[UV Packmaster] Efficient UV packing solution for Blender (C++ based, multithreaded)

add-ons
commercial

(Bohdan Lvov) #122

Still nothing?


(glukoz) #123

There is something: :wink:

RELEASE 1.6:

  • Mac support was finally added
  • New option for folks who really don’t care about their UV topology: Process Self-Intersecting UV Faces
  • A lot of code was refactored in order to speed up further development process. What is more this refactoring allowed us to add a few improvements to the user experience in this release: add-on progress reports are more exact now: it not only reports progress of the actual packing, but also progress of topology analysis. Overlap check and area measurement may be cancelled in the middle of operation now.

For Mac users: pay special attention to OS-specific Requirements and Known Issues sections of the product description on gumroad.


(Maks) #124

I would like to see the option to save the scale (pre-scale disable) :slightly_frowning_face:


(carbon2) #125

hi, thanks for osx version, works on 10.10 too (in docs you stated 10.11). i took a risk, purchased pro version and it works just fine :slight_smile:


(glukoz) #126

mac7ua, I think it can be done in the next release.

carbon2, it’s great to hear that add-on works on older systems as well :slight_smile:


(glukoz) #127

We’ve prepared a picture showing the differences between versions in graphical form:


(Bohdan Lvov) #128

That’s just smoking!
But what about material grouping? Is it finished, or still in WIP phase?


(glukoz) #129

Don’t worry, material grouping improvements are planned in the next release :slight_smile:


(fiendish55) #130

great news this is by far the best packer for blender based on speed and features. I hope you keep developing it, since this is for me starting to replace my previous abandonware IpackThat.


(glukoz) #131

Thank you for the kind words - such posts give us a lot of motivation :slight_smile:


(bassig) #132

Just tried it on a complex model I did last year with 3ds Max. Many curved shapes, many tiny islands. Back then UV packing was done with PolyUnwrap and lots of manual improvements. I don’t know any more how much time I spent on it but it must have been one or two hours at least.

According to UVPackmaster I achieved 65% coverage. 2 minutes of recalculation later: 73%. This is awesome.


(glukoz) #133

Thank you for the positive comment :slight_smile: I am currently gathering opinions on UVPackmaster in order to cite them on the add-on product page - could I include your opinion?


(Vilem Duha) #134

Hi, just bought it. Will you please support multiple objects packing? I think it’s te most missing feature by now.l…


(bassig) #135

Sure! :slight_smile:

@pildanovak packing multiple objects seems to be working just fine when using the Texture Atlas function. Here’s my mesh from yesterday’s experiment that consists of 60 objects.
This time I got 82% in even shorter calculation time, increasing Iterations seems to be much more crucial in this case than Heuristic Search Time.

I too got this Invalid topology error a few times with some other meshes. It seems not unly to occur with actual invalid geometry or loose vertices but once islands are too close together. It can actually be reproduced: create a cube and unwrap it with Smart UV project — Island Margin set to 0.0 — when trying to pack it it will give you the Invalid topology error. You can avoid it by setting a margin or by packing it with Blender’s built-in tool first.

Plain cubes seem to be a weak spot btw., I can’t seem to get more than 37% coverage when trying to pack those 6 squares. :stuck_out_tongue:


(gritche) #136

you can also use Multi-Object-UV-Editing addon


(glukoz) #137

standard_owl, that’s excepted: if you have a lot of tiny islands in your UV map then the heuristic search option is not much helpful. Think about it this way: in such case the dense packing of bigger islands is not so importat because the big quantity of small islands will fill the gaps between bigger islands either way. In such situation it is more imporant to minimize the margins between islands - a lot of islands means a lot of area taken by margins, so the smaller the margin the much more UV area used.

The situation is different when a UV map doesn’t contain a lot of small islands. In such situation it is essential to pack bigger islands in dense manner, and this is what the heuristic search allows you to achieve.

Regarding an issue with the cube packing: I cannot reproduce it. I created a cube, UV unwrapped it using smart UV project with islands margin set to 0. I could pack islands, no invalid retopology error was reported (I didn’t even have to enable the ‘Extended Analysis’ option). I achieved above 60% of coverage. Could you send me a blend containing the cube together with the UV map you have issues with?


(bassig) #138

Thanks for the explanation. That helps to understand which setting to increase for getting better results for a certain mesh.

As for the .blend file, these are the settings I used when unwrapping:
Angle Limit: 66
Island Margin + Area Weight: 0.0
Correct Aspect and Strech to UV bounds enabled.

invalidCube.blend (644.9 KB)

However the reason for the invalid topology error seems to be entirely Blender’s fault as it merges two islands together on one corner. Which doesn’t happen if you set a margin greater than 0.

When packing the islands, the Addon produces a checker pattern (left) while Blender’s packer arranges them as I would expect it (right).


(glukoz) #139

I packed the map from your file and got decent result: above 60% coverage:

cube-packing

Are you sure you have island rotation option enabled? Set it to 90.


(bassig) #140

Yes, I tried the default settings and again with more iterations. I keep getting the checker pattern though.
But hey, as long as it works like a charm on actual complex meshes that’s totally fine with me. :slight_smile:


(fiendish55) #141

I can confirm that with normal cube all edges marked as seam and packet with packmaster I get this checker pattern as well. https://i.imgur.com/EKgEZbl.gifv