can you give a complete (short) list for converting PBR to FSX/P3D?
I want to try it. maybe on Osprey
many thanks
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
PBR Texturing: Introduction to 3D Workflow in Photoshop
- Thread starter gman5250
- Start date
I want to try it. maybe on Osprey
many thanks
gman5250
Charter Member
Next video will cover...
My workflow for PBR basically begins with assigning the textures to the mesh components, just the same as traditional methods, but the base textures are applied to the mesh in Quixel. This creates the foundational artwork in minutes instead of hours of hand painting. The flexibility in Quixel for adjusting gloss, bump height/intensity, specular and diffuse detail is impressive.
(The four bottom layers shown)
This is a good place to export the flattened bitmap out for use in GMAX or 3D Studio.
or
Layer in the photoreal elements, in this case from my master Photoshop file for the F7F Tigercat.
(The ten upper layers)
The thing to bear in mind is each mesh set should only be created for a single UVW map. For instance, the panel shown here fills one full 4K texture sheet, so all of those elements are included in the mesh. Using this method, I can customize all of the various elements, in this case four, in one painting session. The flattened bitmaps will now be assigned in their corresponding slots in the materials editor i.e. diffuse, bump, spec etc. The base art can be enhanced either by hand painting in Quixel, for instance bump detailing which is absolute magic in 3D. The editing process is non destructive to the originals, so changes or errors can simply be erased and corrected.
The challenge for most devs will be to incorporate the 4D chess game into their normal work flow. Once you integrate the logic of the process, it all makes sense. When we inevitably go to full PBR support in P3Dv5 (rumored) we will be able to use the economy of the method that Rick is showing us in his PBR work.
Four basic Quixel layers and my detailed art layered in.
The first four layers only. Less than five minutes from blank gray to this.
My workflow for PBR basically begins with assigning the textures to the mesh components, just the same as traditional methods, but the base textures are applied to the mesh in Quixel. This creates the foundational artwork in minutes instead of hours of hand painting. The flexibility in Quixel for adjusting gloss, bump height/intensity, specular and diffuse detail is impressive.
(The four bottom layers shown)
This is a good place to export the flattened bitmap out for use in GMAX or 3D Studio.
or
Layer in the photoreal elements, in this case from my master Photoshop file for the F7F Tigercat.
(The ten upper layers)
The thing to bear in mind is each mesh set should only be created for a single UVW map. For instance, the panel shown here fills one full 4K texture sheet, so all of those elements are included in the mesh. Using this method, I can customize all of the various elements, in this case four, in one painting session. The flattened bitmaps will now be assigned in their corresponding slots in the materials editor i.e. diffuse, bump, spec etc. The base art can be enhanced either by hand painting in Quixel, for instance bump detailing which is absolute magic in 3D. The editing process is non destructive to the originals, so changes or errors can simply be erased and corrected.
The challenge for most devs will be to incorporate the 4D chess game into their normal work flow. Once you integrate the logic of the process, it all makes sense. When we inevitably go to full PBR support in P3Dv5 (rumored) we will be able to use the economy of the method that Rick is showing us in his PBR work.
Four basic Quixel layers and my detailed art layered in.
The first four layers only. Less than five minutes from blank gray to this.
Last edited:
Gordon, the way you described it is exactly what my workflow is in the moment.
As mentioned, for P3D/FSX, we need a post processing step that plugs the exported maps into the proper slots and define the proper material settings. Albedo becomes diffuse, AO is layered onto the diffuse via PS, specular stays, and so on. Now, the difficulty for me is that for the exported grey tones of the material textures, you need a proper combination of certain material parameters (there are many!) to make them work as intended. I tried to find a standard, or base line parameter set, to make it work. I must say that I have not succeeded with that yet. I always end up adjusting the maps themselves, which is a lot of work, at least for me.
These aircraft shots, expecially the F-86, look fantastic, Rick.
Cheers,
Mark
[Edit] : I contacted the Quixel team about that material settings issue. I'll report the results back here!
As mentioned, for P3D/FSX, we need a post processing step that plugs the exported maps into the proper slots and define the proper material settings. Albedo becomes diffuse, AO is layered onto the diffuse via PS, specular stays, and so on. Now, the difficulty for me is that for the exported grey tones of the material textures, you need a proper combination of certain material parameters (there are many!) to make them work as intended. I tried to find a standard, or base line parameter set, to make it work. I must say that I have not succeeded with that yet. I always end up adjusting the maps themselves, which is a lot of work, at least for me.
These aircraft shots, expecially the F-86, look fantastic, Rick.
Cheers,
Mark
[Edit] : I contacted the Quixel team about that material settings issue. I'll report the results back here!
How about creating a mini FS-related object, say a seat or an undercarriage assembly, with the obj file, the base flat ID, AO and normal textures (all 1024!!), a Quixel project properly set up, with one or two Quixel materials slapped on (nothing fancy), and notes on how to launder the resulting psd files into what can be put into FSX/P3D. A hands-on tutorial from A to Z, so to speak...
gman5250
Charter Member
I'll put together a basic tricycle undercarriage and fuselage frame. I have something already that will fill that requirement. I'll do a short, mesh to sim video showing a real time work flow applying the textures, exporting for FSX/P3D, plugging the textures into the materials editor in 3D Studio and processing the .mdl out to the sim. That sound good to everyone?
gman5250
Charter Member
A side by side is an excellent idea. I'm really interested in SP as well. Also love Unigine...but that's a bit out of my price range.
gman5250
Charter Member
If we are going to do a side by side evaluation of Quixel and Substance Painter, I thought it would make sense to work with both. I downloaded the evaluation package and will begin working with that, as well as Quixel to get a good comparison. This is going to be interesting. 
Mach3DS
Charter Member
That would be awesome Gordon! I'm really interested in developing but very intimidated by the 3d modeling side....as I know.nothing....well I know very little... Dabbled in Blender and managed to export a blob into P3D....LOL.
That sounds great, Gordon! If I can help with anything, just holler. I'm busy with the VC 3D design of the C-7A in the moment, and sidestep into Quixel now and then to texture components. I also plan to wash the part that I'm working on (overhead console) through both Substance Painter and Quixel to be able to compare it.
Cheers,
Mark
TuFun
Riveter
I'm also very interested in Blender, especially when 2.8 gets released.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh29-ZgOLxY
Witold Jaworski is a professional modeler and does very detailed aircraft models in Blender. I've been following his work on a SBD Dauntless. Although his models are to detail to be use in flight sims, but his methods from making scale plans and analyzing photos is amazing! He also has a how to book.
Look thru this his post and see what I mean.
http://www.military-meshes.com/forum/showthread.php?7296-SBD-Dauntless
lagaffe
SOH-CM-2026
Vitold publish also on Blenderartist.org and the story of this creation is described in details here: https://blenderartists.org/t/sbd-dauntless-us-navy-dive-bomber/641592/265
The best thing in my own opinion to test theses two softwares will be to use one only and same model.
Why not to use this model for the comparaison ? of course with the permission of Vitold.
This SBD Dauntless can be download here: https://blenderartists.org/t/sbd-dauntless-us-navy-dive-bomber/641592/242 - SBD-3-67.zip can be download to test and evaluation (page 242/265 Dec 2017).
gman5250
Charter Member
I think the Blender SBD model, while fabulous, would not be practical for a basic primer. The poly count and complexity would eliminate all but high end developer platforms.
I spent the last two days with Substance Painter and come away with a perspective that I think most here will agree with. Quixel is an intuitive point and click interface for doing surface rendering quickly and in a manner that the average painter can grasp. Substance Painter is a comprehensive environment that is suitable for a journeyman level approach to PBR. It seemed quite logical to me, but then again I have over twenty five years in Photoshop, so the concepts are familiar. I can see the clear advantages of working in SP, mainly because it is gives the designer a full spectrum approach to materials design and application.
For me, I can see that I require both Quixel and Substance Painter depending upon my needs. Right tool for the right job...so to speak.
For the basic Quixel mesh to sim tutorial that Manfred requested, I think a simple mesh that represents the basics used by most devs should be the approach. Mark already has some assets that we have tested on the B-26K very successfully. I have all of those assets, so I'll include those with your permission Mark. You can tweak some of the areas you want to address, depending on your available time.
That's it for now. My system is back up to full song, so I can put together the test mesh easily enough. Bear in mind that I also have a backlog that has been on hold for a few months after the computer went south.
I spent the last two days with Substance Painter and come away with a perspective that I think most here will agree with. Quixel is an intuitive point and click interface for doing surface rendering quickly and in a manner that the average painter can grasp. Substance Painter is a comprehensive environment that is suitable for a journeyman level approach to PBR. It seemed quite logical to me, but then again I have over twenty five years in Photoshop, so the concepts are familiar. I can see the clear advantages of working in SP, mainly because it is gives the designer a full spectrum approach to materials design and application.
For me, I can see that I require both Quixel and Substance Painter depending upon my needs. Right tool for the right job...so to speak.
For the basic Quixel mesh to sim tutorial that Manfred requested, I think a simple mesh that represents the basics used by most devs should be the approach. Mark already has some assets that we have tested on the B-26K very successfully. I have all of those assets, so I'll include those with your permission Mark. You can tweak some of the areas you want to address, depending on your available time.
That's it for now. My system is back up to full song, so I can put together the test mesh easily enough. Bear in mind that I also have a backlog that has been on hold for a few months after the computer went south.
Last edited:
TuFun
Riveter
Exactly, just showing how powerful Blender is for modeling. He only uses three free programs.
http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?/topic/284363-sbd-dauntless-from-scratch/&do=findComment&comment=2893323
It's just fascinating to me to see this done in the virtual world by talented developers such as you and many others!
I've got a Quixel weekend coming up! I have to run the C-7A Caribou overhead console through the texturing process, and I'll take notes of the workflow I use. I'll post the results here when I'm done.
Cheers,
Mark
Cheers,
Mark
Mach3DS
Charter Member
One thing I love about PBR, is the work flow... To get the equivalent P3D with metal showing through under the chipped paint would have been extremely labor intensive with the file structure of FSX/P3D.
This was 2 files in game and a 3rd PSD I use just to keep things separated in case I make a mistake I can't walk back! Lol. Obviously it's a little different just painting with the kit compared to the developer stuff. But even this is superior.
This was 2 files in game and a 3rd PSD I use just to keep things separated in case I make a mistake I can't walk back! Lol. Obviously it's a little different just painting with the kit compared to the developer stuff. But even this is superior.
TuFun
Riveter
Rick, that looks great with PBR! I hope P3Dv5 will have self reflections. PBR sure makes a difference as seen here.
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/ry5zG
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/ry5zG
gman5250
Charter Member
Update and what I feel is an important question.
I'm working on the 101 Mesh to Sim Tutorial that will show how to take mesh from Gmax/Studio into Quixel, and out to the sim. That will be ready this weekend.
Here's the question.
In light of the release of the NVIDIA RTX 2080 TI card, and the much touted raytracing capabilities, do we want to expand this conversation to raytracing/PBR and the future of flight sim?
I spent quite a bit of time down the rabbit hole, analyzing the 2080 and came to the realization that this card is the first step to integrating full raytracing rendering into simulated games and flight simulators. This is going to be an incremental process, but we will eventually be at a place where graphics and modeling as we know it are going to be completely re-written. The conversation about PBR cannot be conducted without moving into raytracing as well.
Your thoughts?
I'm working on the 101 Mesh to Sim Tutorial that will show how to take mesh from Gmax/Studio into Quixel, and out to the sim. That will be ready this weekend.
Here's the question.
In light of the release of the NVIDIA RTX 2080 TI card, and the much touted raytracing capabilities, do we want to expand this conversation to raytracing/PBR and the future of flight sim?
I spent quite a bit of time down the rabbit hole, analyzing the 2080 and came to the realization that this card is the first step to integrating full raytracing rendering into simulated games and flight simulators. This is going to be an incremental process, but we will eventually be at a place where graphics and modeling as we know it are going to be completely re-written. The conversation about PBR cannot be conducted without moving into raytracing as well.
Your thoughts?
TuFun
Riveter
Here's an example that was posted today about Real-time Ray-tracing which will be used in the 3Dmark Dandia.
Amazing! Fingers crossed for P3Dv5!
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/3dmark-dandia-real-time-raytracing-video.html
Amazing! Fingers crossed for P3Dv5!
https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/3dmark-dandia-real-time-raytracing-video.html