Need some help, clearing up with terrain masks

Hey, So I've done some reading and I do understand how a mask is put together by painting red, green and blue where you want your detail textures to show up and then using the multilayer shader to place them however I'm pretty sure i got it work before but now it won't.

So basically I've done my mask and I've used Pixelchasers example he gave me for this so thanks for that and the google map satellite image as my diffuse texture, I'm also aware that the mask needs to match your uv's to work. So i've done all of that however i must have missed something somewhere or I'm doing something wrong so even though the detail red slot is the grassmain material the google map still shows through I thought the grass would cover the google map entirely unless I'm missing something.

If i tile a grass texture over the google map the mask no longer works as the uv's no longer match so I'm a bit confused at the minute to where I've gone wrong I will post two images underneath of what i mean.

Cheers, Jack




So on the second image it's the same uv's as the google map so it's messed up.

 

the multR slot in the editor controls the tiling for your detail texture, increase the tiling until its to your liking

 

Not sure how to explain really but i'm confused now I've tried that but it's basically underneath the google map looks transparent and If i change my diffuse to the grass main texture I can't tile the diffuse in ks editor i need to do the uv's for it and the mask no longer matches up as It's a different texture to the sat map.

I'll give you a close up of what's happening.

As you can see the google map is still showing I'm pretty sure before I managed to cover the google map entirely so you couldn't see it if i test it like that I see everything on the google map such as the trees etc which obviously I don't want. I know you can play around with the channels to tile it.

But what i know so far is the mask needs to match the diffuse.

 

Ok I've rar'd this up if you have time to test it the fbx and the textures are all in there.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lFTaNJbndSSlZXhbG7tgchNhVBC1CWE5

 

I’m having a hard time trying to understand what you actually want to accomplish... if you want to see more of the detail pop through the diffuse, then increase the value in the magicMult slot.

 

Ok so I want the google map as the diffuse as the mask is based off the google map texture but the detail r slot which is my grassmain texture to cover the google map so you can't see the map I did it before some how but can't remember .

at the minute the trees, building etc are still visible from the google map which I don't want.

 

You forgot the fbx.ini for the file.

You need to manually edit the google map image if you don't want it's detail to show, the shader can only do so much.

If you don't want the trees you need to edit them out in PS or similar.

The ksMultilayer shader overlays detail textures, onto the main diffuse texture, it doesn't replace them.

If you only want the detail channels to show you can use a null or blank texture in the txDiffuse slot.

 

if you just want to see the detail texture and no blending you must use a pure white texture instead of the google map in the diffuse channel. (this is the kunos method although they sometimes add a bit of shadowing and AO within that basic texture.)

 

I'll try this out cheers pixel but the mask will still map the same areas out on the google map?

 

It should just load straight into ks editor with no problems never knew I needed the .ini

 

It loads but the fbx.ini contains all the material settings, without it the scene resets to defaults.

No, see post #7.

I wouldn't recommend pure white for the diffuse, use an average colour that makes your detail textures look the best, there isn't any set rule.

AO/Shadow can go in both the diffuse and/or the mask.

 

I have looked at your mask. which you made from the google map info. so YES the mask will still map the same areas out on the google map. and regardless of whether you use the google map or not, it is indeed the same mapping.

your detail textures have a pure white alpha which is causing things to look a bit weird lighting wise. these need a really dark alpha channel. my suggestion is to copy the main texture into the alpha channel and drastically darken it , you can use brightness/contrast in photoshop and apply -150 brightness and +150 contrast(not legacy) for a general rule of thumb to start of with.

 

Detail textures don't mask out areas they mask over areas, they BLEND with the diffuse, they don't mask OUT details on the diffuse texture.

 

Ok I'm back on pc now lets try it cheers for the info I'm starting to get it now , great info

 

Ahh yeah I'll attend to that right now I'll post results in a bit to see where we are, I understand now if you use a solid color in the diffuse slot it still has the same uv's as the google map so the mask will still match.

The white alpha could be the issue for my other blending textures aswell then I'll bare this in mind in future to make sure I do the alpha channel correctly for my textures.

 

there is a type of texture that is called an "albedo" diffuse map. all this is is a texture image that has no lighting. and that's what you want to consider working towards regards the final texture you might use in the diffuse channel. and for every other texture actually. . the concept here is to separate the lighting information completely for any of the shaders to work well. we leave the main diffuses as albedo. whilst retaining all that lighting info within the alpha channel or wherever its being dealt with.

 

Yes got it working thanks all , that's where i got confused this was with the null in the diffuse slot and the white inside the diffuse slot works perfectly also attached a photo of my alpha for my detail texture as well.

 

yes, the alpha looks appropriate !

try extract some variation from the original google map, and inject it into the mask subtly. I always hated the plain diffuse method, but like lilski does, he builds the lack of variation into the mask itself as dark and lighter areas.

 

Glad you got there, also happy Pixelchaser finally understands what detail textures do...

 

yeah yeah, keep playing your stupid game all you want. you are a horrible person that tries to disguise his own lack of knowledge and mis interpreted information by turning it round that the very person who is primarily a texture artist apparently doesn't know what he was doing.

you say you are happy at pixelchaser finally understanding what he always understood. but you couldn't bring yourself to admit you were wrong regards my grass working complete over the whole track. go suck up to your crass associaties that feed you their dispise for me.

I made no attempt to get involved with you in this thread. but I did have to point out where you were wrong and indirectly so was the method I chose.

but still it grated on your mind enough for you to come directly to me with your abuse. funny really that it was me that finally explained it coherently. Fact. but yeah I only just learned this . anyway up yours mofo. find another person to prey on.