Texture baking results are different (and worse) from previous versions of Blender. #99204

Closed
opened 2022-06-27 12:38:50 +02:00 by Lautaro Iglesias · 15 comments

System Information
Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.22000-SP0 64 Bits
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Laptop GPU/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 512.59

Blender Version
Broken: version: 3.2.0, branch: master, commit date: 2022-06-08 10:22, hash: e05e1e3691
Worked: 2.93, 3.0.0, 3.1

Behavior changed in 74228e2cd2

Short description of error
The result of normal texture baking from selected object to active doesn't work as expected. Results are much better baking texture in 2.93.10 version of Blender (same settings). It's being impossible to me to get a usable texture. Here I post a comparison:
comparison.png

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error
1- I attached a file. In the Orange collection is the original model. In the green collection is the low poly model where the texture needs to be baked.
2- Bake the normal texture in Blender 3.2 and then do the same thing without touching anything in Blender 2.93.
3- Compare results.

Test File:
Baking Bug.zip
Here are both textures I got:

3.2 3.1
Baking_normal_3.2.png Baking_normal_2.93.jpg
**System Information** Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.22000-SP0 64 Bits Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Laptop GPU/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 512.59 **Blender Version** Broken: version: 3.2.0, branch: master, commit date: 2022-06-08 10:22, hash: `e05e1e3691` Worked: 2.93, 3.0.0, 3.1 Behavior changed in 74228e2cd2 **Short description of error** The result of normal texture baking from selected object to active doesn't work as expected. Results are much better baking texture in 2.93.10 version of Blender (same settings). It's being impossible to me to get a usable texture. Here I post a comparison: ![comparison.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F13232361/comparison.png) **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** 1- I attached a file. In the Orange collection is the original model. In the green collection is the low poly model where the texture needs to be baked. 2- Bake the normal texture in Blender 3.2 and then do the same thing without touching anything in Blender 2.93. 3- Compare results. Test File: [Baking Bug.zip](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F13234030/Baking_Bug.zip) Here are both textures I got: | 3.2 | 3.1 | | -- | -- | | ![Baking_normal_3.2.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F13232377/Baking_normal_3.2.png) | ![Baking_normal_2.93.jpg](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F13232376/Baking_normal_2.93.jpg) |

Added subscriber: @LautaroIglesias

Added subscriber: @LautaroIglesias
Member

Added subscriber: @EAW

Added subscriber: @EAW
Member

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Needs User Info'

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Needs User Info'
Member

@LautaroIglesias the blend file isn’t attached.

Please upload it. Thank you.

@LautaroIglesias the blend file isn’t attached. Please upload it. Thank you.

Sorry, here it is.
Baking Bug.zip

Sorry, here it is. [Baking Bug.zip](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F13234030/Baking_Bug.zip)
Member

Changed status from 'Needs User Info' to: 'Needs Triage'

Changed status from 'Needs User Info' to: 'Needs Triage'
Member

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Confirmed'

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Confirmed'
Member

Added subscriber: @PratikPB2123

Added subscriber: @PratikPB2123
Member

Behavior changed between b468255453 - 8d9d5da137
Raising the priority for now.

Behavior changed between b46825545325 - 8d9d5da13706 Raising the priority for now.
Member

Added subscriber: @lichtwerk

Added subscriber: @lichtwerk
Member

Bisecting as we speak...

Bisecting as we speak...
Member

Changed status from 'Confirmed' to: 'Needs User Info'

Changed status from 'Confirmed' to: 'Needs User Info'
Member

Behavior changed in 74228e2cd2

But this is actually correct, your Max Ray Distance is specified as 0.01 m (which was evaluated as sqrt(0.01)=0.1 prior to 74228e2cd2.
If you raise this to 0.1m it bakes like before (and this is the actual distance we need it seems).

@LautaroIglesias : makes sense?

Behavior changed in 74228e2cd2 But this is actually correct, your `Max Ray Distance` is specified as `0.01 m` (which was evaluated as sqrt(0.01)=0.1 prior to 74228e2cd2. If you raise this to `0.1m` it bakes like before (and this is the actual distance we need it seems). @LautaroIglesias : makes sense?
Member

Changed status from 'Needs User Info' to: 'Archived'

Changed status from 'Needs User Info' to: 'Archived'
Member

yes, make sense to increase the current max distance value after 74228e2cd2 (gets expected output when it's changed to 0.1)
Closing this report.
Feel free to comment or reopen the ticket if there is misunderstanding)

yes, make sense to increase the current max distance value after 74228e2cd2 (gets expected output when it's changed to 0.1) Closing this report. Feel free to comment or reopen the ticket if there is misunderstanding)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset Browser
Interest
Asset Browser Project Overview
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
EEVEE & Viewport
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Interest: X11
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
EEVEE & Viewport
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Normal
Priority
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
4 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: blender/blender#99204
No description provided.