SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Announcements, requests and support regarding SkIndigo - the Sketchup / Indigo exporter.
User avatar
Whaat
Developer
Posts: 1824
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:15 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Whaat » Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:37 am

Pibuz wrote:Hi Soup!
I was not referring to the scale of the texture, sorry for not having made it clearer.
I was concerning about the strength of the displacement: preview and rendered material are quite different, and the displace value is 0.006 (meters) for both. So I assume that there is some problems about the strength of the displacement map in the preview scene. That's it.
Hey Pibuz,
There is nothing wrong with the strength of the displacement map in the preview scene. You have to adjust the strength of the displacement map when you render with the preview scene so that it scales right. Think about it. The preview scene is about 10cm across and the UVs stretch across it once. If you apply the same texture to a model that is 100cm wide, it will make the displacement value look 10X smaller relative to the size of the texture. Does this make any sense? :)

The preview scene does not adjust its size to your displacement settings so you have to adjust your displacement settings to fit the preview scene.

User avatar
Pibuz
1st Place 100
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:58 am
Location: Padua, Italy
3D Software: SketchUp

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Pibuz » Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:05 pm

Uh...I see: you're right.
Though it is somehow misleading, if in the architectural process and modeling one is building in meters..
Maybe we (read: you) could prepare a preview scene similar to the one for the MatDB with no scale indications on the base plane and scaled to meters. Bump and displacement values then should turn out to be something similar we will achieve in the scene..

Is it a big hassle?

User avatar
Whaat
Developer
Posts: 1824
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:15 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Whaat » Sat Feb 06, 2010 4:40 am

Pibuz wrote:Uh...I see: you're right.
Though it is somehow misleading, if in the architectural process and modeling one is building in meters..
Maybe we (read: you) could prepare a preview scene similar to the one for the MatDB with no scale indications on the base plane and scaled to meters. Bump and displacement values then should turn out to be something similar we will achieve in the scene..

Is it a big hassle?
It could be done but it still wouldn't solve the problem. The displacement would only look correct if the preview model was exactly the same size as your SketchUp model. Since there is no guarentee that users will model at correct scale, this would complicate things even further IMO.

User avatar
Pibuz
1st Place 100
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:58 am
Location: Padua, Italy
3D Software: SketchUp

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Pibuz » Sat Feb 06, 2010 5:52 am

Maybe we could name the preview scene after the scale used, for example: matDB(cm), matDB(m).
Indigo is an application which takes into consideration the scale of the model, and since we sketchers often model architectural subjects (given the fact of the bad hi-poly count management) the users often use a metric scale.

I agree with you that for some beginners this splitting could be confusing, btw. This issue was confusing for me, though, and I am an experienced user.

I also think that nobody uses the "custom" preview scene anymore ( :lol: ) so I think it should be time to replace it with a more useful one. I'm sure that many users-architects will be glad about this: mat previews are really important time-saving-wise.

Just think about it, if you have some spare time. Thank you a lot!

User avatar
Pibuz
1st Place 100
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:58 am
Location: Padua, Italy
3D Software: SketchUp

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Pibuz » Thu Feb 18, 2010 6:24 am

Hi Dale.
I just tried to import a material from the database into a simple SU model: I just wanted to test how the mapping stuff works. I downloaded the "wet glass" material. I made a new SU material (plain colour), I opened the SkIndigo mat editor and I imported the downloaded pigm.

Everything works fine but: how can I map the texture to have bigger or smaller drops?

And how come no texture is actually imported into SU?

They're silly questions I know, but one has got to learn :lol:

User avatar
djegoo
Indigo 100
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 10:19 pm

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by djegoo » Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:47 pm

HI
I think there is a bug when editting lights, i noticed it long ago but was not sure, but i am working on a scene where i use emitters and i have several problems :
When i set the light emitter material from the preset ones, it works. I launch a first render, it exports the scene, and render it OK.
But, when i change the emitter and efficacy value, and try to quick render the scene, i click "yes" when it asks for refreshing materials, but in the rendered scene, it has no change.
Then, i click the render button to re export the whole geometry and stuff again, and it takes the changes in count.

Can some one else confirm this? because it is very annoying having to wait for scene exporting again and again.

cheers!

Soup
Posts: 444
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 1:20 am

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Soup » Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:23 pm

In Indigo, emitters are tired to the mesh so that's probably what's happening.
Perhaps SkIndigo could update only emitting meshes on quick render.

User avatar
djegoo
Indigo 100
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 10:19 pm

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by djegoo » Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:55 pm

Yes, this is what i was expecting to happen
when i change some materials reflection/roughness, exponent etc values, and quick rendering, it refreshes texture, and the render looks like it should, and i thought emitters would act the same way.

Do you have the same thing happening ?

dmn
3rd Place Winner
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 6:42 pm

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by dmn » Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:37 am

I am encountering a bug where unpacked pigm's are not being updated properly.
More specifically when you link a PIGM in Skindigo, it unpacks that pigm into the Indigo data folder. HOWEVER, if you then try to edit the original PIGM and update it in skindigo by browsing for the file, It doesn't update the PIGM folder properly. I had a material where I had changed the albedo map from a png to a tif, Skindigo exported the material as if it were still linked to the original albedo map, if that makes any sense? In order to fix the problem I had to delete c:\...\unpacked\material folder and relink it in Skindigo. Simply relinking the PIGM does not update the unpacked folder correctly.

User avatar
Whaat
Developer
Posts: 1824
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:15 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Whaat » Tue Mar 02, 2010 2:20 am

dmn wrote:I am encountering a bug where unpacked pigm's are not being updated properly.
More specifically when you link a PIGM in Skindigo, it unpacks that pigm into the Indigo data folder. HOWEVER, if you then try to edit the original PIGM and update it in skindigo by browsing for the file, It doesn't update the PIGM folder properly. I had a material where I had changed the albedo map from a png to a tif, Skindigo exported the material as if it were still linked to the original albedo map, if that makes any sense? In order to fix the problem I had to delete c:\...\unpacked\material folder and relink it in Skindigo. Simply relinking the PIGM does not update the unpacked folder correctly.
I'll look into this. Thanks!

dmn
3rd Place Winner
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 6:42 pm

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by dmn » Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:11 am

Thanks! Great exporter!

neo0.
Posts: 1784
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:11 am
Location: the US of A

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by neo0. » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:29 am

Any word on when skindigo 2.4 is going to be out?

User avatar
Pibuz
1st Place 100
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:58 am
Location: Padua, Italy
3D Software: SketchUp

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Pibuz » Fri May 14, 2010 4:42 am

Hi Whaat, just a simple question.
I noticed that even if I leave a 255 255 255 white, in the render it appears somehow grey.
Have you introduced some sort of hidden trick to avoid pure whites?

User avatar
Whaat
Developer
Posts: 1824
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:15 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Whaat » Fri May 14, 2010 3:09 pm

Pibuz wrote:Hi Whaat, just a simple question.
I noticed that even if I leave a 255 255 255 white, in the render it appears somehow grey.
Have you introduced some sort of hidden trick to avoid pure whites?
No hidden trick in SkIndigo. Are you using Reinhard tonemapping? That might be the culprit...

User avatar
Pibuz
1st Place 100
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:58 am
Location: Padua, Italy
3D Software: SketchUp

Re: SkIndigo 2.2.12 (2.2 Stable)

Post by Pibuz » Tue May 18, 2010 5:49 am

No, indeed. "Camera" always. :|
I'll try to render a scene and then post it here to show you what I mean, thank you!

How's the new exporter going, btw?

Post Reply
70 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest