![]() ![]() This isn’t something that should be needed, as there’s nothing analogue about converting the 3d-mesh into 2d (not like actual modelling, or painting textures, or what have is pretty dense, yes. And, from what I’ve seen, theres always a trade-off in quality and/or precision when the translation between 2d and 3d takes place, since the 2d format can’t hold as much or as exact data as the 3d format can.Īnd if it’s really unavoidable, how come there are no (yet again, to my knowledge, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong) automatic way of getting the UV’s sorted with a minimum or no human interaction? I can’t be the first to think this thought, and I’ve seen some brave attempts at going around it, but no matter what UV-mapping tool you use, you still need to do major tweaks by hand, for all but the simplest of objects. ![]() I know that in 3d-paint programs, the workflow is different in that you paint the textures onto your mesh in a 3d space, but it still is applied as a 2d map onto it, and still requires the UV mapping. Is it an inevitable evil that we have to surmount? It seems quite sub-optimal to have to flatten a 3d mesh to be able to texture it. My question is this: Is UV-mapping really necessary? I don’t mean for any specific 3d software here (although I have a nagging feeling that all 3d-packages require it), I mean to textured 3d-models in general. Sitting here, with a 500k poly custom-made character, while droning through the UV’s at a painfully slow pace, I came to thinking: Is this really necessary? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |