Anyway to further smooth this mesh

[barkest]

I made these towels in another app and then imported via OBJ into VW. I have a custom crease angle of 89. Is there anything else I can do to make them smoother in here as in the original app they are very smooth?

 

If I can't do anything to the mesh then what about some kind of nice render to make it work

 

The two images show the original before import into VW with the second being in VW after render. The render info is also on there.

 

thank you

[VeryCrunchyTaco]

This will probably sound like a dumb response, but what happens if you increase the custom crease angle (to like, 180)?  Will those hard edges still remain?

Also, was that made in Marvelous?  Looks pretty good!  Have you tried increasing the polygon count in Marvelous before exporting?

Edited April 6, 2017 by VeryCrunchyTaco
Forgot to mention Marvelous export settings.

[rDesign]

Maybe adding a bump map with a very slight displacement might hide some of the edge breaking artifacts. Adding displacement will increase your render times, though.

 

Very nice - but I think you need to find a new housekeeper. 

[barkest]

1 hour ago, VeryCrunchyTaco said:

Also, was that made in Marvelous?  Looks pretty good!  Have you tried increasing the polygon count in Marvelous before exporting?

 

Yes 100% correct its MD. I have the poly count pretty high as is so I am reluctant to increase further.

 

Custom crease to 179 see below on a duvet I brought into VW. On the duvet the dames issues persist but the pattern on the texture hides it well (but if you look closely)

 

30 minutes ago, rDesign said:

Maybe adding a bump map with a very slight displacement might hide some of the edge breaking artifacts. Adding displacement will increase your render times, though.

 

I will give this a go when I get back home to 2017 - thank you

 

 

Edited April 6, 2017 by barkest

[barkest]

Unfortunately the bump/displacement was a no go. I tried several bump maps including white and 50% grey etc. and varying displacement heights.

 

Is it the case that VW is turning the mesh into triangles and therefore the resulting mesh looks bad. The original was quads.

 

thanks

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by barkest

[rDesign]

I'm sorry the bump / displacement didn't help matters.

 

I believe that MD can be set to use Triangular meshes instead of Quads. Triangulating them before exporting from MD might help rule out whether the problem is Vw's conversion of Quad -> Triangles.

[barkest]

Quote

I believe that MD can be set to use Triangular meshes instead of Quads. Triangulating them before exporting from MD might help rule out whether the problem is Vw's conversion of Quad -> Triangles.

 

My thoughts as well. I did ask the question on the general board with regard to triangles and if VW operates only in triangles. I think that Jim kind of said it does but I thought I would ask again to make sure.

[barkest]

Quick cushion all triangles to test. Towel pile is at work.

 

It generally looks ok but needs further tests

 

 

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by barkest

[rDesign]

59 minutes ago, barkest said:

 

My thoughts as well. I did ask the question on the general board with regard to triangles and if VW operates only in triangles. I think that Jim kind of said it does but I thought I would ask again to make sure.

 

I did a quick test to confirm that Vw2017 does not triangulate quad OBJ files upon importing.

 

Here is a screencap of a wireframe view of the mesh (Vw2017), it clearly is composed of quads:

 

And a screencap of the OpenGL view - there are still some smoothing artifacts at the sharp folds, but I think it looks pretty good.

Crease angle set to 180 upon import:

 

Maybe the issue is not the smoothing of the quads, but the fact that Normal maps are not supported in Renderworks? Just a guess.

Edited April 7, 2017 by rDesign

[barkest]

Yes I think it looks good. One of the reasons is that the texture is 'busy' which hides some of the edges. A normal map might make a difference but regardless the mesh should be smoother. The same mesh in c4d is better so it's the way VW handles the crease. In C4d the phong tag works better (I am no expert). I would have also thought a crease angle of 89 should be max?

 

@zoomerwould know more about the c4d side.

 

If it is the poor quality of the creas angle handling then that may be why triangles look better than quads

 

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by barkest

[barkest]

Ok so the answer is triangles looking at my re-render of the duvet. I am happy with the result but will test more on other soft goods. Its positive that I now have useable soft goods in VW but it has take some time to work out.

[rDesign]

It took more effort than it probably should have, but in the end you've got it looking really good. I can't see any crease angle artifacts in that view. Very nice!