I'm not entirely sure why, but UV mapping my models is one of those things that makes me get on edge and almost pissed off. But the software I do it with is actually pretty good for it, and I've been sucessful enough with it before so it's no lack of capability on my part. I even go through the effort to make my maps "human readable" so they're easier to figure out when painting in 2D apps. Yet after modeling (which I find fun and easy enough), it's just one of those things I have to get psyched up for.

The only thing I could think of is that it's much like the paint process in one of those car building shows on TV. After all that other work, the paint can be the one thing that makes it or breaks it - and the UV maps on a 3D model is much like that. It has to be pretty close to perfect.

So am I alone in this, or do some of you guys get edgy too when it comes to this particular aspect of the 3D modeling process?

UV mapping, IMVHO, is sheer drudgery. If it weren't for the fact that I have to do it, I wouldn't do it at all ;o).

Laurie

hates it I does. even more than cleaning the cat litter box.

I enjoy it, but then I'm just weird :)

I used to feel the same way until I came across a program called "Unfold 3D".  Somewhat expensive but incredibly easy and effective.  What used to take me days and weeks to do can now be done in just a few minutes.

I like it, maybe I'm weird too. ;)))

I think I would enjoy it as well, if i could ever get it figured out LOL

I enjoy UV mapping, its relaxing. Easy models are boring, more challenging more fun lol :tongue1:

I use UVMapper Pro and UVLayout

Very happy with both.

I use Wings or UVMapper/Roadkill to do UV's. Maybe that's my problem ;o).

I haven't even gotten into Hexagon's uv editor yet...

Laurie

I have to say that it used to drive me nuts too.. Until Carrara7pro came along and now I find it a breeze but if I had the choice I would skip it entirely. But everyone can pick a bad point out from their favourite hobby, and so you are not alone on that one.

does Carrara do UVmapping ?

i know it suck for modeling... is it actually worth something after all ?

I'm with you guys [the cools one, not the haters :P], I enjoy UV mapping. Not nessecarily the making seams part, but actually packing the UV charts to get the most out of the space available, that's where the funs at. Its very much like a good puzzle.

I use both the PLG plug-ins for LW and I've done a lot of UV'ing with Blender. Blender is fantastic for organic UV's, I'm not so keen on it for mechanical stuff tho. Sometimes it gets a little wonky with the way it unwraps otherwise straight edges. LW handles both quite well with the plug-ins.

pauljs57 - You are on the right track in one regard, the textures, much like the paint on the cars you mention, can really make or break a model. I've seen loads of awesome models destroyed by shoddy textures, and a truly masterful texture can go along ways towards saving even the lousiest of models. I've also found the quality of the UV often [strongly] influences the quality of the texture as well. Poor choices in seam placement, mismatched scaling, stretching, etc can really hamper your efforts to make a decent texture.

acutally I think the hating comes a lot from the toolset. personally I learnt to hate UV'ing while using uvmapper... when I tried uvlayout it was like a revelation - it does not have to be drugery. 

but since uvmapper is essentially a dead product, (there's been no support given to users now in about a year, emails go unanswered.....), maybe that curse will end.

Quote - I use UVMapper Pro and UVLayout

Very happy with both.

Hey Phil: How is getting a  License from Headus UVlayout it is a little confusing to me. Do they just send you a key to unlock the software or what? Thinking of buying but am scared by dongle ??? What ever that is.

I think my problem doesn't come from the toolset (UV'ing in Wings works perfectly fine), but rather because I like the charts laid out specifically so you don't need a 3D painting app to paint them. Because when the model moves on to the texture painting step, nothing is more annoying than having things scattered about willy-nilly or having random looking little bits where you can't figure out what the heck they are. So the UV'ing process (when I do it) involves cleaning up and placing everything to avoid that problem.

Those using software that can paint in 3D most likely don't have this problem though, since you can get away with clicking auto-map and being done with it. (Software doesn't really care how it lays out a map other than minimizing stretching and things like that.) But those who would like to paint those same maps in a 2D app where you don't see the charts being painted projected on the correct surfaces may go insane. (Akin to dealing with one of those 1000 piece jigsaw puzzles where the whole thing is one solid color.)

Well you still have to set the UVs out properly Paul, but you're right about the actual positioning. Automap/atlas waste so much space they are rarely worth using.

I usually copy and paste between mesh painting and PSP

I felt the same. Now I use 3D coat auto retopo to brush out the most boring part of UVing, then a touch of Wings3D to rearrange some uv maps, and voilà. I never tried uvlayout though.

After I figured out what I was doing with Wings, it's UV mapping is actualy pretty decent, providing you cuut the mesh it the right places to have it unfold correctly. I don't find it as ig of a hassle anymore, just time consuming, as with making the textures themselves. Now if I could only make textures as fast as I can model, I'd be set.