For those who think that this method does not work. This method is absolutely the same as any other 3D software and any other plugins that allow you to change texel density. It’s nothing more than scaling UVs. However, if you’re working with unique baking textures, you don’t want to go out of 0 to 1 UV space. And yes, if you scaled your UVs out of 0 to 1 range - you can’t bake it, but It’s only one case that was in this video. Many of the game assets in the industry use tiling (not baked) textures - therefore, we can scale our UV out of 0 to 1 range. And we not only can - we must scale UVs like that in order to maintain correct texel density. Another important thing - we can’t be 100% consistent with the Texel density on each model. It means, that nothing prevents us from scaling UVs by eye. For example, it’s common practice when using Trim sheet textures. And last - this method showcased lead level artist at Microsoft Leonardo Iezzi, so it’s commonly used in the industry. Check out his ArtStation: www.artstation.com/artwork/qbOqP You can see related topics on UA-cam, such as Trim sheet textures.
Just scaling with an eye-draft isn't an overall solution. At first, it looks ok but your UVs aren't perfectly the same size. And at the second I guess it doesn't work with complex geometries.
Yes, this method is not the best choice for perfect texel density, but it always work if you don't have tools or 3rd party plugins for your 3D software. But it's clear, that now we have many free options to control texel density
This method works but sometimes you have a small object and a large object and both need to have seperate UV's. Simply scaling UV's to match texel density will result in wasted UV space. This is why we use different texture resolutions for different objects. It's just a matter of simple calculation. In certain cases however, you want uneven texel density. For example, in game development, greater texel density would be needed on hands and face of a character compared to the rest of the body. If everything shares the same UV's then simply scaling up UV's where more resolution is needed will work just fine. In other cases, where you would use seperate materials for hands since maybe you need first person hands and 3rd person hands with different LOD models, you would need to approximately calculate the necessary resolutions. They dont need to be exact numbers.
The issue texel density addresses is inconsistent resolution images within game, which problem is only discovered by eyeballing, just like this does. If eyeballing it in Blender doesn't reveal a problem, then except for hidden surfaces that animate into view in game, I can't see how this method can be a problem. The real problem would seem to be dealing with the contradiction between consistent texel density and using the full texture space of the image. Texel density demands that an object use a specific amount of uv 0 - 1. Whereas an unwrapped object should pack the entirety of that range if it is to efficiently utilize the image that it asks the game engine to load. Packing UV with multiple objects, or more efficient seaming of model to allow for better packing seem to be workarounds that can never really honor the wish for absolutely consistent texel density.
Lol, am I supposed to manually scale up and down a few thousand parts of my mesh? Now what about packing that will eventually mess your scale up? This vid isn't useless, it's dangerous)
This works fine for tiled textures if you don't have to think about UV placement or for individual or multiple models. It is clear that there are many plugins that do this automatically. This video shows only one methods. And it works for any 3D software.
@@nikolayshamaev so you have to mention it in the title. And in the vid. Because otherwise you mislead people. Because you're not supposed to scale your UVs outside of the UV space. You won't be able to bake mesh maps for such a model in, say, Substance Painter. So this "method" doesnt work. You should have specified that. I'd hit a million dislikes if I could. Don't post more vids, please)
Okay, you scaled up the uvs. But now some parts of the mesh use the same areas of the texture. Meaning if you change certain pixels they will appear in multiple locations. Is that something you just gotta deal with or are there ways to still have matching texel density but no texture repeat?
It doesn't work for baking textures. But it's absolutely ok to scale UVs out of 0 to 1 space if you're using tiling textures. It's one of the major differences for gamedev, I had to realise.
Unreal Engine, for instance, uses by default second UV channel to bake lightmap UVs, so it won't effect your lightmaps. This method is mostly intended for use with models that use tiled textures. I didn't mention this in the video because I thought it will be clear for all. But I think I was wrong and I need to explain more.
@@shoop9274 the light maps are baked on a completely different uv set and in a completely different way so your whole argument is void in regards to this. If you ever used your main UV layout for your lightmaps I fear for the quality of your work...
@@nikolayshamaev i mean about scaling out the uv layout, it is so wrong !!, activate the "Constraint to UV bound" is the way to be sure to having the correct UV LAYOUT ready to export the models between engines (Ue4/Unity/others 3d softwares), there is only 1 way to work with UV, unwrap it never have parts out of the grid, using the correct seam at the correct position, and then click unwrap, apply a "uv checker",and check if something is wrong, like stretching, texel density can be set up by only using "Unwrap"there is lot of job. finally texel density is oftently used to go faster, the manually uv unwrap is necessary for AAA studio working on the optimization and performances, like atlas groups, and more, texel density for rocks and statics simple meshes are grea, but technicals models need more than just a term like "texel density = "correct repartition of the texture on the model". autodesk softwares have a very good code to work with UV's. Blender is good for strong 3d modeler (technical UV repartition need to be made manualy, except for LightMap).
So what would you do if, for instance, you have a large model of a wall (10 meters by 5 meters for example) and you want to achieve 1024 px per meter? And you have maximum 4k texture. Isn't it clear that you can't stay in the UV grid from 0 to 1 space?
lol like a boss , explained in two minutes ha ha ha, but keeping all ur island inside the texture boundary and covering the maximum spaces is the good standard practice for exporting. you just crossed the boundary
Check out his tutorial by Lead level artist at Microsoft (previously at Ubisoft) about texel density. He shows exactly the same method as an example. www.artstation.com/artwork/qbOqP
@@nikolayshamaev i have already read his pdf, he only shows example of 3ds max, and maya, if you want to know how to do it in blender correctly you should see this, its the same method from pdf ua-cam.com/video/x-pTALV0wuI/v-deo.html
wait a minute... There is no way to control texel density in vanilla blender? Man... I am trying to migrate from Maya to Blender for some time now for obvious reasons $$$. But wow, there is no way, At least for gaming Blender lack a lot of tools that makes the process easier or even possible like the texel density. Forget about add ons, they are for facilitating things and not to make things possible to do. The lack of a better snapping system, smoothing groups system is terrible and now texel density. Better to just get the indie license for Maya...
For those who think that this method does not work.
This method is absolutely the same as any other 3D software and any other plugins that allow you to change texel density. It’s nothing more than scaling UVs.
However, if you’re working with unique baking textures, you don’t want to go out of 0 to 1 UV space.
And yes, if you scaled your UVs out of 0 to 1 range - you can’t bake it, but It’s only one case that was in this video.
Many of the game assets in the industry use tiling (not baked) textures - therefore, we can scale our UV out of 0 to 1 range. And we not only can - we must scale UVs like that in order to maintain correct texel density.
Another important thing - we can’t be 100% consistent with the Texel density on each model. It means, that nothing prevents us from scaling UVs by eye.
For example, it’s common practice when using Trim sheet textures.
And last - this method showcased lead level artist at Microsoft Leonardo Iezzi, so it’s commonly used in the industry.
Check out his ArtStation: www.artstation.com/artwork/qbOqP
You can see related topics on UA-cam, such as Trim sheet textures.
Just scaling with an eye-draft isn't an overall solution. At first, it looks ok but your UVs aren't perfectly the same size. And at the second I guess it doesn't work with complex geometries.
Yes, this method is not the best choice for perfect texel density, but it always work if you don't have tools or 3rd party plugins for your 3D software. But it's clear, that now we have many free options to control texel density
The dude just wants to become famous on UA-cam. Actual knowlegde has nothing to do with his purpose))
This method works but sometimes you have a small object and a large object and both need to have seperate UV's. Simply scaling UV's to match texel density will result in wasted UV space. This is why we use different texture resolutions for different objects. It's just a matter of simple calculation. In certain cases however, you want uneven texel density. For example, in game development, greater texel density would be needed on hands and face of a character compared to the rest of the body. If everything shares the same UV's then simply scaling up UV's where more resolution is needed will work just fine. In other cases, where you would use seperate materials for hands since maybe you need first person hands and 3rd person hands with different LOD models, you would need to approximately calculate the necessary resolutions. They dont need to be exact numbers.
The issue texel density addresses is inconsistent resolution images within game, which problem is only discovered by eyeballing, just like this does. If eyeballing it in Blender doesn't reveal a problem, then except for hidden surfaces that animate into view in game, I can't see how this method can be a problem. The real problem would seem to be dealing with the contradiction between consistent texel density and using the full texture space of the image. Texel density demands that an object use a specific amount of uv 0 - 1. Whereas an unwrapped object should pack the entirety of that range if it is to efficiently utilize the image that it asks the game engine to load. Packing UV with multiple objects, or more efficient seaming of model to allow for better packing seem to be workarounds that can never really honor the wish for absolutely consistent texel density.
Doesnt work for games at all. It stays only in Blender. Cant baked it. Cant use it for anything else
this is a terrible technique that only works for niche cases :/
God Love You, Bro. Thank You!
Lol, am I supposed to manually scale up and down a few thousand parts of my mesh? Now what about packing that will eventually mess your scale up? This vid isn't useless, it's dangerous)
This works fine for tiled textures if you don't have to think about UV placement or for individual or multiple models. It is clear that there are many plugins that do this automatically. This video shows only one methods. And it works for any 3D software.
@@nikolayshamaev so you have to mention it in the title. And in the vid. Because otherwise you mislead people. Because you're not supposed to scale your UVs outside of the UV space. You won't be able to bake mesh maps for such a model in, say, Substance Painter. So this "method" doesnt work. You should have specified that. I'd hit a million dislikes if I could. Don't post more vids, please)
No, it isn't useful for me
Okay, you scaled up the uvs. But now some parts of the mesh use the same areas of the texture. Meaning if you change certain pixels they will appear in multiple locations. Is that something you just gotta deal with or are there ways to still have matching texel density but no texture repeat?
It doesn't work for baking textures. But it's absolutely ok to scale UVs out of 0 to 1 space if you're using tiling textures.
It's one of the major differences for gamedev, I had to realise.
Unreal Engine, for instance, uses by default second UV channel to bake lightmap UVs, so it won't effect your lightmaps. This method is mostly intended for use with models that use tiled textures. I didn't mention this in the video because I thought it will be clear for all. But I think I was wrong and I need to explain more.
@@shoop9274 the light maps are baked on a completely different uv set and in a completely different way so your whole argument is void in regards to this. If you ever used your main UV layout for your lightmaps I fear for the quality of your work...
the perfect way to do the perfect wrong method
It would be great if you could explain the correct method for manually controlling texel density.
@@nikolayshamaev i mean about scaling out the uv layout, it is so wrong !!, activate the "Constraint to UV bound" is the way to be sure to having the correct UV LAYOUT ready to export the models between engines (Ue4/Unity/others 3d softwares), there is only 1 way to work with UV, unwrap it never have parts out of the grid, using the correct seam at the correct position, and then click unwrap, apply a "uv checker",and check if something is wrong, like stretching, texel density can be set up by only using "Unwrap"there is lot of job. finally texel density is oftently used to go faster, the manually uv unwrap is necessary for AAA studio working on the optimization and performances, like atlas groups, and more, texel density for rocks and statics simple meshes are grea, but technicals models need more than just a term like "texel density = "correct repartition of the texture on the model". autodesk softwares have a very good code to work with UV's. Blender is good for strong 3d modeler (technical UV repartition need to be made manualy, except for LightMap).
So what would you do if, for instance, you have a large model of a wall (10 meters by 5 meters for example) and you want to achieve 1024 px per meter? And you have maximum 4k texture. Isn't it clear that you can't stay in the UV grid from 0 to 1 space?
I'm confused? You have gone well out the grid? You can't pack that for a game asset
Please, read the pinned comment. It explains everything with examples
Can I increase my Texel density as I want without increase the resolution the workspace ??
I like this kind of videos.
you scale right? then you bake the texture and you see everything is awful
Thanx Comrad
офигеть, как блин удается так язык выучить
dafuq did I jest see? xD
lol like a boss , explained in two minutes ha ha ha, but keeping all ur island inside the texture boundary and covering the maximum spaces is the good standard practice for exporting. you just crossed the boundary
Check out his tutorial by Lead level artist at Microsoft (previously at Ubisoft) about texel density. He shows exactly the same method as an example. www.artstation.com/artwork/qbOqP
@@nikolayshamaev i have already read his pdf, he only shows example of 3ds max, and maya, if you want to know how to do it in blender correctly you should see this, its the same method from pdf ua-cam.com/video/x-pTALV0wuI/v-deo.html
?
Slow down bro
wait a minute... There is no way to control texel density in vanilla blender? Man... I am trying to migrate from Maya to Blender for some time now for obvious reasons $$$. But wow, there is no way, At least for gaming Blender lack a lot of tools that makes the process easier or even possible like the texel density. Forget about add ons, they are for facilitating things and not to make things possible to do. The lack of a better snapping system, smoothing groups system is terrible and now texel density. Better to just get the indie license for Maya...