Material Library Scale Issues in 2010?

[Anonymous]

I recently installed 2010 at work, and brought my first autocad model into max. Everything is scaled full size, and I checked with the tap to make sure. I went and used a few of the pro materials for conc. and asphalt, but the maps look like they are way out of scale? I am a long time Max 8 user and I am not really used to these new controls yet. Where can I fix this scale issue?

[Steve_Curley]

Max 2010 or Max 2010 Design? The ProMats (and the Arch&Design) materials are designed to used with MR which is the default in Design, not in standard Max. The default settings for Max Design take account of this, the defaults for Max (non design) do not.

Basically you need to make sure that both the Material and the UVMapping on the objets use Real World Scale - if you don't they won't be right. Search for "real world scale" in the Max help for more.

[CAMedeck]

I've found issues with Promaterials and imported Revit models (via FBX). Because the FBX units are Feet, it's easiest to use Max with Feet as the System Units. But the imported Promats seem to be off by a factor of 12 (inches). They don't use Bitmaps, where you can set the size of a map, but another map type that has some ambiguous scale factor. But I usually change Promats to Arch & Design when I can...

Make note of the units you are using (System, not Display)and make sure your objects were not scaled on import (select an object, Scale tool, F12, everything in the transform type-in should be 100). I think the Promats are designed to work in inches, but don't quote me on that.

[Anonymous]

I am using Max 2010 Design. I made sure that everything was set to real work scale and tried re-importing the model into max and still have the same problems. I also tried using an fbx file which seems to make no difference. I normally export my model from Revit in an Autocad format, and then imort it to max. I only have this problem with the pro materials. If I create my own materials things work fine. It would be nice to use the pro's but I guess unless someone can tell me what to change, ill have to do it the old fassion way.

[Anonymous]

You can also manually adjust the size of the bitmat under the map rollout "Coordinates" The "Size" parameters spinner can be tweaked to obtain the desired result. 4x4 usually works well but it depends also on the size of the bitmap image. A liitle experimentaion should resolve the issue.

[Anonymous]

it's a thread on real world scale mapping here
http://area.autodesk.com/forum/autodesk-3ds-max/autodesk-3ds-max--3ds-max-design-2010/anyway-to-have...

[Anonymous]

I have attaced a test rendering...Look at the concrete. In the real world scale box it says 16" x 16"? looks alot larger than that to me? anyone have any ideas what is going on?

[Anonymous]

Ok so I have not been able to upload an image? Well I have done some more tinkering, and if I import the File as an "fbx" the scaling of the textures is fine. If I import the file as an autocad file its all f-ed up and I cant seem to figure out how to fix the textures...I would rather use the autocad method so that I can manualy create the lights using mr lighting?

Can anyone help me? I guess im just not gettting it?

[Steve_Curley]

Atachments are a bit iffy at present. I hate to suggest this, but try imageshack or rapidshare and post the link.

[Anonymous]

This is what happens when I use Promaterials. As you can see the conc. is way out of scale..Any ideas?






http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj117/TRAVISKEPLER/RenderingTest.jpg

[Anonymous]

I am having the same trouble, Mapping coordinates are messed up if I come from Revit/DWG to Max
size of map is not real world.

[Anonymous]

This afternoon i did figure out that on objects that will use a bitmap image, or pro material if you use the uvw map modifier on the object it will fix the problem. It does however become cumbersome to have to do that on each object. Not really sure why I had to do this, since old versions did not require me to do this. is there a way to fix this so that I do not need to select the modifier for each object?

[CAMedeck]

Apply a MapScalar modifier.

I'll bet you have System Units set to inches. From Revit, geometry is ALWAYS feet. Bringing it into Max at anything besides feet just scales the geometry. Select something, and check the current scale to verify this. (Scale Tool, F12 for Transform Type-In box)

Even adding a UVW map on objects like this won't work, because they are scaled. Either a MapScalar modifier, or do a Reset XForm and then add a UVW Map.

If this isn't the problem, and this doesn't fix anything, then just make a new material to replace the Promats. They tend to render slower than A&D, and reflections/refractions aren't as clear.

[Anonymous]

Hi

The bottom line is the file link using DWG used to work fine(sort of) in 2009 and previous versions, and now its not.

The root of the problem seems to be that the linked geometry simply is not being given map co-ordinates that it should be given. In the File Link presets you have a choice to have the imported geometry mapped or not and it seems to me that even if you tick this button on or not it just doesnt do it.

I really dont want to map an entire hospital/shopping center when it used to do it just fine before. So we are all going back to 2009 till this is resolved.

I and my clients can not use FBX because it is simply not practical for reloading changes that are constantly done to the revit model.

I think its a programming issue that needs to be resolved and I hope there will be a fix out soon.

[Anonymous]

is generate coordinates-checked when importing the DWG? if you drag & drop DWGs in the viewport from max he will use default settings, best thing to do is to import a DWG into max by file > import and set the settings correct, just for the first time

after that he'll auto-adapt these settings when drag & dropping the DWG into max from the time you adjusted these settings i guess

I fail to see how you could get a scale issue when the importing file is on the correct drawing scale (inch for instance) and the max scene is set to inch before importing the model..

a dwg with objects have a "generate-coordinates" option when importing into max, giving a surface the actual size of the surface.. so when u import a surface of 500x400inch, the uvw will be 500x400 inch when importing with this option - not being the uvw of the texture prob..

if this should be a bug however, might want to try and see what the scale difference is? if the scale difference of the texture projected on the surface is for example 39,..% off balance, there's a bug in the european / american metric-system inside max.. when it's 10% 100% 1000% scale issue you're within the continent-metric system with bugs..

just thinking out loud,

Ethan

[Anonymous]

I'm with Shaun on this one - Max does not assign mapping coordinates to the linked geometry which is a big issue for me - even if I have the time to assign UVW mapping to each object, I get all sorts of geometry issues when reloading a Revit file (because of the UVW Map modifier)

I thought that the service pack would solve such a obvious problem (it works in 2009 software), but after installation....no joy!!! Argh!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Hi. I just moved over to 2010 and I'm having, I think, the issue described here and I was wondering if anybody figured this out - if it was a bug, intended, etc.

Basically, I model in Autocad and then link my file into Max. Previous to 2010, I could just apply my 'real world' scaled maps to my layers and everything looked just dandy. Now, whenever I apply a material, it's coming in way too large. Applying a UVW map corrects this. It seems like I'm going to have to apply a UVW map to every fracking object to get my maps to scale properly. Is this right? Am I missing something?

Thanks,
Cory

[CAMedeck]

Are both files using the same scale? It sounds like maybe the scale of the CAD drawing is not the same as Max, and therefore what should be Real-World Scale is being scaled.

[Anonymous]

I'm having the same issue moving over to max 2010 from max 2009. I have tried importing the same autocad file to each version of max. In 2009 the real world materials work fine. When I import the geometry into max 2010, using all the same settings as 2009, the real world materials are scaled way too big. Does anyone know the solution to this problem?

[Anonymous]

Here is the response we got from AutoDesk:

"Our development team has investigated this issue and we believe that 3ds Max/VIZ is working as intended. This change in behavoir is actually due to an intentional change that was made because customers reported a defect using File Link in 3ds Max/VIZ with DWG files created in AutoCAD.

The original report was regarding a DWG created in ACAD 2007. The box had a bitmap material applied to it with a rotation of 15 degrees, which rendered in ACAD correctly. However, when the customer used File Link to bring in the DWG, the "Real-World Map Size = off" flag was ignored. This resulted in the UV's being altered by the File Link process and forced to "Real-World Map Size = on". When we fixed this defect, we changed the behavoir by adopting the exact same code as AutoCAD for the case where no mapping information is found on the object.

In the file you provided, the geometry does not contain any information about texture mapping. In that case, 3ds Max applies a default mapping. To determine how a bitmap is mapped onto an object there are two parts: 1) the object itself has some texture mapping information associated with its vertices 2) the material contains some information about how the material is mapped. These two pieces of information are combined together to determine the final mapping.

So I think the conclusion is that you cannot rely on the default mapping to provide good mapping in all circumstances. If you want a specific texture mapping, you should set that up either in AutoCAD or 3ds Max to ensure the UV's are preserved.”