If you have too many then when you drive/skid/slide on the model the physics engine will start to lag really bad. On another note, hopefully you already know this but if you are making a really big model in sketchup and plan on using the visible mesh for the collisions then I would consider keeping an eye on the amount of polygons in your model. I all so found a plugin for that is suposed to make normal maps from an image, but it cant really say it made much difference when I applied it to the model in game. Or make your own if you can use Photoshop or similar.Īs for generating normal maps with sketchup I found a plugin that's meant to help create them from 3D geometry you create, but I haven't really messed about with it yet. There are already a few decals included with skid marks/pot holes/cracks etc that you could use. As I gather this seams to be a road/concrete/asphalt type texture you are working on. I just thought I would add that painting decals in random places can break up repeating textures quite easily in the map editor. Then again i only know programs to generate normal maps from images that would cost you money, like crazybump or pixplant2. Also SketchUp does not have to support normal maps if you only use them on texture details but not for faking geometry details of the mesh. I can try to generate a seamless texture for a test.Įdit: im new to the software myself and so some stuff is hard to achieve, most easy i found is asphalt or concrete and such. just link me a texture of a material you would want to have as seamless texture for your huge object. i cant manualy too myself but pixplant can. You can use looped textures on any object size without seeing repeating details, even in hd textures, if you can create the texture. Another one is having shadow and light details, that you could not achieve within a game, without normal or bump map, due to the high polycount those details need in case you try to model them. I have no idea if sketchup supports it, i dont use it.īut be sure that normal maps are very well worth it performance wise! Performance is one of the main reasons why normal maps are used. If not, i should be able to generate you some seamless textures that have no single details that stand out, as long you can provide source images and describe what you wish for. Maybe you can take the texture then cut the watermark out and make the rest seamless again in gimp. It is more than worth its money but also has a demo version, full functionality for 30 days but renders a watermark into the texture. It mixes them up if you wish so and you can even mask certain details on the source image to have those areas excluded from the source, and so also from the generated texture. It can generate seamless textures from single or multiple source images. And i dont use sketchup because it is worth to learn blender or similair instead using sketchup!³īut have a look at this nifty little tool I fell in love after a coupe seconds!^^ When i uv-map a texture, i either have to use endless huge textures to preserve the resolution or rearange the uv map in parts by hand which can turn out to be a real monster in worktime on huge objects with thousands of polygons. The big disadvantage i see is that you sometimes want details but still not looped as offten as the background. If you remove all those details that stand out of the background, you can have very nice loop effects. I mean for example a single bright spot or a scratch in a metal surface. The thing about seamless textures that get looped is you dont want to have distinguishable details within the overall look of the texture.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |