Easy question from a 3DS beginner

[Anonymous]

Hi, I'm just starting out with 3ds and I'm running into a problem which seems like it should be easy but I've been banging my head against the desk for the past couple hours, and anyone I've talked to doesn't have any suggestions.

I'm trying to create some simple trees by crossing two thin planes and then applying an diffuse bitmap of the tree on both sides of the planes. I've added an opacity map, with an alpha channel image, to remove the surrounding, black background. Looks fine in the material editor, but when i render the image my trees come out transparent. It seems like the opacity level is affecting the diffuse map. If I reduce the opacity level, my trees look solid, but now the border appears.

thanks for taking the time to read this,

Dan

[Anonymous]

Hi, I'm just starting out with 3ds and I'm running into a problem which seems like it should be easy but I've been banging my head against the desk for the past couple hours, and anyone I've talked to doesn't have any suggestions.

I'm trying to create some simple trees by crossing two thin planes and then applying an diffuse bitmap of the tree on both sides of the planes. I've added an opacity map, with an alpha channel image, to remove the surrounding, black background. Looks fine in the material editor, but when i render the image my trees come out transparent. It seems like the opacity level is affecting the diffuse map. If I reduce the opacity level, my trees look solid, but now the border appears.

thanks for taking the time to read this,

Dan

[Anonymous]

Can you post an example of the render? Try rendering without the diffuse map, just the opacity to see what happens. Also, make sure 2-sided material is on. If this still is totally transparent, the opacity texture may be improperly mapped (meaning it's in the wrong place on the plane). One way to test this is to turn on "show in view port" for the opacity map of the material (not the diffuse) and see if you can see your tree (in the viewport).

[Anonymous]

Can you post an example of the render? Try rendering without the diffuse map, just the opacity to see what happens. Also, make sure 2-sided material is on. If this still is totally transparent, the opacity texture may be improperly mapped (meaning it's in the wrong place on the plane). One way to test this is to turn on "show in view port" for the opacity map of the material (not the diffuse) and see if you can see your tree (in the viewport).

[Steve_Curley]

Apologies if this is slightly OT, but I'm seeing a similar thing here with respect to the "borders".

If you look closely at the attached image (render) you can clearly see the "edges" of the transparent areas - surely this shouldn't be happening? or am I missing something glaringly obvious? Rendering is not my strong point, I admit.

This is nothing fancy, just 2 Planes, a 2-sided Material with the same Checker map in both the Diffuse and Opacity maps.

NB. The attached Scene is Max9.

259_aUC2kjrtPA8hnF6VJ98G.zip

[Steve_Curley]

Apologies if this is slightly OT, but I'm seeing a similar thing here with respect to the "borders".

If you look closely at the attached image (render) you can clearly see the "edges" of the transparent areas - surely this shouldn't be happening? or am I missing something glaringly obvious? Rendering is not my strong point, I admit.

This is nothing fancy, just 2 Planes, a 2-sided Material with the same Checker map in both the Diffuse and Opacity maps.

NB. The attached Scene is Max9.

259_aUC2kjrtPA8hnF6VJ98G.zip

[Anonymous]

>>you can clearly see the “edges” of the transparent areas - surely this shouldn’t be happening<<

Hi Steve,

Haven't had time to look at your scene, but try playing (lowering) the Blur amount in the map. Also, make sure you've applied a UVW Map modifier, have you noticed that the size of the gizmo is always slightly larger than the object? I think that's to compensate for the slight blurriness settings.

I've found that Blur settings can radically affect how some maps work, especially Gradient Ramp and maps in Bump slots.

Good luck
Ted

[Anonymous]

>>you can clearly see the “edges” of the transparent areas - surely this shouldn’t be happening<<

Hi Steve,

Haven't had time to look at your scene, but try playing (lowering) the Blur amount in the map. Also, make sure you've applied a UVW Map modifier, have you noticed that the size of the gizmo is always slightly larger than the object? I think that's to compensate for the slight blurriness settings.

I've found that Blur settings can radically affect how some maps work, especially Gradient Ramp and maps in Bump slots.

Good luck
Ted

[Steve_Curley]

Hey Ted - welcome back from your travels!

I hadn't touched the Blur (Coordinates rollout of the Diffuse Map). Just tried lowering it to its minimum value (0.01) from its default (1.0) - it actually made the situation worse! Those edges show up much more clearly.

Applying a UVW Map (default settings) helps - the edges are much fainter, but they're still there.

All the rendering settings are at their defaults, no effects, the only changes I made were to the background colour (grey instead of black) and the Tint level (2 instead of 1).

Obviously a Checker pattern is a much more harsh test than a tree - and rendered up close at that. Probably a with a tree at some distance from the camera this wouldn't be an issue, but it's still something I'd like to get to the bottom of.

Thanks for the reply 🙂

[Steve_Curley]

Hey Ted - welcome back from your travels!

I hadn't touched the Blur (Coordinates rollout of the Diffuse Map). Just tried lowering it to its minimum value (0.01) from its default (1.0) - it actually made the situation worse! Those edges show up much more clearly.

Applying a UVW Map (default settings) helps - the edges are much fainter, but they're still there.

All the rendering settings are at their defaults, no effects, the only changes I made were to the background colour (grey instead of black) and the Tint level (2 instead of 1).

Obviously a Checker pattern is a much more harsh test than a tree - and rendered up close at that. Probably a with a tree at some distance from the camera this wouldn't be an issue, but it's still something I'd like to get to the bottom of.

Thanks for the reply 🙂

[Anonymous]

Hi Ted, I have Never seen such a big Newbie!

Steve, scale the UVW Gizmo to 101%.
(See Attachment.)

ivan

[Anonymous]

Hi Ted, I have Never seen such a big Newbie!

Steve, scale the UVW Gizmo to 101%.
(See Attachment.)

ivan

[Steve_Curley]

Yeah - these noobs get everywhere 😛


OK, that works just fine Ivan - but...

It does affect the "size" of the Map, however, if you then reduce the Width/Height params in the Mapping rollout to compensate then the result is fine. Nice work-around.

However, I'm a bit confused as to why we should need to do this in the first place. To my mind it should "just work" - having to resort to adding the UVWMap and then scale and then adjust seems a lot of steps. Is this a "known issue" that I just haven't come across before?

Either way - thanks for the tips (Ivan and Ted) 🙂

[Steve_Curley]

Yeah - these noobs get everywhere 😛


OK, that works just fine Ivan - but...

It does affect the "size" of the Map, however, if you then reduce the Width/Height params in the Mapping rollout to compensate then the result is fine. Nice work-around.

However, I'm a bit confused as to why we should need to do this in the first place. To my mind it should "just work" - having to resort to adding the UVWMap and then scale and then adjust seems a lot of steps. Is this a "known issue" that I just haven't come across before?

Either way - thanks for the tips (Ivan and Ted) 🙂

[Anonymous]

Nobody is perfect Steve, but maybe Max 2008!?

ivan

[Anonymous]

Nobody is perfect Steve, but maybe Max 2008!?

ivan

[Anonymous]

>>the edges are much fainter, but they’re still there<<

Hi guys,

Hmmm, when I set the Blur to 0.01 I can't see any remnants of the edges (checks get ragged, though). I've tried several color backgrounds and tried zooming in close on the rendered image. This is with the default UVW Map.

It might just be old eyes that have been in Marseilles too long watching other things!! 🙂

Ivan...one post makes a newbie; no matter how you look at it. 🙂

Later
Ted

[Anonymous]

>>the edges are much fainter, but they’re still there<<

Hi guys,

Hmmm, when I set the Blur to 0.01 I can't see any remnants of the edges (checks get ragged, though). I've tried several color backgrounds and tried zooming in close on the rendered image. This is with the default UVW Map.

It might just be old eyes that have been in Marseilles too long watching other things!! 🙂

Ivan...one post makes a newbie; no matter how you look at it. 🙂

Later
Ted

[Tim_Wilbers]

Hey Dan,

Can you zip the bitmap and a scene (just the planes) together and post it here.
Be easier than guessing.

(Newbies, always wandering off-topic.)

Ted, good to see you on the dark-side.

[Tim_Wilbers]

Hey Dan,

Can you zip the bitmap and a scene (just the planes) together and post it here.
Be easier than guessing.

(Newbies, always wandering off-topic.)

Ted, good to see you on the dark-side.

[Anonymous]

Ted I wanted to put the accent on Big not on Newbie. 🙂
Great to see you back here!

ivan

[Anonymous]

Ted I wanted to put the accent on Big not on Newbie. 🙂
Great to see you back here!

ivan

[Anonymous]

>>having to resort to adding the UVWMap and then scale and then adjust seems a lot of steps. Is this a “known issue” that I just haven’t come across before?<<

I think it just depends on how the map is used, Steve. In this case, the blurring adds "size" to the map that happens to show as opacity artifacts. If it's used only for color only it isn't generally noticeable. It will really raise havoc with alpha channels, though, if the blur isn't adjusted.

This has been an issue as long as I can remember, but is not a bug; just the way it works with blurring.

Good seeing you guys are still here.

Ted

[Anonymous]

>>having to resort to adding the UVWMap and then scale and then adjust seems a lot of steps. Is this a “known issue” that I just haven’t come across before?<<

I think it just depends on how the map is used, Steve. In this case, the blurring adds "size" to the map that happens to show as opacity artifacts. If it's used only for color only it isn't generally noticeable. It will really raise havoc with alpha channels, though, if the blur isn't adjusted.

This has been an issue as long as I can remember, but is not a bug; just the way it works with blurring.

Good seeing you guys are still here.

Ted

[Steve_Curley]

Top Left - just 2 Planes, no change to Blur (1.0), no UVW Map
Top Right - as Top Left but Blur=0.01
Bottom Left - as Top Left but with a UVW Map (unmodified, not scaled)
Bottom Right - Blur=0.01 and UVW Map

To re-create these, grab the scene from my earlier post and make the changes 1 at a time.

[Steve_Curley]

Top Left - just 2 Planes, no change to Blur (1.0), no UVW Map
Top Right - as Top Left but Blur=0.01
Bottom Left - as Top Left but with a UVW Map (unmodified, not scaled)
Bottom Right - Blur=0.01 and UVW Map

To re-create these, grab the scene from my earlier post and make the changes 1 at a time.

[Anonymous]

>>To re-create these, grab the scene from my earlier post and make the changes 1 at a time<<

Here's what I get when I set the Blur to 0.01 in your file. No other changes.

Ted

[Anonymous]

>>To re-create these, grab the scene from my earlier post and make the changes 1 at a time<<

Here's what I get when I set the Blur to 0.01 in your file. No other changes.

Ted

[Steve_Curley]

OK, I'm lost now - I don't understand why the same file is producing such different results on different systems. You can clearly see the "edges" in my image(s), and equally clearly NOT see them in yours.

I'm confused... Got any ideas why this is happening?

[Steve_Curley]

OK, I'm lost now - I don't understand why the same file is producing such different results on different systems. You can clearly see the "edges" in my image(s), and equally clearly NOT see them in yours.

I'm confused... Got any ideas why this is happening?

[Tim_Wilbers]

Steve,
I get what Ted gets.

To keep both maps the same, I instanced one to the other slot. Even at a Blur value of .1, the edges are gone.

[Tim_Wilbers]

Steve,
I get what Ted gets.

To keep both maps the same, I instanced one to the other slot. Even at a Blur value of .1, the edges are gone.

[Anonymous]

>>I instanced one to the other slot<<

Oh yeah, sorry I left that step out.

For those following the thread and using the process to create "billboard" trees or other objects; it's often a good idea to put the map into the Glossiness slot so the plane doesn't show any specular highlights on the transparent portion.

Whether that map is an Instance or Copy depends on where you want the highlights to show, but Instance usually makes sense.

Good luck
Ted

[Anonymous]

>>I instanced one to the other slot<<

Oh yeah, sorry I left that step out.

For those following the thread and using the process to create "billboard" trees or other objects; it's often a good idea to put the map into the Glossiness slot so the plane doesn't show any specular highlights on the transparent portion.

Whether that map is an Instance or Copy depends on where you want the highlights to show, but Instance usually makes sense.

Good luck
Ted

[Anonymous]

Steve, rendering your file, I also see what Ted and Tim are seeing.
"Even with Blur of 0,2"

Edit: Actually the opacity map is the important one, I see no edges with 1,0 for the diffuse map and 0,2 blur in the opacity slot.

ivan

[Anonymous]

Steve, rendering your file, I also see what Ted and Tim are seeing.
"Even with Blur of 0,2"

Edit: Actually the opacity map is the important one, I see no edges with 1,0 for the diffuse map and 0,2 blur in the opacity slot.

ivan

[Steve_Curley]

I think you (all) may have found the problem - my maps are not instanced (at present) so any changes I make are only affecting the diffuse map not the opacity map. I told you it was probably something glaringly obvious 😄

I'll have a play shortly - it's been a busy night here and there's a lot of posts to look through first.

Oh yes, and apologies to the OP - I seem to have hijacked his thread. Sorry about that, it wasn't intentional.

[Steve_Curley]

I think you (all) may have found the problem - my maps are not instanced (at present) so any changes I make are only affecting the diffuse map not the opacity map. I told you it was probably something glaringly obvious 😄

I'll have a play shortly - it's been a busy night here and there's a lot of posts to look through first.

Oh yes, and apologies to the OP - I seem to have hijacked his thread. Sorry about that, it wasn't intentional.

[Steve_Curley]

Yep - that was it. Not having the Opacity map instanced was causing it. I wonder why I didn't do that in the first place?
I'm glad we got to the bottom of that for 2 reasons:-
1) It's an easy mistake to make, someone else is bound to do it and will hopefully find the answer in this thread.
2) The OP can have his thread back.

Thanks to all who responded.

[Steve_Curley]

Yep - that was it. Not having the Opacity map instanced was causing it. I wonder why I didn't do that in the first place?
I'm glad we got to the bottom of that for 2 reasons:-
1) It's an easy mistake to make, someone else is bound to do it and will hopefully find the answer in this thread.
2) The OP can have his thread back.

Thanks to all who responded.