Time for normal support

Discuss stuff not about Indigo.
User avatar
Zom-B
1st Place 100
Posts: 4547
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Location: ´'`\_(ò_Ó)_/´'`
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by Zom-B » Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:09 am

Master Ono did it again :D
seems to be worth nagging you hard about something :lol:
Thanks a lot for the effort!
polygonmanufaktur.de

StompinTom
Indigo 100
Posts: 1797
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:33 pm

Re: Time for normal support

Post by StompinTom » Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:27 pm

OnoSendai wrote:Here you go dcm, just for you :)

Preliminary normal map support has been implemented (see image)

Etienne:
The standard basis for normal mapping seems to be something like:
* Take dp/ds (where p is the surface position, and s is the first texture coordinate)
* remove components in the direction of the shading normal N_s
* normalise. This forms the i vector of the basis.
Likewise for dp/dt to form j
N_s is used for k.
Note that this is not necessarily an orthogonal basis, if dp/ds and dp/dt are not orthogonal.
That was fast! Looking sexy.

User avatar
galinette
1st Place Winner
Posts: 923
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:39 am
Location: Nantes, France
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by galinette » Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:36 am

OnoSendai wrote:Here you go dcm, just for you :)

Preliminary normal map support has been implemented (see image)

Etienne:
The standard basis for normal mapping seems to be something like:
* Take dp/ds (where p is the surface position, and s is the first texture coordinate)
* remove components in the direction of the shading normal N_s
* normalise. This forms the i vector of the basis.
Likewise for dp/dt to form j
N_s is used for k.
Note that this is not necessarily an orthogonal basis, if dp/ds and dp/dt are not orthogonal.
Hi Ono,

There are several tangent space conventions used. The one used in 3dsmax is quite different from this one, and should be used as a reference I think.

It is explained there:
http://area.autodesk.com/userdata/fckda ... %20Max.pdf

Using the wrong tangent space leads to inconsistencies when rendering normal maps

Etienne
Eclat-Digital Research
http://www.eclat-digital.com

Online
User avatar
OnoSendai
Developer
Posts: 6083
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by OnoSendai » Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:49 am

Hi Etienne,
Nice link, thanks!

Online
User avatar
OnoSendai
Developer
Posts: 6083
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by OnoSendai » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:14 am

Another normal map test.

The model is the 'infinite head'.
Attachments
head_test.jpg

User avatar
dcm
Posts: 663
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:55 am

Re: Time for normal support

Post by dcm » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:16 am

:twisted:

User avatar
CTZn
Posts: 7240
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:34 pm
Location: Paris, France

Re: Time for normal support

Post by CTZn » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:38 am

OnoSendai wrote:Another normal map test.

The model is the 'infinite head'.
Can we see an example on hard surfaces, with other maps put on please ? Normal maps support is a great addition for digital sculptors. Bump is getting quite an old trick by the time I recon.

Don't show this on an implicit surface or I'll bug you till it's into the trunk !!!
obsolete asset

User avatar
galinette
1st Place Winner
Posts: 923
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:39 am
Location: Nantes, France
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by galinette » Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:18 pm

OnoSendai wrote:Another normal map test.

The model is the 'infinite head'.
Nice!

I can see some tangent space discrepancy (between the soft generating the map and the renderer) on the upper left I think

Etienne
Eclat-Digital Research
http://www.eclat-digital.com

User avatar
Zom-B
1st Place 100
Posts: 4547
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Location: ´'`\_(ò_Ó)_/´'`
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by Zom-B » Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:25 pm

polygonmanufaktur.de

User avatar
galinette
1st Place Winner
Posts: 923
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:39 am
Location: Nantes, France
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by galinette » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:46 pm

Zom-B wrote:I think its a general issue: http://www.indigorenderer.com/forum/vie ... 29#p113329
Nope, I don't think so. The image on your link relates to precision issue, whereas this is a typical tangent space convention problem
Eclat-Digital Research
http://www.eclat-digital.com

Online
User avatar
OnoSendai
Developer
Posts: 6083
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by OnoSendai » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:07 pm

Hi Etienne,
I think Zom-B is right, it's a terminator artifact.

Online
User avatar
OnoSendai
Developer
Posts: 6083
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by OnoSendai » Fri Apr 27, 2012 11:16 am

Here's the same scene but with 3 subdivs on the head.

Btw, one thing I really don't like about the approximating subdivision schemes (Loop + Catmull Clark) that Indigo uses is that they soften/distort detail, such as this guy's features. (You can see this by flicking back and forwards between the two renders)

Maybe we need to look into interpolating subdivision schemes.
Attachments
head_test_3subdivs.jpg

User avatar
CTZn
Posts: 7240
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:34 pm
Location: Paris, France

Re: Time for normal support

Post by CTZn » Fri Apr 27, 2012 11:53 am

I think it's alright really. If the maps were baked against the lowpo version then an offset on the smoothed one is expected (those moving volumes might be mapped).

I presume that all sculpting and modeling apps use C-C by default, that's the way for results to remain consistent accross them.

Well I don't know, your call.
obsolete asset

User avatar
Zom-B
1st Place 100
Posts: 4547
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:18 pm
Location: ´'`\_(ò_Ó)_/´'`
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by Zom-B » Fri Apr 27, 2012 9:36 pm

OnoSendai wrote:Btw, one thing I really don't like about the approximating subdivision schemes (Loop + Catmull Clark) that Indigo uses is that they soften/distort detail, such as this guy's features.
Put a checkerboard texture on him if you want to see the distort better.
If you like to disable the normal smoothing, simply use a Diffuse Transmitter or a Glossy Transparent material :roll:
OnoSendai wrote:Maybe we need to look into interpolating subdivision schemes.
I already asked for that back in 2010 :?

Since Indigo v3 you implemented quad based subdiv, what countered the distortion a little, but doesn't have any view dependency working...

Here are some images:

C4D based subdiv with CC @ 2:
subdiv_c4d_CC.jpg
Indigos subdiv with quads @ 2:
subdiv_indigo_quads.jpg
Indigos subdiv with tris@ 2:
subdiv_indigo_tris.jpg

That distortion comes trough having non uniform scaled polygons, here a mesh shot of the model:
subdiv_indigo_color.jpg
polygonmanufaktur.de

Online
User avatar
OnoSendai
Developer
Posts: 6083
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 6:16 pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Contact:

Re: Time for normal support

Post by OnoSendai » Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:07 pm

Hi Zom-B
It's the smoothing of the vertex positions themselves that I was referring to, not the UVs, although that can be an issue as well.

Post Reply
45 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests