Can someone try using CrazyBump to make bump maps for VS

Post by **hellcatv** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:05 am

now that we have normal map support... we need help from folks to make us bump maps for all our spaceship models and bases!

I recently found a tool that could prove quite helpful, but I haven't figured it out myself...could someone look into trying to apply crazybump onto the textures and see if sane bumpmaps come out?

http://www.crazybump.com/

RyanClark · Post by **RyanClark** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 9:46 am

Hi there,

GoogleAlert just brought this thread to my attention. (I love GoogleAlert.)

CrazyBump doesn't really have proper documentation, but I just threw an example video on YouTube which might help with figuring the program out!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ohchkP-9oxo

cheers,

-Ryan Clark

Post by **loki1950** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 1:52 pm

Welcome RyanClark and thx for the link.

Enjoy the Choice

Post by **hellcatv** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 2:32 am

that video is sweet---can someone give it a try in VS?

Madawg · Post by **Madawg** » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:15 pm

It won't look good.
I'm using it at work and I can tell you it's perfect for rocks, bricks and other quite messy textures but it never looks good for more mechanic/precise stuff. You'll always get a better result with the Nvidia plug-in for Photoshop (or even better with a hi-res model projection).
The only use it could have for you would be on asteroids and maybe on planet surfaces (altough I wouldn't advise that because it would make the planets look even smaller).

RyanClark · Post by **RyanClark** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:04 am

The key to using CrazyBump with mechanical textures is to avoid the "3D shape analysis" function.

The shape analysis works well for natural / organic textures... but for mechanical textures, I recommend sticking to the low-frequency sliders.

Madawg · Post by **Madawg** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:30 pm

I agree...
But you still have to make a dedicated bump map for it otherwise Crazybump may interpret your color values wrongly, which comes back to the result you would get with the Nvidia plug-in.
The good thing with Crazybump is that you get and imediate visual result, it's much more intuitive.
But I personally prefer the Nvidia plug-in because I feel like I have more control on the result, Craeybump still give some weird result from time to time.
In any case, the normal maps have to be reworked in Photoshop (or any other package) anyway.