CameronMcDonald 147 Posted June 10, 2008 Hey all, I'm currently working on an update to my ACU troops. The update is pretty major, as retrospectiveness has opened my eyes to the hideous-ness of the normal maps on my units, as well as their disturbing lack of vest ambient shadow details. However, as mentioned above, my CrazyBump trial has expired, and IMHO I'm not willing to fork out 250 USD to use a program that I do not use for commercial purposes (even the student license is 60 USD) and only ever use in ArmA. I found a few days ago that I needed to make one more improvement on my vest normal maps and also to reduce the severity of the _AS maps a bit more, but my progress is essentially shafted by my inability to use Crazybump. If anyone could recommend a decent normal and ambient shadow generator that uses one texture file as source, or can assist me with getting access to CBump ( ) I'd be eternally grateful. I've already looked at xNormal and the NVIDIA Photoshop plugin, but... well, they're not really suitable. I'll post up some before and after comparison pics to explain what I mean. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted June 10, 2008 http://ati.amd.com/developer/sdk/radeonsdk/html/tools/toolsplugins.html try the ati normal map generator. For the cavity map, you can use xnormal. Apparently, this is the better between it and nvidias normal map tool. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nephilim 0 Posted June 10, 2008 ps plugin and xnormal not suitable? i think youre doing something wrong..... what do you think the big studios use? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 147 Posted June 10, 2008 Thankfully I'm not a big studio. Let me explain why I like CrazyBump, apart from the fact that I understand the different parameters in it a shload more than the other methods. xNormal is fine, sure, but it requires 4 different shadow angles on each picture to generate its normal maps. Now, in a PSD with 200 different layers, this becomes prohibitive, and frankly I don't have the time to fix each and every little problem that this method causes (e.g. shadows appearing incorrectly in PS). The NVidia plugin is fine too, but makes normals that are far too sharp, IMHO, and, as Neph mentions, perhaps I'm just too retarded to change the values around to get it as I want. Here's what I mean (note pics are quite the lossy): ATi (and essentially NVidia) output: ATi/NVidia CrazyBump output (I've inverted some of the seams as necessary): CB Which values do I need to funk around with the NVidia plugin to get this kind of result? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[aps]gnat 29 Posted June 10, 2008 http://ati.amd.com/developer/sdk/radeonsdk/html/tools/toolsplugins.html  try the ati normal map generator.  For the cavity map, you can use  xnormal.  Apparently, this is the better between it and nvidias normal map tool. NormalMapGenerator.zip Yep, makes a better one than that *%$$#%$ crazybump that a) Expired b) Uninstalled itself c) talks to all sorts of web sites !! Although, with this TGAtoDOT3.exe it doesn't seem to allow tweaking. ....... for those of us who DONT own PS ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nephilim 0 Posted June 10, 2008 well you still can tweak your normals with gimp.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 147 Posted June 10, 2008 As much as I appreciate the interest, does anyone have settings or otherwise, concerning the NVidia plugin, to get my normal maps looking like the CrazyBump ones? Because without such an answer, I'll essentially have to redo my original normal map base. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scars09 9 Posted June 10, 2008 try your last systemrecovery point from windows, should give you few more days. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nephilim 0 Posted June 10, 2008 well why dont you try out some differet settings with the ps plugin? its sufficient for detailing. for real high poly fakery you wont come around creating high resolution models. btw ive made a tutorial quite some time ago just using the ps plugin. if you use it efficiently its just about right. well post your normal map here and lets see what youve got Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted June 10, 2008 Yeah, but, crazybump does that for you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 147 Posted June 11, 2008 Quote[/b] ]well post your normal map here and lets see what youve got Couple of posts up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nephilim 0 Posted June 11, 2008 dude.... try this with the nm plugin.. load the ps plugin created normal map doubicate set it to overlay and give it a gaussian blur (bout 1-2 pixel) dublicate this layer and give it another blur etc etc until you have about the same result. then merge all layers and run the normal map filter again. but with the option set to normalize only. done... you dont need stupid crazybump for that... Quote[/b] ]Yeah, but, crazybump does that for you. yea maybe... but you have more control on what youre doing.. and derriving a ao map from a norma map is... laughable easy... and deriving a normal map to fake geometry just from the diffuse map is... not a good idea.. you only do this for detailing and not faking geometry.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MehMan 0 Posted June 11, 2008 dude....try this with the nm plugin.. load the ps plugin created normal map doubicate set it to overlay and give it a gaussian blur (bout 1-2 pixel) dublicate this layer and give it another blur etc etc until you have about the same result. then merge all layers and run the normal map filter again. but with the option set to normalize only. done... you dont need stupid crazybump for that... I now see what you mean, it seems I've been setting the blur setting far too high previously and thus I got negative results with the overlay. With a 1 px one it comes out very nicely. Sweet, I really don't need crazybump now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 147 Posted June 12, 2008 That does give a good result. How many duplicate layers would you recommend usually? Just curious. EDIT - Cancel that, found it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nephilim 0 Posted June 12, 2008 Until it suits you of course Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmarkwick 261 Posted June 12, 2008 You might want to check out ShaderMap, there's a free version as well as a better version that costs like $20 or something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BilOlson 0 Posted June 12, 2008 You might want to check out ShaderMap, there's a free version as well as a better version that costs like $20 or something. I 2nd that, I use it as well, ShaderMap CL (command Line), produces much better results than nvidia plugin.. imho of course.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CameronMcDonald 147 Posted June 12, 2008 Aye, I agree, having tried it. It looks like we've got a winner, especially with the multilayering technique. Cheers, lads - it's a shload less turn-one-pixel-into-a-rivet-y than the plugin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites