I'm happy to change it to whatever the going term is.
Thats really weird, I've been working in the industry with baked maps for the last 10 years and have never heard that term, googling seems to suggest the only relevant mention of that term exists on your website as well. So maybe someone you talked to calls it that but its not typically used from my experience, I could be wrong though. Material ID map or Color mask or Material mask are common phrases. Of course, you're free to call it whatever you like, it is your app after all.
Online , Moderator, 11,234 Posts, Join Date Oct 2004, Location Iowa City, IA  
   Reply With Quote

malcolm's Avatar
Old (#11)
We've started using this at work, it's rad can't go back to any other baker now. It's kind of like when we made the switch from CrazyBump to Knald, just can't go back once you've used something better. My rave review below.

The Maya workflow is incredible, can't speak for any other engines except Maya and Unreal 4 since that's all we use. EQ the not having to triangulate stuff actually works I tested this thoroughly when we were evaluating it for work. We can send a mixture of quads tries and ngons out of Maya with the special export buttons and this bakes flawlessly in Maya viewport or Unreal 4 with the drop down in the software. If you don't use the supplied shelf buttons then you get the X shading. Mightybake is like handplane + xNormal built into one program.

For people wanting to get clean maps into UE4 I thought I'd list the steps as I had to test all this stuff for work. (by the way did anyone ever find they could get UE4 maps out of handplane, I could almost get it to work, but not really). Either way one less piece of software in the pipeline is appreciated since I have like 6 softwares I need to use to make an object these days.

1. Export your low poly out of Maya using the MightyBake low button, no need to triangulate!
2. Export your high however you want, or use the high button in Maya.
3. Export envelope is optional, note envelopes behave like Maya style where they do not contribute to the shape of your bake only block rays from extending too far to help with concave objects.
4. Run the software and select Unreal 4 drop down.
5. All the settings will be familiar if you've ever baked a map in Maya, geo normals, surface normals, dilation, blur, etc.
6. Bake the map.
7. Export your low out of Maya as .fbx for use in Unreal 4
-smoothing groups on
-split per-vertex normals off
-tangents and binormals on
-smooth mesh
-triangulate off
8. Import the texture into unreal and flip green.
9. Import the model into unreal when asked import normals only, you will get fucky results if you import normals and tangents, or recompute normals.
10. Turn on full precision uv's on the static mesh and you're done, perfect UE4 maps without any weird shading or triangle flip errors.

Edit, and as I was typing EQ replied with a good point I should note my tests are only for Maya + UE4, I haven't tested any other software as all our low poly and our outsourcer's low poly's are done in Maya. I would also note on my machine at home and at work MightyBake is faster than xNormal. I've heard the term clown map, not sure where it came from some guy at works calls it that. Remember when Carmack started using the the term albedo maps and everyone was like, what the fuck is he saying? Ha.

Last edited by malcolm; 11-08-2014 at 12:12 PM..
Offline , card carrying polycounter, 2,187 Posts, Join Date Oct 2004, Location Vancouver Canada  
   Reply With Quote

repete's Avatar
Old (#12)
Quote:
Originally Posted by malcolm View Post
We've started using this at work, it's rad can't go back to any other baker now. It's kind of like when we made the switch from CrazyBump to Knald, just can't go back once you've used something better. My rave review below.

The Maya workflow is incredible, can't speak for any other engines except Maya and Unreal 4 since that's all we use. EQ the not having to triangulate stuff actually works I tested this thoroughly when we were evaluating it for work. We can send a mixture of quads tries and ngons out of Maya with the special export buttons and this bakes flawlessly in Maya viewport or Unreal 4 with the drop down in the software. If you don't use the supplied shelf buttons then you get the X shading. Mightybake is like handplane + xNormal built into one program.

For people wanting to get clean maps into UE4 I thought I'd list the steps as I had to test all this stuff for work. (by the way did anyone ever find they could get UE4 maps out of handplane, I could almost get it to work, but not really). Either way one less piece of software in the pipeline is appreciated since I have like 6 softwares I need to use to make an object these days.

1. Export your low poly out of Maya using the MightyBake low button, no need to triangulate!
2. Export your high however you want, or use the high button in Maya.
3. Export envelope is optional, note envelopes behave like Maya style where they do not contribute to the shape of your bake only block rays from extending too far to help with concave objects.
4. Run the software and select Unreal 4 drop down.
5. All the settings will be familiar if you've ever baked a map in Maya, geo normals, surface normals, dilation, blur, etc.
6. Bake the map.
7. Export your low out of Maya as .fbx for use in Unreal 4
-smoothing groups on
-split per-vertex normals off
-tangents and binormals on
-smooth mesh
-triangulate off
8. Import the texture into unreal and flip green.
9. Import the model into unreal when asked import normals only, you will get fucky results if you import normals and tangents, or recompute normals.
10. Turn on full precision uv's on the static mesh and you're done, perfect UE4 maps without any weird shading or triangle flip errors.

Edit, and as I was typing EQ replied with a good point I should note my tests are only for Maya + UE4, I haven't tested any other software as all our low poly and our outsourcer's low poly's are done in Maya. I would also note on my machine at home and at work MightyBake is faster than xNormal. I've heard the term clown map, not sure where it came from some guy at works calls it that. Remember when Carmack started using the the term albedo maps and everyone was like, what the fuck is he saying? Ha.

Oh daddy

I am really liking the sounds of this !
Offline , polygon, 614 Posts, Join Date Oct 2012,  
   Reply With Quote

JedTheKrampus's Avatar
Old (#13)
It looks really good, but personally if I'm going to spend $99 on software that can only bake maps, it has to support Linux, at least unofficially.
Offline , polygon, 684 Posts, Join Date Nov 2013, Location Kansas City, MO  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#14)
@JedTheKrampus Great suggestion! I wasn't sure if there was much interest in Linux, but if there is, we should be able to port it. I'll update you if we're successful.

[Edit] @JedTheKrampus What distribution would you recommend developing against?

Last edited by mightybake; 11-08-2014 at 02:12 PM..
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#15)
@malcolm Thanks for posting the helpful directions and the kind words. Maybe I should call them 'material' maps?
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

TeriyakiStyle's Avatar
Old (#16)
Maybe let people name them in the settings So they can fit it to their studio pipeline?

Tool looks interesting I am going to try it out!
Don't forget to read:
THE WIKI
Rapid Viz

Sketchbook
LoL Warwick
Offline , card carrying polycounter, 2,023 Posts, Join Date Oct 2006, Location Oakland, CA.  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#17)
@EarthQuake Totally fair point. Our workflow to automatically handle the triangulation is primary for FBX from Maya, but it will work also for any FBX that is downstream from any art package headed to the game engines. We looked at how the target engines do their triangulation and make sure to do it the same way when baking. We implemented a specific workflow to bring maps back into the Maya viewport specifically, with a special exporter, and have plans to do that for other packages as people request them. I think Modo is a fantastic package, but I'm not as familiar with the API yet. I'll clear up the language on the website.
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#18)
@TeriyakiStyle Great idea! I'll put it on our roadmap.
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

pior's Avatar
Old (#19)
Besides a solid feature list, the one thing you really need to show in order to get the attention of potential users is a realtime video showing the process of getting an asset into one of the target engines through your pipeline, or, at the very least, some footage showing how much better your results are compared to other more approximative solutions.
Offline , Counter of Polys™, 6,472 Posts, Join Date Oct 2004, Location Orléans, France  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#20)
@plor Great point. We'll start working on that.
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

passerby's Avatar
Old (#21)
Will it support scripting or a CLI interface so ta can integrate it?
@cmcpasserby - GitHub
------------------
Portfolio - Tech Art and Game Logic
Offline , veteran polycounter, 3,218 Posts, Join Date Nov 2010, Location Halifax, NS, Canada  
   Reply With Quote

mightybake's Avatar
Old (#22)
@passerby We are working on the CLI at the moment. It has the same functionality as the UI and will be releasing it with version 1.3.1 this week. It requires a MB Studio license on the node to run it as it's targeted at pipelines.
Offline , line, 68 Posts, Join Date Jul 2014,  
   Reply With Quote

passerby's Avatar
Old (#23)
Thanks that is great to hear, defiantly help work flow when things can either be integrated into the 3d package or if it can be put into some of the pipeline scripts.
@cmcpasserby - GitHub
------------------
Portfolio - Tech Art and Game Logic
Offline , veteran polycounter, 3,218 Posts, Join Date Nov 2010, Location Halifax, NS, Canada  
   Reply With Quote

JedTheKrampus's Avatar
Old (#24)
I would develop against the Steam Runtime in the distribution of your choice. (Personally I like Xubuntu 14.04 LTS.) If your program depends on CUDA you should ship pre-built CUDA binaries with it that you build with the CUDA SDK. If your program depends on OpenCL you'll have to document that in your installation instructions and make sure that the user has the correct video drivers and OpenCL libraries installed. As far as the distribution method goes, just a tar.gz with the binaries in it will work fine; in my opinion there's no need to build different binary packages for every distribution. If you want good examples of proprietary software packages for Linux, I would refer you to 3D Coat and anything by the Foundry. You can pretty much untar them and run them on any distribution just fine.

As far as where you should test your port, I would try running it on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, CentOS 7, Ubuntu 14.10, Arch Linux, Debian-stable, and the latest Fedora, in that order of importance. The first three are the ones that I would definitely test.
Offline , polygon, 684 Posts, Join Date Nov 2013, Location Kansas City, MO  
   Reply With Quote

malcolm's Avatar
Old (#25)
Holy shit, people make 3D art on Linux...

Should rename the clown map to material id map to sync up with quixel since everyone uses that now and is probably what everyone on polycount is expecting when they choose that drop down.
Offline , card carrying polycounter, 2,187 Posts, Join Date Oct 2004, Location Vancouver Canada  
   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright 1998-2014 Polycount