Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

How can I stop Photoshop CS6 from unwelding imported 3d models?

Jan 24, 2013 11:09 AM

Hello,
        Photoshop has an issue right now in which when I import a 3d object (it doesn't matter which format, I've tried obj and cae) then it will split the object apart into multiple objects along where the borders of the uv map are (aka polyunweld). How do I stop it from doing that?


Here are images demonstrating what I mean exactly.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/809/97993483.png/

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/844/85471742.png/

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/846/61658057.png/

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/694/76040241.png/

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 24, 2013 11:33 AM   in reply to Georgerocious

    Adobe needs to fix the problem. There's already a couple of threads about it. Unfortunately, but quite typically, Adobe do not indicate that they intend to do something about it.

     

    Problem importing 3D objs into CS6 extended

    3D feature, when importing 3d model, unwelds polys at UV borders

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 28, 2013 4:51 PM   in reply to Georgerocious

    Photoshop does not, and can not do that. We do not split geometry that comes in whole.

     

    If the geometry/mesh comes in split then use you can transform pieces. But we are not a modeler like 3D Max, and three of the four look like screen shots of 3D Max. The exception being image 61658057.png which is Photoshop.

     

    If you don't want your mesh to split apart then dont export it as pieces, which is what you show in that 3D editor, 76040241.png for example.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 28, 2013 6:41 PM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    Daniel Presedo wrote:

     

    Photoshop does not, and can not do that. We do not split geometry that comes in whole.

     

    If the geometry/mesh comes in split then use you can transform pieces. But we are not a modeler like 3D Max, and three of the four look like screen shots of 3D Max. The exception being image 61658057.png which is Photoshop.

     

    If you don't want your mesh to split apart then dont export it as pieces, which is what you show in that 3D editor, 76040241.png for example.

     

     

    The mesh was whole before import into Photoshop!!!

     

    Is anybody testing the software? If yes, then you'd surely know that polygons within a previously seamless mesh are being unwelded from each other, along UV island boundaries, on import to Photoshop. The mesh isn't broken into separately named objects in Photoshop, but its structure is changed and unwanted seams appear in the mesh and prevent correct texturing. Splitting along UV boundaries when importing can be found in some other apps, but these apps give the user the option to do that or not!

     

    What hope of a fix is there when you don't even understand Georgerocious's abundantly clear screenshots? He shows an exploded mesh that was a seamless mesh before import to Photoshop. He imported the pristine seamless mesh into Photoshop, exported the wrecked mesh from Photoshop then imported the wreck into Maya or Max or similar for examination and to produce the exploded image.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 28, 2013 10:09 PM   in reply to conroy

    I understand what you are saying but the forums are lighting up for misinterpreting the issue described here.

     

    If that is happening >>being unwelded along UV island boundaries<< we will investigate. I checked out the sphere posted on this and other threads and it does not look that way (eg broken up) in some of the 3D apps (eg Cinema 4D) I have looked at, so that could mean any number of things are going on.

     

    I would like to know what apps, aside from Maya are seeing this. I'll check 3D Max tomorrow and make my own examples and see what happens.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 5:26 AM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    Daniel, what the heck is going on? Your absolutely wrong response (reply #3), where you deny Photoshop has a problem that it does have, is marked correct! That's also happened when other Adobe staff have posted denials of definite problems in Ps.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 5:31 AM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    In the following screenshots of various apps, the sphere on the left is the original UV'd mesh provided by Georgerocious, and on the right is the sphere after going through Photoshop where it is unwelded at UV boundaries on import. I stopped at three apps although I have others which undoubtedly will show the same damage.

     

    Hexagon

     

    Hexagon.png

     

     

    Wings 3D

     

    Wings.png

     

     

    Cinema 4D, with HyperNURBS on the spheres

     

    Cinema.png

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 7:06 AM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    Daniel Presedo wrote:

     

    If that is happening >>being unwelded along UV island boundaries<< we will investigate.

     

    That suggests you had not even investigated before denying the reported problem. No wonder Ps is falling to pieces and bugs persist for years.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 7:56 AM   in reply to Georgerocious

    I don't suspect a cover-up. It seems to me that there is a forum moderator(s) who assumes that staff are always correct and a user must be wrong if there is disagreement between staff and user, and the moderator(s) marks correct the staff response regardless of whether the moderator(s) has any understanding of the issue being discussed.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 8:20 AM   in reply to Georgerocious

    Yes, it's bad enough that the 3D features are so poorly designed and implemented, but the lack of competent investigation of a reported problem is extremely troubling. There is virtually zero chance of me upgrading to another Extended version of Ps when one becomes available.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 8:52 AM   in reply to conroy

    Wow, so why is this still marked as 'correct', i.e. "there's nothing more to see here, move along..."

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 9:20 AM   in reply to TLL...

    The moderators probably have no understanding of what is being discussed or who is correct, so they'll let the present wrong "correct" status stand until instructed to change it by someone whom they respect.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 7:11 PM   in reply to conroy

    Georgerocious, I apologize for the delay. We have identified the issue and will fix it.


    I don't know who marks threads so I cant comment as to why etc is answered or the like. People make mistakes.

     

    And Conroy if you actually have any productive comments aside from " 3D features are so poorly designed and implemented" then we'd like to hear it. So go for it tell us your perfectly designed 3D feature set/solution.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 8:31 PM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    Productive comments? I think I've done a reasonable amount of producing in this thread by helping you see a problem to which you were blind. There's no point in me detailing my ideas for improvements to the software design when there's not a hope in hell of the ideas ever seeing the light of day - I've been waiting 5 months for one simple bug-fix!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 29, 2013 10:25 PM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    I'll fix the "correct" marks on the posts.  (not sure who set them)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 30, 2013 2:24 PM   in reply to conroy

    There is no point? Wrong. We Beta test and draw feedback from our customers everyday.

     

    >>There's no point in me detailing my ideas for improvements to the software design when there's not a hope in hell of the ideas ever seeing the light of day<<

     

    The fact that you have no ideas worth sharing does not really surprise me. It is not an easy problem to solve for a variety of customers that are your audience. Photoshop has a very diverse community, what you think is good is not what a Photographer thinks makes sense. It's easy to complain about on a forum, and if it is constructive that is fine but you seem to enjoy just complaining or insulting. 

     

    >> I've been waiting 5 months for one simple bug-fix<< I don't know when this was first reported and it's unfortunate we missed that (oh yeah we are human too)  but we do have mechanism's (Bug reports on feedback.photoshop.com) that reach us directly, some of us patrol the forums but we cannot do that full time and ship a product.

     

    Have a nice day.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 30, 2013 3:45 PM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    Daniel Presedo wrote:

     

    There is no point? Wrong. We Beta test and draw feedback from our customers everyday.

     

    >>There's no point in me detailing my ideas for improvements to the software design when there's not a hope in hell of the ideas ever seeing the light of day<<

     

    The fact that you have no ideas worth sharing does not really surprise me.

     

    You say it's a fact that I have no ideas worth sharing. You are damned cheeky to a customer who helps pay your salary, lad. What's your problem? Embarrassed by your inept "investigation" of a reported problem? Anyway, how on earth would you know anything about my ideas or their worth?

     

     

     

    It is not an easy problem to solve for a variety of customers that are your audience.

     

     

    What? Not easy to solve? Just don't unweld the polygons! Not unwelding is easier than unwelding, surely

     

     

     

     

    Photoshop has a very diverse community, what you think is good is not what a Photographer thinks makes sense.

     

     

    That sounds ridiculous.

     

    1. You initially insisted that Photoshop doesn't unweld meshes!

     

    2. Then, after I provided further evidence, you said you would fix the problem.

     

    3. Now you seem to be suggesting that the software was programmed to unweld meshes because it's "what a Photographer thinks makes sense".

     

     

     

    It's easy to complain about on a forum, and if it is constructive that is fine but you seem to enjoy just complaining or insulting.

     

     

    I complain about things at times. I'm insulting at times. But it's a fact that I'm helpful and constructive most of the time. Oh so sorry for not being the perfect contributor to this forum.

     

     

    >> I've been waiting 5 months for one simple bug-fix<< I don't know when this was first reported and it's unfortunate we missed that (oh yeah we are human too)  but we do have mechanism's (Bug reports on feedback.photoshop.com) that reach us directly, some of us patrol the forums but we cannot do that full time and ship a product.

     

     

    You're completely mistaken again.

     

    I wasn't talking about the problem in this thread. (Which you've denied exists, then admitted exists and will be fixed, and then suggested to be a design decision on behalf of photographers.)

     

    I said "one bug" not "this bug".

     

    The bug which still isn't fixed after 5 months, despite being acknowledged by Adobe, is one that was introduced by the OS X version of the 13.0.1 update. It makes the 3D rendering almost useless for OS X users and did not exist when customers paid $300 for the 3D rendering.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 30, 2013 6:24 PM   in reply to conroy

    1. You initially insisted that Photoshop doesn't unweld meshes!

    Wow, No Conroy I said Photoshop does not break meshes in Photoshop, we do not edit geometry. This was introduced on Export.

     

    2. Then, after I provided further evidence, you said you would fix the problem.

    Yes, saw the issue and we can address it.

     

    3. Now you seem to be suggesting that the software was programmed to unweld meshes because it's "what a Photographer thinks makes sense".

    Wow, no not at all what I said. I could have been more clear I suppose... I was speaking on general use cases between a variety of customers and not you, or him or anyone else in particluar. See this is not a good place ro have this discussion.

     

    No one has a problem with complaints, one rarely goes to a forum to shout yipee. But have some respect, we understand things get frustrating, however, insulting will not make the problem go away or get one to help you more quickly.

     

    I see there is no way to communicate effectively here. If you want to really climb out from behind your annomyity then email me daniel at adobe, otherwisethis is my last point on this thread.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 31, 2013 2:23 AM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    Daniel Presedo wrote:

     

    1. You initially insisted that Photoshop doesn't unweld meshes!

    Wow, No Conroy I said Photoshop does not break meshes in Photoshop, we do not edit geometry. This was introduced on Export.

     

     

    Fair enough, but by reading the linked threads in reply #1, you should have seen that the problem is one of unwelding at UV boundaries and not the breaking of a mesh into multiple objects.

     

    Regardless of Adobe's intention to prevent the unwelding in future, the cracked 3D texture painting at UV boundaries needs to be addressed. The problem is well-known and other 3D painting software implements a solution, but since this has eluded Photoshop, I'll post a separate thread about it, later.

     

     

     

    2. Then, after I provided further evidence, you said you would fix the problem.

    Yes, saw the issue and we can address it.

     

     

    Good.

     

     

    3. Now you seem to be suggesting that the software was programmed to unweld meshes because it's "what a Photographer thinks makes sense".

    Wow, no not at all what I said. I could have been more clear I suppose... I was speaking on general use cases between a variety of customers and not you, or him or anyone else in particluar. See this is not a good place ro have this discussion.

     

     

    There's no supposing about it. You certainly could have been more clear. I doubt that any reader would realize that you were suddenly writing about broad generalities.

     

     

    No one has a problem with complaints, one rarely goes to a forum to shout yipee. But have some respect, we understand things get frustrating, however, insulting will not make the problem go away or get one to help you more quickly.

     

     

    Look, you responded to my insults by insulting me with "The fact that you have no ideas worth sharing does not really surprise me". And now you ask me to have some respect!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 31, 2013 2:23 AM   in reply to Daniel Presedo

    If you want to really climb out from behind your annomyity then [...]

     

    You ask me to be respectful and then you write that!

     

    What on earth is the relevance of my choice to be anonymous in this forum? Does this anonymity discredit the things I have written in the forum?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2013 5:34 PM   in reply to Georgerocious

    George, remember your problem initially was cracks in the textures painted in Photoshop. Here's your screenshot:

     

    61658057.jpeg

     

     

    Preventing Ps from unwelding on export is itself going to make no difference to that. The unwelding of the mesh becomes irrelevant, anyway, if you don't use the exported mesh and simply use the created textures on your original mesh in Maya or other app, as pointed out in one of your other threads.

     

    The cracked texturing is mainly a result of Ps neglecting to bleed paint into a region of a few pixels width outside each UV island. (At some UV borders there seems to be a pixel of bleed but that's possibly an unintentional side-effect of some calculation.) I said "mainly" because some pixels inside a UV border can fail to be correctly painted, too.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2013 11:03 PM   in reply to Georgerocious

    Corp. Boiler Plate response > Sorry we are not allowed to comment on projected shipping dates.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 2, 2013 3:44 AM   in reply to Georgerocious

    Georgerocious wrote:

     

    Hmm, I hope I didn't miscommunicate, but to clarify, Photoshop appears to unweld polys as it imports a 3d model.

     

    No, that's wrong!

     

    Daniel has explained that the unwelding happens on export, not import.

     

    The screenshot of yours that I posted above is cracking in the texturing of your welded mesh inside Photoshop before export.

     

    I can asssure you that Photoshop neglects to allow for the cracking effect of not painting a region on the outside of a UV border. Preventing the unwelding on export will not change that.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 2, 2013 4:58 AM   in reply to conroy

    If you completely cover your (still welded) sphere with black paint in Photoshop then the resulting texture is this:

     

    Screen-shot-2013-02-02-at-11.57.11.png

     

     

    Here is the UV mesh overlayed to show that the paint does not spread beyond the UV boundaries:

     

    Screen-shot-2013-02-02-at-11.57.17.png

     

    Paint is required beyond the boundaries. Otherwise, when the texture is interpolated for rendering (high quality rendering or OpenGL display rendering) on the model, unpainted pixels can be "pulled in" at boundaries, creating a cracked appearance.

     

    The following texture will not be rendered with cracks because the black paint bleeds beyond the borders. (Obviously, the UV mesh lines wouldn't be in the real texture and are there only to illustrate the bleed.)

     

     

    Screen-shot-2013-02-02-at-12.10.16.png

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 2, 2013 4:32 AM   in reply to Georgerocious

    Georgerocious wrote:

     

    I can tell you right now that when I put in the obj from photoshop that is broken up into Mudbox, that I get similar behavior when trying to paint over the unwelded polys. So I'm staying optimistic that once the fix is in, then everything will work perfect.

     

    An unwelded mesh may make painting problematic in Mudbox. (I don't know whether it does or doesn't since I don't use Mudbox). I initially thought the unwelding was happening on import to Photoshop and was responsible for Photoshop's painting problem.

     

    However, the problematic painting in Photoshop happens with a mesh while it is still welded. Photoshop is only unwelding when exporting. The unwelding is not implicated in the painting problems that occur before export.

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points