Photosculpt

[braddewald]

Has anybody used photosculpt? I saw a link to it on Evermotion, but it didn't come with a lot of info. It seems like a great tool, but it also seems kinda weird that I can hardly find anything about it online, and definitely nothing before 2010. I don't want to be installing some virus or something...

[Ernest Burden III]

The demo says full-featured, 30 days. I'll give it a try as soon as I have time. If it works as it does in their videos, it could save me a LOT of time on some projects.

 

It's not clear if it matters how far apart the images have to be, or how close. Is it meant to be similar to human eyes? The samples were surprisingly close.

 

Two aerial images and out comes a decent terrain model--with context structures massed in, and mapped? Sounds good. Level-of-detail control on messes with the ability to create normal or displacement maps--sounds good, too.

[braddewald]

Great, let me know how it goes!

[Dave Buchhofer]

Looks closer to Crazybump than to a photo modeler from the videos, but looks worth a try regardless!

[Devin Johnston]

It seems that it's limited to only two pictures per model so you can't construct a 360 degree version and as a result the model will only be convincing from a very limited perspective. I was hoping this was a more advanced and automated version of image modeler.

[Vray.instrukteur]

Ya i saw it in action it"s actually good for games...

this actually uses the human eye phenomenon, exactly as we see all in 3D in real world, same effect as our eyeballs shift one another and create that 3D feeling..

 

Any way this one not so good for architecture...i mean it looks really phhotorealistic but feels like low poly modeling...although there is some places that it shows really detailed wood roots for example...but it depends from what angle do you watch....

[Ernest Burden III]

Any way this one not so good for architecture...

 

I'm thinking about some nasty repetitive detail, like flower patterns or art deco patterns, that are hell to model.

[Peter M. Gruhn]

The models didn't seem that impressive. They also seemed adequate for some purposes. I was fairly impressed with what little they showed of the ivy. I can see using it for non-critical normal maps if nothing else. One fears the geometry might be dodgy, but with retopo options in /Polyboost/ it shouldn't be too much effort to whip up some nicer geometry and tweak bits thought to need. Will have to try the demo after this project.

 

Heck, maybe it's better than I think it looks and is useful for more.

[axezine]

From looking at the videos and the website in general the impression I get is that this is an automated displacement map generator, I'm not sure it actually creates any geometry.

 

Even if it does (which I'm not sure of) the result is pretty much what you'd get from a displacement map so I would think generating that would be more useful than generating actual geometry - being that pretty much everyone now supports mini-polygon displacement at rendertime.

 

That being said I think this could be incredibly useful to capture intricate surface detail that can be a pain / impractical to model. Even just generating high quality normal maps would be helpful.

 

Jorge

[hipe-0]

Hi to everyone!

 

My name is Hippolyte Mounier from PhotoSculpt and I'm new to your web site.

I'm the senior developper for the software PhotoSculpt Textures. I collected some trafic from your thread and I see that you had some questions?

 

I'm interested in sharing information and to hear what you think?

Have someone tried the soft already?

 

What I think about PhotoSculpt for architects.

PhotoSculpt Textures is great to do natural looking detailed textures, stones, cracks, floors, garden paths, wood, bas relief work, sculptures, landscapes, mountains, vegetals ...

It's great to help kill the "CG" look of some archvis renders that's sometimes difficult to avoid even in post w photoshop. You can do natural looking textures and models quickly and save time and concentrate on the architecture itself.

 

axezine: "Creating geometry". I confirm PhotoSculpt can create geometry too and you're almost right about thinking that it's the same as a displacement. Let me explain: It creates a 2.5D models that's like a big rectangular drape with bumps in it. But the only difference is that PhotoSculpt optimises the mesh and add the UV and the diffuse texture to it. Export is done with obj export.

 

Peter M. Gruhn: "adequate for some purposes". This is correct, PhotoSculpt is really good for stone textures and natural textures. It's not good for shiny objects or modern buildings without surface detail. This is due to the nature of the binocular vision algorithm.

 

Dave Buchhofer: "Looks closer to CB than to PM " I like the way you put it, this is exact, but it's more a bit of a synergy between the 2 softwares. The 3d models are much more detailed than PM (multimilions quads) and it's not at all limited to 2D like CB. So the textures look a lot better in the end.

 

Vray.instrukteur: "feels like low poly modeling" No that's always ultra high poly modeling. So high (multimilions quads) that I usually only use a subdivision of the result.

 

You can try the full featured 30 day trial software.

 

braddewald, I assure you there is no virus or spyware. It comes with clean installer and uninstaller. The software is small (14mb idle) and doen't need the web to work.

I'd be interested to have some artwork for the challenge. One can win a full version of the software (value 99.00 euro). Don't hesitate to post them here so anyone can see them?

 

That was a bit long I'm sorry. Hoping that makes sense?

[hipe-0]

Here are samples of high quality 3D textures that can be obtained with Photosculpt Textures

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]38943[/ATTACH]

Click here to download those FREE Samples (or create your own with the 30 days trial): http://www.photosculpt.net/blog/2010/9/1/the-best-quality-seamless-tileable-3d-textures-ever.html