BGC script 0.0.8 released

(S68) #1

You,

aso BGC script works with 2.43 now!

http://projects.blender.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/bstar/BGC/?cvsroot=bstar

Boys, last commit 22 months old :o

S.

0 Likes

(BgDM) #2

Stefano! Where you been!?

sorry, just had to say it. :smiley:

BgDM

0 Likes

(ecgilboy) #3

Another nice script…thanks again…(just got BAG script)

0 Likes

(S68) #4

Hehe, was really buisy last months… well’I’m more or less back!

S.

0 Likes

(qwequ777) #5

cool, that makes panorama rendering much easier
thanks :slight_smile:

0 Likes

(Deckard) #6

Hi,

BGC is a fantastic tool but I’m having an issue in the resulting cube panoramas. It’s basically where the faces meet. Everything is fine if normals aren’t used. However, when normals are used in materials applied to objects crossing more than one face there are distinctive lines along the face edges.

Here’s a pic with the problem:
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee124/Deaky_photos/NormalLightingProb.jog.jpg

Might be a bit hard to see but look closely down the middle and at the bottom to see the lines where the faces meet. These faces should all blend together.

I’m assuming these defined lines where the faces join are due to the way the normal’s light/shadows are formed from the particular camera angle (the camera stays at the same x,y,z coordinates but rotates 90 degrees to each face).

The material setup is very straightforward:

  • Add material.
  • Add texture to material.
  • Turn on ‘Nor’ in the ‘Map To’ tab and increment the ‘Nor’ slider.

I’m also 100% sure that faces aren’t misaligned.

Is there a way to resolve this or am I just going to have to live with using materials with no normals?

I assume (and hope!) that normals were used in creating this QTVR scene so holding out that there is a solution:
http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=43209

Thanks for any help!

P.S. - The BGC link mentioned above is dead but here’s another:
http://alienhelpdesk.com/python_scripts/old_scripts

0 Likes

(S68) #7

Hi!

Yes, I can see the problem… indeed the Hall QTVR scene you mentioned is modeled and do not use NOR maps… (well, maybe there is some faint NOR mapping for marble veins but tiles and bricks are modeled… :stuck_out_tongue: )

I’m a bit less active on Blender so I might be wrong but NOR is bumpmapping, not real displacement and could be indeed viewpoint dependent as you say :slight_smile:

Stefano

0 Likes

(S68) #8

Oh yes,

that link is dead because Blender switched from CVS to SVN!

New link is

http://projects.blender.org/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/trunk/bstar/?root=bstar

S.

0 Likes

(Deckard) #9

Thanks for getting back to me Stefano! As I’ve already mentioned, this is a brilliant tool so thanks for putting it together.

That’s a shame there doesn’t appear to be a quick fix (i.e. an option I was forgetting to activate). :frowning:

One possible workaround could be to open the faces in an image editor (GIMP/Photoshop/etc.) and blend the edges together with a cloning/healing tool in much the same way as creating tileable images.

Unfortunately this is quite time consuming manual labour and, in some cases, the differences between two connecting faces may be too contrasting to get away with this.

Or, are there possibly QTVR/panoramic stitching applications that will automatically do the above for you? It would be much more efficient and consistent for this process to be automated where possible.

Does there appear to be a plausible way to blend connecting faces within Blender? Maybe an in-between render mixed in somehow (camera angle at 45 degrees, wider camera lens & face render that then gets trimmed/blended with neighbouring face, or something like that).

I’m sure other 3D software packages capable of outputting cubemaps/normals (such as Cinema 4D) are able to deal with bumpmaps so how are they doing it?

Outside of BGC, Blender is able to create it’s own cubemaps for environment mapping (see Shading --> Texture buttons --> Texture tab --> Texture Type --> EnvMap).

I just did a test on EnvMap vs BGC. For the same scene and camera position, I created cube faces using BGC and matching cube faces using EnvMap (creates one large image containing all faces) in the hope that the EnvMap settings would blend the faces. Unless I missed something this unfortunately this didn’t happen - the same contrast in Normals on the faces (due to the camera angle) was apparent in the EnvMap render too. They were identical. :frowning:

Technically, does this mean that anything using EnvMap and Normals (e.g. reflections) isn’t represented correctly in Blender (i.e. the EnvMap shows contrasting edges where materials that have Nor settings cross faces)?

On a side note, with EnvMap, the quality of the final image wasn’t quite as good as with BGC (very slight but I still noticed it).

Sorry if any of this is hokum - just thinking aloud to see if a solution presents itself.

0 Likes