By MrRokusho
#107818
Arsonist wrote:Things can be separated later if they need to be, what's important now is the UVmap, right?
And really, come to think of it, the problem would probably be that the model has multiple materials. Easy to fix, in maya at least.


I see, so it's all about having 1 material linked to the whole model... :D

By MrRokusho
#107840
LegendsMC wrote:What pokemon is that ???


That is a Cubone :lol:
By MrRokusho
#107895 Ok so what I've done right now is Linking the material of the objects, which means they're still all seperate objects but they share the same material, thus the same texture. Is that ok?
Also another small question, blender has 2 camera modes i noticed, which of the 2 looks as it would look in minecraft?

Image
User avatar
By Arsonist
#107903 The difference between those cameras is the focal length. The setting that works like that in Minecraft is POV. So which one resembles minecraft more is dependant on whether or not the player is playing with a low POV (higher focal length, flatter image) or quakepro (lower focal length, more of a fish-eye look at it)
It's most likely gonna look like the one on the right, but not that extreme
By MrRokusho
#107916
Arsonist wrote:The difference between those cameras is the focal length. The setting that works like that in Minecraft is POV. So which one resembles minecraft more is dependant on whether or not the player is playing with a low POV (higher focal length, flatter image) or quakepro (lower focal length, more of a fish-eye look at it)
It's most likely gonna look like the one on the right, but not that extreme


So in which should i use for my screenshots? :lol:
User avatar
By Arsonist
#107920 The one on the left. It gives us a better indication of your proportions, and it's a lot easier to look at.
User avatar
By Arsonist
#107923 Although, looking at it again, the one on the left shows absolutely no perspective, so both have their faults.
By MrRokusho
#107973
Arsonist wrote:Although, looking at it again, the one on the left shows absolutely no perspective, so both have their faults.


I see, well thanks man, but could you answer this as well? :lol:

MrRokusho wrote:Ok so what I've done right now is Linking the material of the objects, which means they're still all seperate objects but they share the same material, thus the same texture. Is that ok?
By lugiaisbeast101
#108029
MrRokusho wrote:
Arsonist wrote:Although, looking at it again, the one on the left shows absolutely no perspective, so both have their faults.


I see, well thanks man, but could you answer this as well? :lol:

MrRokusho wrote:Ok so what I've done right now is Linking the material of the objects, which means they're still all seperate objects but they share the same material, thus the same texture. Is that ok?


You are saying that you have separate parts of the model stacked on, and I can only assume that if you use one PNG and render, you'll see the texture in its respected locations. Now if I'm correct in saying this, then yes it's ok. If you cannot open one PNG to make up for all of the parts, then something is wrong. Example, my happiny has 3 parts to it, it's Body, it's arms, and it's feet. However, I still unwrapped them onto one UV map and when I applied the final texture, that one map applied to all three parts. It should also be helpful to say that I simply selected all verts afterwords and assigned one material to it, so the answer to your question would be yes either way.

Hope that helps?
JOIN THE TEAM