Discussion in 'Software' started by Neon Neuron, Oct 5, 2014.
Has anybody had any experience with Metasequoia 4?
Specifically, the Anguwrap.
What aspect of Meta4 are you interested in?
Are you currently on Meta3.x and are considering upgrading to Meta4?
This should give me an idea on how to describe my experience with Meta4.
I think Anguwrap is a Meta plugin that should work on both Meta 3 and 4. I've not tried it yet though.
I already purchased Meta4.
It's very different from 3. I was used to using power unwrap, now I'm trying to figure out how to use anguwrap. I was hoping someone had knowledge about this feature, as I can't find any tutorials online for it yet.
The main problem I'm having is when I pose a model or move things around, it changes the the way the texture sits on the faces.
RE: Meta3 vs Meta4
Yeah, lots have changed, especially the UI. Some operations have been moved. (ex. Wire --> Pull)
The UI on the UV mapping panels have changed significantly as well. I still haven't fully grasped the changes so much that I still find myself click testing different buttons until I see something that resembles the UV Mapping of META3 . (Kinda like the feeling of using Blender for the first time)
But what I really appreciate about Meta4 is its vastly improved Boolean operations.
Back to topic:
Anyway, by any chance, are you using Pepakura?
I use Pepakura for my unwraps. Then I let Pepakura export UV info, which I then import back to Metaseq.
Yes, I use Pepakura.
I have never thought of exporting back into meta.
I'll give that a try.
I'm working on a Gum model, from JSFR; and after I simplify it, I take into Blender to add an armature so I can change the pose.
When I bring it back to Meta, the the uv info changes, too. I know this is because of the distortion from the pose change, but, I wanted to know if anyone knows if there's a way to normalize them again.
Pushing buttons seems like a good idea.
Worked for Ringo.
You can use the Export UV Info as Wavefront (OBJ) file.
Then when you import back to Meta, make sure the checkbox, "invert x axis" is checked. (Otherwise, the UV maps will be flipped horizontally.. weird.)
Once the import is complete, you'll get one single object. If your model was previously comprised of multiple objects, and you want to keep it that way, you'll need to break apart the model to individual objects again. It should not be a big problem though. You'll just need to use the "select joined faces" to single out each component, then cut + paste to new object.
There is one problem though. The UV Map is technically "correct".
However, the height vs. width ratio is off. You'll need to do some resizing to get the ratios correct.
Importing it back s a single object is a major plus!
I spend a lot of time joining vertices at points where two objects meet. I haven't had 100% success with "join closed vertices" either.
The height vs. ratio doesn't seem to big a problem. "Scale" seems to be one of the things that still works properly.
Thanks for the help!
Glad to be of help.
RE: Importing back as a single object
It becomes an issue for me when I start working on the textures.
I sometimes need to hide some objects to get a better view of the textures in tight spots.
You guys want to start a Metasequoia thread, it can become a "Sticky" if you're willing to help others. We need that one covered.
I think that would be a great idea. I learned Metaseq from this forum, and I'd like to help back in return.
That would be great!
It it concerns Meta4, this might be the first of it's kind. I can't find anything on the net about version 4; tutorial or help wise.
Each of you start, each with a simple project, I will turn it into a subsection. Keep your projects separate. As in all software like this, there are many ways of doing the same thing. Let people decide the method that they feel comfortable with. In other words, never feel like it's a competition, sharing knowledge is never a competition, and is an ultimate act of giving. As that old saying goes: " Give a man a fish, he eats for a day, Teach him how to fish, he eats forever".
I've been wrestling with my thoughts on what topic to start writing about.
Are there any outstanding topics/issues/trouble about Meta+Pepa that you can suggest for a starting point?
If it's about starting from scratch, then I would strongly recommend that you sticky that thread/tutorial that was created by Jaybats.
Is there enough people out there running version 4 for updated tutorials?
My main interest was anguwrap; A feature that was released in v.4.
To be honest, I started learning Rhino. And will probably dedicate most of my efforts with this program.
For existing Meta 3.x meta users, Meta 4 introduced a lot of improvements and addressed a lot of annoyances that were in 3.x. Most notably for me is the Boolean ops. Boolean in 3.x was just plain messy. But 4.x also intro'ed some UI changes that gave me headaches. (e.g. the revamping of the UV mapping UI).
For all its shortcomings (numerical precision being one of them), Meta is still a good app to learn 3d design on. Easy to learn.
RE: learning Rhino
Hehehe.. I guess we're both in transition. I'm now learning Blender. Switching from Meta to Blender feels like switching from a left-hand-drive car to right-hand-drive car.
ANyway, if anyone has any questions on the meta+pepakura combo for cardmodel design, please feel free to ask and if I'm able to answer, I will do my best.
If you start writing tutorials, we will add sections for each program.
Now, I'm more interested in Rhino tutorials.
The booleen options are fantastic! In my short time using it, I can see the potential it has for better modelling I couldn't do in Meta.
Separate names with a comma.