PBR Texturing: Introduction to 3D Workflow in Photoshop

[Paul K]

Thanks for the info and links, gentlemen. I think I can understand the explanation, but maybe not quite appreciate the advance over self-shadowing, dynamic reflections, alpha channels and so on. But if you all say it's good, then it's good. Thank you again

[Bjoern]

X-Plane has PBR and it's quite good.

[YoYo]

PBR will be the next reason to move to P3Dv4, especially that it will be in P3Dv4.4 perhaps:
https://fselite.net/news/prepar3d-v4...2018-with-pbr/

[gman5250]

I read and took under consideration all of the comments following the first video. I have adjusted my approach a tad to address the issues people brought up.

I'll begin by clarifying what is required to use Quixel, specifically cost and complexity.

Forward
Quixel can be used in conjunction with these free platforms to generate art.

GMAX
ModelConverterX
Gimp

Mesh can be fully prepared for Quixel using these programs to generate assets for any Quixel project.


Textures generated in Quixel are easily converted for FSX/P3Dv2/P3Dv3 and P3Dv4. Slight tweaks will enable the 64bit features of a Quixel file for the 64 bit simulators.
The export process is exactly the same as multi layered FSX files prepared in Photoshop for texture, bump, alpha and specular files. Quixel layered files are simply flattened and exported with proper naming conventions as either BMP or DDS. FSX and current P3D engines will process those files in the same way any traditional bitmap file.
If and when Prepar3D moves into a dedicated PBR engine, Quixel PBR rendering will become fully realized, but until that time anyone can take advantage of the point and click interface to generate textures they previously thought out of their artistic reach.

One important thing to bear in mind is Quixel is not a purely PBR oriented workflow. Textures generated in the application can be used on any FSX or P3D mesh.

GMAX and Quixel
Gmax can generate mesh that can be converted to FBX or OBJ using ModelConverterX. In fact, any mesh that can be imported into MCX can be converted for use in Quixel.
Generate your GMAX mesh and export as .mdl. Import the .mdl into MCX and export the object as either FBX or OBJ. This mesh will import perfectly into Quixel in either format.


Mini Tutorial
I'll prepare a fully detailed video of the process I used to generate this project, and post that link here.

This project used a .mdl file that I imported to MCX and exported out as both FBX and OBJ. I prepared a single layered mesh in 3ds Max with three material ID tags for the barrel/receiver, buttstock/handguard and magazine. GMAX will do the same task. You can add as many color IDs layers as you would like here, I chose three for this simple illustration.

Quixel will support multiple dedicated mesh layers, but bear in mind that numerous Photoshop layers are generated for each mesh layer and this can become problematic if working at 4K and 8K. You will need a capable system to work at that level. I prefer a single mesh layer with color ID map to select specific components. These steps can be done in either GMAX or 3DStudio Max. BTW, if you want to try Studio free for a year, go down to your local college and enroll in any class to qualify for the student version of 3ds Max. That's a screamin' deal.

Step two, I prepared a color ID map based on the three materials that compose the mesh. Quixel will use the color template to assign textures to the mesh.
For the M4 Carbine in Quixel, I chose a polymer for the barrel/receiver, a camo polymer for the buttstock/handguard and gunmetal for the magazine.

Third, I created an ambient occlusion map, which is optional for this project. Quixel can use a baked AO map, or generate one automatically if one is not pre-baked in. I prefer to bake in my own AO, then layer it into the final bitmap render for the finished simulation model. Quixel generates specular layers in most of the textures. A single texture may consist of three color layers, gloss layers and specular layers. I have found that their specular files work better in most applications than hand painted specular files.

All of the art in this project was prepared by adding Quixel textures and a basic point and click application. This art is now ready for final detailing i.e. grip texturing and appropriate metal stamping and engraving. These details are easily added as layers in Photoshop.

Total production time...nine minutes from gray mesh to the renderings shown here. Not bad.


The raw FBX mesh with ambient occlusion applied.



After application of three scan based materials to the mesh.

[gman5250]

This is the model prepared using the OBJ mesh, and a few different texture choices.

[kalong]

PBR will be the next reason to move to P3Dv4, especially that it will be in P3Dv4.4 perhaps:
https://fselite.net/news/prepar3d-v4...2018-with-pbr/

if it realized in P3D, it would awesome upgrade.

[TuFun]

This short overview video will give you an idea how creating PBR Materials using Blender for modeling (free) and Quixel suite with photoshop 6. This is the future!

https://www.linkedin.com/learning/cr...fault_learning

[IanP]

I've got Quixel Suite and have used it with Blender too, with varying degrees of success. One thing I will say is that it is recommended NOT to allow Quixel Suite to create your curvature map - it doesn't do a very good job at all. There are other tools that can do this better.

Ian P.

[TuFun]

An article about that issue using Quixel DDO creating curvature maps. Don't know if Quixel has been update since this article. I have no way of testing. No computer since December. The program xNormal is use to do the job which is free.

https://polycount.com/discussion/140462/edges-on-geometry-ddo-curvature-map-creation-bug-best-practice

[roger-wilco-66]

Hi,

that issue of edges in the geometry was was solved, at least from my perception. The Quixel curvature algorithm was "bending" the curvature around hard edges, making them less visible, but I have not seen this since I started to use it around two years ago.


Cheers,
Mark

[TuFun]

Thanks Mark good to know.

[roger-wilco-66]

Just look at Gordons's images above. E.g. the barrel of the gun. I guess there were no smoothing groups referenced to the uv shells. So Quixels curvature calculation left the hard edges on the rather low poly geometry.

Cheers,
Mark

[gman5250]

Just look at Gordons's images above. E.g. the barrel of the gun. I guess there were no smoothing groups referenced to the uv shells. So Quixels curvature calculation left the hard edges on the rather low poly geometry.

Cheers,
Mark

The caps in the second post are on an un-smoothed mesh. I went back, smoothed the mesh and did the second rendering. The caps in the top post are the smoothed model. Hope this helps.

[roger-wilco-66]

Proof of concept, Gordon :-)

[gman5250]

Curvature Options in Quixel 2

I usually let Quixel bake an initial curvature map when it creates the project.

There is a ton of flexibility for curvature built into the interface that lets you modify curvature properties using sliders. This can be done for each layer that uses a dynamask. The mask will loosen or tighten along with a number of variables around the three dimensional polys. This can also be enhanced with poly smoothing applied to the mesh before exporting the FBX.

The first menu (at left) with layers for each color ID mesh component.




After selecting a layer and clicking the Dynamask option, the Dynamask Editor opens with a fully adjustable set of variables for curvature. I tightened up the curvature a bit to get the wear around the edges a bit heavier.

This cap also shows the normal mapping that is automatically generated when selecting a texture. The ability to move the mesh and light in three dimensions takes the guesswork out of bumps, spec, gloss, curvature and weathering, all of which are adjustable. Pretty trick.

[IanP]

It's a really clever and inexpensive piece of software that I've definitely not explored the full potential of (primarily because my modelling isn't good enough to make best use of it.)

I'm glad to see that others are getting much more from the package - are any of you using Megascans as well? I played with it pre-release but that is too expensive for me at present. It looks like for scenery that uses PBR in a 64-bit sim, it'll be a phenomenal resource.

Ian P.

[gman5250]

It's a really clever and inexpensive piece of software that I've definitely not explored the full potential of (primarily because my modelling isn't good enough to make best use of it.)

I'm glad to see that others are getting much more from the package - are any of you using Megascans as well? I played with it pre-release but that is too expensive for me at present. It looks like for scenery that uses PBR in a 64-bit sim, it'll be a phenomenal resource.

Ian P.

I'm using Megascans Ian. I opted for the "Hobby" subscription for starters, but will upgrade to the commercial license when I begin to use the assets in future payware. The Megascans Mixer and Bridge are fantastic for creating and organizing assets. Once the interface is set up, the custom scans from Megascans are automatically inserted into the Quixel work flow.

I'm still in the learning curve, but anyone with Photoshop experience will pick up the logic of the Quixel software without any problems. The learning curve for PBR, as it relates to simulators like Prepar3D, is going to be comprehensive but well worth the investment of time and capital. Once Prepar3D goes full PBR, our flight simulators are going to be...well...magnificent. IMO

[lagaffe]

Some of the posts above you were talking about a process using Quixel and Gimp, yet at the moment I don't think Quixel can work with The Gimp ... maybe in a while but not yet unless a solution already exists ?

After some unsuccessful attempts with Quixel (repeated crashes with 16 GB of RAM), I decided to explore another software of the same kind: Substance Painter (SP).

SP has the advantage of being an independent program and not a plug-in which makes it less dependent on the machine's memory.
After a few tests, I managed to find a workflow that allows me to use it with current versions of Prepar3D (textures not PBR). That said, SP's vocation is to offer PBR textures and I think I can share my experience on this other way of approaching this subject.

Thanks for your post.

[gman5250]

Some of the posts above you were talking about a process using Quixel and Gimp, yet at the moment I don't think Quixel can work with The Gimp ... maybe in a while but not yet unless a solution already exists ?

After some unsuccessful attempts with Quixel (repeated crashes with 16 GB of RAM), I decided to explore another software of the same kind: Substance Painter (SP).

SP has the advantage of being an independent program and not a plug-in which makes it less dependent on the machine's memory.
After a few tests, I managed to find a workflow that allows me to use it with current versions of Prepar3D (textures not PBR). That said, SP's vocation is to offer PBR textures and I think I can share my experience on this other way of approaching this subject.

Thanks for your post.

As far as I know Quixel does not work in Gimp. I referenced Gimp as a software that can be used to prepare assets for Quixel. Those assets would be any bitmap that Quixel uses, along with the mesh to construct the model used.

[roger-wilco-66]

Quixel is a native Photoshop plugin which works heavily with xml scripting. I also had RAM related crashes with my 16GB RAM, but only when 3Do was running over a prolonged period of time and the texture maps were set on 4096 squared.

Lagaffe, it would be interesting to know about your experiences with Substance Painter! As an independent application it might have a better performance and be more efficient with RAM usage, as you stated. Did I understand that there is a workflow which allows exporting Directx type textures (diffuse + diffuse alpha, specular) ? Or, does it burn AO maps into the diffuse map? Does it support bump map painting?


Cheers,
Mark

[TuFun]

Curvature Options in Quixel 2

This cap also shows the normal mapping that is automatically generated when selecting a texture. The ability to move the mesh and light in three dimensions takes the guesswork out of bumps, spec, gloss, curvature and weathering, all of which are adjustable. Pretty trick.

You can say that again! Beautiful work there "G"!

[lagaffe]

Quixel is a native Photoshop plugin which works heavily with xml scripting. I also had RAM related crashes with my 16GB RAM, but only when 3Do was running over a prolonged period of time and the texture maps were set on 4096 squared.

Lagaffe, it would be interesting to know about your experiences with Substance Painter! As an independent application it might have a better performance and be more efficient with RAM usage, as you stated. Did I understand that there is a workflow which allows exporting Directx type textures (diffuse + diffuse alpha, specular) ? Or, does it burn AO maps into the diffuse map? Does it support bump map painting?

Cheers,
Mark

Yes, perfectly I succeeded in early 2018 in making a set of textures for Prepar3D or FSX with Substance Painter 2017.

Wanting to try my hand at creating planes for X-Plane, I followed Javier Rollon's Youtube channel dedicated to the creation of his SF-260 (exemple: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjwy...index=55&t=20s). It was when he approached texture creation with SP that I became interested in this software.
After some research I actually found Quixel too and tried to do some tests with both software to see.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm more comfortable with SP and on the memory side it seems "lighter": it's a software in its own right and not a plug-in like Quixel, so it's more responsive and less subject to lags and blockages.

It was during my Menestrel HN700 project that I became interested in SP. After browsing the Internet and reading your work as well, I began to understand the interaction of the different textures between them and how we could still create a process to create FSX/P3D textures based on SP.

AO creations - interior - front gear - rear gear :








After SP workflow - interior - front gear - rear gear :







These are not too complicated textures to make and I could have done them with just Gimp. There, it allowed me to test the process and get a result that I liked.

Since May 2018, I have put this project on hold to devote myself with Jean-Pierre Fillon (Quebec.org) to the realization of a large Quebec airport (near Montreal) that will soon be completed.
I would have to get this Menestrel HN700 back together to revive my memory and give you the elements that I have used to achieve theses textures.

In principle, the process is almost identical:
- creation of AOs in your modeling software
- duplication of the desired object (front wheel for example) then assignment via a multi-material of several basic colors to distinguish the different elements (brakes, tire, cylinder, valve, etc.):=> texture ID
- import into SP of the duplicated object (FBX or OBJ format, I prefer FBX)
- import of AO and ID texture
- selection of diverses elements via the color defined in the texture ID then application of the various layers

PS: This process is identical between the two software packages.

The main problem lies in the way we initialize the project in SP since according to the pattern used at the beginning we define a certain number of textures that will then be processed in the software and ultimately when exporting will correspond or not to the desired goal.
I took notes during my various essays and I have to gather them together to make a summary... in English (I'm French, sorry)

The two screenshots of my SP input and export settings are refused by my image host: Postimage ??? I don't understand why.
Anyway, I'll try to give you the main parameters:
- New project
Create a texture set per UDIM tile => unchecked
Normal map format : DirectX
Compute tangent space per fragment => unchecked
Document resolution .... as you want
- Export
Config: Document channels + Normal + AO (With Alpha)
Common padding : Dilatation + Default background color (dilatation 8 pixels)

Texture sets
DefaultMaterial_Diffuse
DefaultMaterial_Specular
DefaultMaterial_Glossiness
DefaultMaterial_Height
DefaultMaterial_Normal
DefaultMaterial_Emissive
DefaultMaterial_Normal_DirectX
DefaultMaterial_Mixed_AO

After that, I have tried to compose all theses textures to obtain the result as you seen before, using the Marks's advices about Quixel.

Best regards,
Didier.

[roger-wilco-66]

Thanks for taking your time for this write-up, Didier! Very interesting.

I'll see if I can get a try-before buy version of Substance Painter and give it a try so I can compare the results. Although, I must say, I wouldn't want to miss the bump mapping tool of Quixel, and the Megascan Mixer/Bridge feature.


Cheers,
Mark

[IanP]

I know a commercial developer (sim software developer, not add-on developer) from outside the flight simulation world whose team started developing PBR using Quixel and then moved to Substance because of instability and other issues with Quixel.

Substance is A LOT more capable and powerful than Quixel, but the price rises to match. I've used both and I'd much prefer to work with Substance - I just cannot justify hundreds of pounds spent on software that gives me no return.

Or, more precisely, Mrs. P would pointedly refuse any justification I came up with for spending hundreds of pounds on software for no return.

Ian P.
Edited to add: She nodded.

[TuFun]

Looking at the Substance licenses... WOW! Those prices!!! I will just invest in more DDR RAM on a new build next year.