1
$\begingroup$

I would like to know how is the disadvantage to unwrap with the option Project from view

I think is very useful for sharp angles such 90 degrees or planar geometries , but I think is not useful for shapes such as "ornaments" for example , Medieval houses , where there are ornaments with rough or rounded shapes.

I think I can not export that kind of UV mapping, I like or prefer Mark the Seams and I think I have more control on the UV.

Should I avoid this method for export the UV's to an engine such as Unreal or Unity?

PS : I think project from view is useful for Ccycles or stuff to work only in Blender, not for export, not for very professional, but it is useful just quickly method to avoid seams.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I do not know many people who can explain me a POV , or recomendation about this method for export to photoshop or even an engine . $\endgroup$
    – RG1988
    Dec 10, 2016 at 0:10

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

You might have a photo of an object in real life that you want to map onto a 3-D object.

So you align the 3-D object to be in the same angle/scale as in the photo and project from view it so that the photo gets a bit more depth than simply flat image being manipulated.

If you have a persons head photoed from different angles, you can stitch together the face using this method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZDMFkj8GqA

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ yes I know, but I am looking for info of this method about combining with texture painting or even exporting , because every model I ve downloaded in internet or some 3D websites are made with UV mark seams , I had never see uv projects in models , every model , houses, bodies, organic, not organic are all with "seams" I suppose this method is very useful just for cycles or materials with only you can see in blender, not for exporting , not for engine, I think is not complicated (project from view) but has his own and terribles disadvantage , in my opinion. $\endgroup$
    – RG1988
    Dec 10, 2016 at 2:28
  • $\begingroup$ Most models have seems because they are meant to be viewed from many different angles. Yes, its better to have the entire model textured, but not every object is going to be the center of attention, and this shortcut can save time. $\endgroup$
    – eromod
    Dec 10, 2016 at 2:48
1
$\begingroup$

There are no inherent disadvantages to Project From View unwrapping method, it's a method like any of the other available

It is mostly suitable for simply unwrapping basic geometries without complex shapes or contrived curvature, and it is also usefull for quickly unwrapping situations where a planar projection of the texture will suffice.

There is nothing unprofessional or limiting about it, other than being mostly suited for the simplest of cases.

You may be confusing it with Cycle's (or Blender Internal's for that matter) builtin automatic UV coordinates for textures, like Generated, Object, or Normal texture coordinates which are procedurally created by the render engine at render time. Those can't be used elsewhere outside Blender or Cycles, and those can't really be exported to other applications or game engines.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I use to export my 3D models to an engine as "unity" , but I prefer the manual unwrap (more option to save space or even paint aswell in blender or gimp) , but I think Projection from view is clever desicion for not complicated shape, however I noticed when I used to Unwrap with this methond I need to scale in the uv editor to get more resolution , sometimes I need to work beyond 1 to 0 uv space , as this example imgur.com/a/lYd4L $\endgroup$
    – RG1988
    Dec 11, 2016 at 3:24
  • $\begingroup$ You can alternatively use Project From View Bounds option, so it will stick to the [0,1] range. $\endgroup$ Dec 12, 2016 at 0:24
  • $\begingroup$ it means a rectricted bounding box on 0 to 1 range ? not furthermore, I know that the texture is tiling beyond the 0 to 1 space , but I not feel confortable sometimes with scaling furthermore the 0 to 1 space in the uv. $\endgroup$
    – RG1988
    Dec 12, 2016 at 4:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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