Topics created by chanz

Thanks again for the reply TIG. Unfortunately, I see the same issues. To verify it wasn't the small differences in faces from DropVertices, I made a copy of the bottom textured model and moved it directly above. I removed the top materials and then ran the script. UV issue is still there. Have you actually downloaded the file and run this script with the top mesh faces selected? Have you seen the UV issues or did it look okay for you? Honestly, I guess I will just give up at this point.

I have figured out another sort of workaround where I make a sandbox mesh above the original, run this script we wrote (which does perfectly with the texture and UVs when the raycast is from a flat surface), then use UVToolkit to save the UVs, then drop the vertices and then restore the UVs. It works. A few extra steps but this script has been enough of a headache.

Regardless, thanks for your help.

Thank you guys for the suggestions and replies. Unfortunately, I need the model to not have just 1 texture but to retain it's original tile texturing. Do I have any other options? Does Thrupaint have anything here that can help me? Is there any way I can paint through surfaces to all faces that are under the drop bucket tool?

@unknownuser said:

Thank you both.

Seems I am alone! 🤢

If you want a 'crib', then why not look at my [somewhat old but still working]:
http://sketchucation.com/pluginstore?pln=OBJexporter
It exports the SKP's geometry, and deals with 'containers', transformations etc...

There are several 'exporters' in the PluginStore which may have additional/better clues...

mmm.. not sure what you are trying to achieve.. that's very bad topology.. 😕

@cotty said:

Why don't you use the good geometry (drop vertices) and apply the texture to it (e.g. thrupaint)?

+1 on this.. i also would run quadface tools on it to mark out the diagonals of the pseudo-quads

Thanks all! Both solutions worked but the drop vertices was very speedy. Thanks!

Gaieus, thank you for the link. I will try that.

cotty, thank you for the video. I will try the plugin Gaieus suggested to hopefully export less textures.

iichiversii, pm sent.

You have several materials with 'Asphalt' in their name and all with the same RGBA values BUT each using a different image-file as the texture.
Therefore, no material-consolidator is going to change them to be one material. How is it to know that two similar named materials with the same RGBA values BUT with different named image-files should be the same material. The two images might be quite different and their materials' naming coincidental.

OK, the repeated image-files do all look the same and have similar names, but without sophisticated techniques beyond the API and Ruby they can't be compared for exactness.

You can manually edit one Asphalt material and export its image-file with a simpler name, then edit all similar materials and set them to use that one new file.
NOW when you do an image-consolidation ALL of those materials will be seen as the same one and will be consolidated... 😕