1
$\begingroup$

Is there a standardization method that helps adding geometry in form of an even wireframe with same-sized squares on to a mesh like the ones in this pictures: enter image description here

The left geometry I had to add all manually and it's taking a lot of time.

I need even squares in order to UV-unwrap them and have undistorted displacement and texturing. Eventually these will be hedges like a boxwood.

enter image description here

Thanks in Regards,

F.Sterzik

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm pretty sure that no matter how you unwrap it, there are going to be at least some seams. Why don't you build it in a more intuitive and easy way? I really don't see the advantage. $\endgroup$
    – Cos Dim
    Commented Feb 17, 2018 at 22:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If I understand what you want to do, you shouldn't need to make squares. I think that placing seams appropriately and then just doing a simple unwrap will place your mesh properly. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 17, 2018 at 23:54
  • $\begingroup$ But when I dont add geometry, I don't have the displacement, that empathizes the leafy structure. And its not about the place of the mesh @MartyFouts its abouzt the displacement map that gets distorted, when I have rectangles instead of squares. $\endgroup$
    – F. Sterzik
    Commented Feb 18, 2018 at 16:09

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

I'm working with speheres now. They got a curve-mod and the displacement direction is not problematic. Rebuilding it in a more clever way sure did the trick :D

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .