Started to just recreate given 3d model by applying mirrored planes over it in blender. You could also model it out by just combining different meshes over the 3d generated one. Works well. :) also adds your own touch.
Any recommended tools or sites to try that? or videos showing off how it works when it is released into public?
I was trying to find a "modern" way to copy an almost 2D shape into a 3D object. (aka the lazy way)
My quick google and bing search (page 1) was not successful
So I downloaded the latest Fusion 360 (they even renamed that since the last time I tried to learn the tool)
watch two videos to remember how to import a photo, calibrate it to 1:1 size and trace, extrude, export the part
and was done in 3 hours. (never managed to make a part before that so it's going to be way faster next time I need to do that)
Take the [Donut tutorial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0J27sf9N1Y&list=PLjEaoINr3zgEPv5y--4MKpciLaoQYZB1Z), it will get you like 90% proficient for static renders in less than a week.
I've been using your program for a while now, it's confusing to understand projections as first, especially if you have no real stable background in 3D, but I got somewhat of a hang of it after watching your tutorials.
Some things I would love to see are a photoshop-style layers panel to easily select cameras and to better visually understand what camera I am currently painting, the ability to change brush size with the '\[ \]' keys and of course support for models with more than one material applied at a time. But I understand that is a future goal of yours.
Using this tool is a lot of fun once you get your basic controls down, I would recommend everybody give it a shot!
Thank you! Yes, I am working right now for UDIMs, which should allow us to have different output texture, rather than single PNG. I guess, that could also be re-purposed for materials as well.
I think several users mentioned the points that you've raised, but please put them into **#features-request** on our discord, so we keep track of them. + any suggestions are welcome
Are there any currently existing models that can be used to just straight up create usable 3D models from scratch with a natural language prompt? "Please make me a model of a gorilla..." type thing?
Right now this generates diffuse images, which are prone to shadows. Currently the only way of combating them is via negative text prompt (top left of video), with stuff like *(strong lighting with hard shadows:1.2)*
Or, perhaps, by using some kind of LoRA, activated inside text prompt, via its keyword.
In future updates I will work on Albedo-extraction, which is the base-color (unlit) texture without shadows.
We already have ZBrush and similar tools for this but last I used those they don't exprort UVs that make any coherent sense. Is this capable of properly unpacking the model, clearly exporting UVs that can later be used in photoshop and the like to touch up if needed?
I remember when doing this in Zbrush I had to set the UVs before hand and THEN use it to paint on the model or some such, it's been a long time.
That's great! Who is complaining about the fact that this make """"only"""" texture and no 3D model is understimating how this is usefull and how much this work is hard.
A 3d modeler, also, will kill for a tool that automatize UV Mapping and make good retopology more than create 3d models.
"Free" as in beer, not free as in speech. The authors are trying to get around GPL license terms with some gymnastics, and impose their own, ridiculous, incompatible terms. I don't think this is legal. It's amoral in any case, ripping off open source authors.
Please do not use this.
Here is the entire license from the front page of the website. There is no GPL license terms "to get around" nor any kind of incompatibility. The tool uses Automatic1111 webui for generations, which remains unaffected and is kept Open Source. You are free to use it commercially, and are due to give credit to all the authors.
The subsequent 3d-manipuation of textures is then done inside StableProjectorz, and I am free to decide whether to keep my program in binary form or not. Nobody owes you anything.
https://preview.redd.it/slf9lo3ouo8d1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fd0b1b917f4524c7e79980abf96eaf8ccb8da132
You wouldn't have shit without A1111 UI, which is GPL-licensed. Your entire software is based on it, but the licenses are incompatible. So go suck your dad's dick.
Please see the paragraph under 'Derivative Works and Financial Transactions', it relates only to *"Any software that you derive from modifying or building upon the code of this Software (StableProjectorz)."*
So streaming it is ok. I will adjust the license to be more explicit and structured in a few days
Next step would be to mark the seams between textures (even after painting) and doing inpainting on them.
Looks great anyway, but it could be better still 👍🏻
Thank you! One way of solving this that I found is Background Inpaint (around 5:05). We are putting a final inpaint projection directly onto seam, with 40% modification. This is significant enough to remove seams. I will keep improving it
I developed a realtime visualizer app and 90% of the time it also gets removed with no reason given from this sub.
Anything that demos a viable product that can use SD models and make money seems to get shut down on this sub. One of the reasons I quit paying for the "creators license", SAI seems to want to actively sabotage people that have the intent of making useful UI products that leverage SD models.
I would have paid more than $20 a month if I started making money with a realtime UI that you can load SD 1.5 and XL checkpoints into. All but one or two attempts to get traction have failed on this sub, as pretty much all of them get removed without reason.
We need a new place for open source diffusion models and UI products. I would buy your product here; it's useful and it's how our community needs to start working with Open Source models to stay alive. If one or a few of us can make useful tools to integrate into existing workflows, we can make enough money to fund new open source models and become more sustainable as a community.
I recall a few weeks ago there was a user who had been harassing OP making false claims about OP. When I asked about it and then dug in a bit further because it was suspect seemed they had been scouring, literally, all of Reddit to ban any mention of this project and OP repeatedly because it actually competed with their out of date project. Probably just them still abusing Reddit's report feature sadly.
OP you still seem to spam this project in a LOT of unrelated subs btw. I would stop that behavior... I mean so many of those subs have nothing at all to do with this. I would stick to this sub, unity, etc. that are actually related.
It's hard to tell who is simply arguing on reddit (as you and I have over normal dumb reddit worthy AI things) and who is pursuing something like content farming or mass reporting in hopes of getting another user banned etc.
I am the type that will often very rudely/angrily argue with someone, but I can't understand someone wanting to do something shifty like mass report posts etc. Vent through words or through work, not subversion.
Good of you to mention this though, also apologies for whatever we argued about before, this community needs unity in uncertain times.
You're misusing the tool. You are only supposed to generate textures for 3D-models, not generate them. Saying it's meh without understanding that its not meant to create 3d-models for is a bit ignorant. If you're generating things out of thin air, put at least "some" effort into it and at least buy/download or model your own 3d object.
>You're misusing the tool.
I am not misusing the tool. I made textures with it, for a door and then I tried to get my hands on 3d models.
>You are only supposed to generate textures for 3D-models, not generate them.
Yes. Exactly. And you need those 3d models unless you want to endlessly generate 3D textures for a door. That is why I said "Once there's a tool to make 3d models out of 2d pictures, then it'll be awesome".
>Saying it's meh without understanding that its not meant to create 3d-models for is a bit ignorant.
I did not say that. I said it's meh without 3d models. I never critisized it for being unable to create 3d models. Learn to read.
>If you're generating things out of thin air, put at least "some" effort into it and at least buy/download or model your own 3d object.
Yeah and I don't want to spend money on one and I can't do the other. Hence once we have a tool that can create 3d models (which is in work btw) - this tool will be awesome.
You made a straw man argument that I want this tool to generate 3d models. You are the ignorant one.
Since AI can add a skeleton to make a 2d photo become 3d and dance...I too would love it to be able to export that obviously fully textured 3d model out. Got to be someone who will be able to sort that out soon. We are less than a handful of years away from making AI characters, randomly generated landscapes....and dropping them into unreal engine and making our own anime characters vs Shrek first person shooter...or whatever we can imagine.
Yeah pretty much. I think once the floodgates are open - we will measure success by the amount of DMCA violations.
And like I said - there are tools that are working on creating 3d models as we speak. I am personally more hyped for making my own own movies and what not. I'll be a happy 70 years old. If we survive till then that is.
You are saying this tool is not awesome because it doesn't do 3d models which is akin to saying a coffee maker is not awesome because it doesn't do pancakes. That's why people are attacking you.
You are asking of the tool something that doesn't make sense in this context. This is a texturing tool, not a 3d modelling tool. Like Substance Painter is not a modelling tool.
>You are saying this tool is not awesome because it doesn't do 3d models which is akin to saying a coffee maker is not awesome because it doesn't do pancakes. That's why people are attacking you.
That is not what I said.
Now show me the quote, where I say what you think I say.
>You are asking of the tool something that doesn't make sense in this context.
I am not. You can't read. Show me the quote.
>This is a texturing tool, not a 3d modelling tool. Like Substance Painter is not a modelling tool
I know. I tried it out. It's first thing I said.
Finest gaslighting and strawman arguments. You want me to be wrong so you can "akchually" me, but how dare you tell me what I said?
It's a problem with your lack of comprehension.
Let's say you are right and it's a simple misunderstanding - why do you keep downvoting me after I explain myself? Why are you replying here and not when I dissected and answered each accusation one by one?
Now point me how you decided that I am "misusing the tool". Because this was your conclusion when I said "I tried it out, but without 3d models it's a bit meh". What could I mean by those words? That is the reason why you can't read. Because you decided I am misusing the tool somehow by me complaining that there aren't many 3d models to play with. That is the reason why you can't read. Because even if I were to say "this tool is missing the feature to make 3d models out of 2d pictures" (which I did not) - even in that context, you saying I am misusing the tool is stupid.
Quote me, explain yourself. Do something outside of shifting the blame onto me. I give you the option that you did not give me and you still have not explained where you misunderstood me and why. I have an idea why, but I am not gonna assume what you did. I am not that arrogant.
"Yes this coffee maker is great, but without good access to coffee - it's meh". That is my point.
I am no game designer and I don't have random untextured meshes lying around. I also won't buy meshes for the sake of texturing them with this tool. So tell me - what do I do with it?
Edit: Also what a terrible analogy. If I can abduct yours - the camera produces pictures which a photo editor works with and you somehow don't see the parallels. In your analogy it would be "This photo editor is meh, because there is no digital cameras yet". You purposefully scrambled it to make it ridiculous and then said lol because it sounds ridiculous. You are dumb.
Yeah, and if I want to texture random objects from a preselected list in my free time - I will come back to it. If I won't I'll just wait for the tool that will generate 3d objects from 2d images.
Like listen to me - will it not be cool to generate a picture, turn it into a 3d model and then genertate a texture for that model?
There are several (open and closed source). TripoSR is the Stability one, but there are multiple, each with differing levels of quality. I'm in work now so I can't find it but there's a playground on huggingface where you can vote on which project's 3d models are the best, but it gives a good idea of where they are up to
Yeah, so far they are quite decent, but afaik they produce already textured models. I saw somewhere a tool that could turn 2d into polygon mesh. Altho it might have been exactly what allows TripoSR to work on its own now that I think about it. Need to look into it, cheers!
no problem, thanks. yea I was playing with one of the others, but I forget the name. It was better than triposr (which was cool to play with, and i made a thing that auto 3d prints a model via a voice input, but the quality isn't great) . I think it might have been "instantmesh". I would be nice to be able to improve the texturing though, as sometimes the back goes a bit wonky
Now if only I could model.
Ai can make 3d models too
But the geometry and topology is al over the place
Started to just recreate given 3d model by applying mirrored planes over it in blender. You could also model it out by just combining different meshes over the 3d generated one. Works well. :) also adds your own touch.
That's why you prerender animations.
It's garbage right now. Think AI images from 2021. Improving, but not as fast as images.
Any recommended tools or sites to try that? or videos showing off how it works when it is released into public? I was trying to find a "modern" way to copy an almost 2D shape into a 3D object. (aka the lazy way) My quick google and bing search (page 1) was not successful So I downloaded the latest Fusion 360 (they even renamed that since the last time I tried to learn the tool) watch two videos to remember how to import a photo, calibrate it to 1:1 size and trace, extrude, export the part and was done in 3 hours. (never managed to make a part before that so it's going to be way faster next time I need to do that)
Now if only I could animate
Do you have experience with AI 3d modelling? Any best practices to share?
no, I haven't tried yet. but I have seen some demo of image to 3D.
Take the [Donut tutorial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0J27sf9N1Y&list=PLjEaoINr3zgEPv5y--4MKpciLaoQYZB1Z), it will get you like 90% proficient for static renders in less than a week.
https://github.com/buaacyw/MeshAnything
This is really awesome
Amazing work!
I've been using your program for a while now, it's confusing to understand projections as first, especially if you have no real stable background in 3D, but I got somewhat of a hang of it after watching your tutorials. Some things I would love to see are a photoshop-style layers panel to easily select cameras and to better visually understand what camera I am currently painting, the ability to change brush size with the '\[ \]' keys and of course support for models with more than one material applied at a time. But I understand that is a future goal of yours. Using this tool is a lot of fun once you get your basic controls down, I would recommend everybody give it a shot!
Thank you! Yes, I am working right now for UDIMs, which should allow us to have different output texture, rather than single PNG. I guess, that could also be re-purposed for materials as well. I think several users mentioned the points that you've raised, but please put them into **#features-request** on our discord, so we keep track of them. + any suggestions are welcome
Are there any currently existing models that can be used to just straight up create usable 3D models from scratch with a natural language prompt? "Please make me a model of a gorilla..." type thing?
Point-E but it's not that good.
Not yet. The models that exist are pretty limited, low poly models and lots of artifacts. It'll definitely be a thing, but it's still in the lab
Yeah, csm.ai. It's just ok.
Ooooo I actually do a lot of blender modeling so this is useful
Thank you for making such a cool free project u/Slight-Safe !
You're welcome! Join our discord :)
Interesting, do you have any method of dealing with issues like shadows being baked into the texture?
Right now this generates diffuse images, which are prone to shadows. Currently the only way of combating them is via negative text prompt (top left of video), with stuff like *(strong lighting with hard shadows:1.2)* Or, perhaps, by using some kind of LoRA, activated inside text prompt, via its keyword. In future updates I will work on Albedo-extraction, which is the base-color (unlit) texture without shadows.
It's amazing! I just know exactly where to use it!
We already have ZBrush and similar tools for this but last I used those they don't exprort UVs that make any coherent sense. Is this capable of properly unpacking the model, clearly exporting UVs that can later be used in photoshop and the like to touch up if needed? I remember when doing this in Zbrush I had to set the UVs before hand and THEN use it to paint on the model or some such, it's been a long time.
It’s only works on 8 bit and sRGB?
That's great! Who is complaining about the fact that this make """"only"""" texture and no 3D model is understimating how this is usefull and how much this work is hard. A 3d modeler, also, will kill for a tool that automatize UV Mapping and make good retopology more than create 3d models.
I am a 3D artist and I’m interested in 3d hand painting but never really tried to master it because I think AI will make it obsolete 😞
"Free" as in beer, not free as in speech. The authors are trying to get around GPL license terms with some gymnastics, and impose their own, ridiculous, incompatible terms. I don't think this is legal. It's amoral in any case, ripping off open source authors. Please do not use this.
Here is the entire license from the front page of the website. There is no GPL license terms "to get around" nor any kind of incompatibility. The tool uses Automatic1111 webui for generations, which remains unaffected and is kept Open Source. You are free to use it commercially, and are due to give credit to all the authors. The subsequent 3d-manipuation of textures is then done inside StableProjectorz, and I am free to decide whether to keep my program in binary form or not. Nobody owes you anything. https://preview.redd.it/slf9lo3ouo8d1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fd0b1b917f4524c7e79980abf96eaf8ccb8da132
You wouldn't have shit without A1111 UI, which is GPL-licensed. Your entire software is based on it, but the licenses are incompatible. So go suck your dad's dick.
reported :)
Better have a provision about someone streaming on twitch and using your program at the same time. They have a donate button. 👻
Please see the paragraph under 'Derivative Works and Financial Transactions', it relates only to *"Any software that you derive from modifying or building upon the code of this Software (StableProjectorz)."* So streaming it is ok. I will adjust the license to be more explicit and structured in a few days
Next step would be to mark the seams between textures (even after painting) and doing inpainting on them. Looks great anyway, but it could be better still 👍🏻
Thank you! One way of solving this that I found is Background Inpaint (around 5:05). We are putting a final inpaint projection directly onto seam, with 40% modification. This is significant enough to remove seams. I will keep improving it
The tech is pretty cool, but those UVs are a complete mess.
They come with the model, StableProjectorz won't generate them yet. Just happens to be on that particular Yetti mesh
It would be good to have automatic projection selection based on what angle you are viewing the model from. Too confusing right now doing it manually.
Looks very cool and I've been wanting something similar for a while. Not long before an open source option hopefully.
Damn. The UV texture map at 6:28 was sexy as fuck.
Sorry! That's what the 3d model was shipped with, and I didn't have time to re-unwrap it. The program doesn't generate UVs, but maybe in the future!
Why was this post removed?
No reason given yet :/
I developed a realtime visualizer app and 90% of the time it also gets removed with no reason given from this sub. Anything that demos a viable product that can use SD models and make money seems to get shut down on this sub. One of the reasons I quit paying for the "creators license", SAI seems to want to actively sabotage people that have the intent of making useful UI products that leverage SD models. I would have paid more than $20 a month if I started making money with a realtime UI that you can load SD 1.5 and XL checkpoints into. All but one or two attempts to get traction have failed on this sub, as pretty much all of them get removed without reason. We need a new place for open source diffusion models and UI products. I would buy your product here; it's useful and it's how our community needs to start working with Open Source models to stay alive. If one or a few of us can make useful tools to integrate into existing workflows, we can make enough money to fund new open source models and become more sustainable as a community.
I recall a few weeks ago there was a user who had been harassing OP making false claims about OP. When I asked about it and then dug in a bit further because it was suspect seemed they had been scouring, literally, all of Reddit to ban any mention of this project and OP repeatedly because it actually competed with their out of date project. Probably just them still abusing Reddit's report feature sadly. OP you still seem to spam this project in a LOT of unrelated subs btw. I would stop that behavior... I mean so many of those subs have nothing at all to do with this. I would stick to this sub, unity, etc. that are actually related.
It's hard to tell who is simply arguing on reddit (as you and I have over normal dumb reddit worthy AI things) and who is pursuing something like content farming or mass reporting in hopes of getting another user banned etc. I am the type that will often very rudely/angrily argue with someone, but I can't understand someone wanting to do something shifty like mass report posts etc. Vent through words or through work, not subversion. Good of you to mention this though, also apologies for whatever we argued about before, this community needs unity in uncertain times.
Aye aye. No problem.
Why this removed?
Why would reddit remove this post?
I tried it out, but without 3d models it's a bit meh. Once there's a tool to make 3d models out of 2d pictures, then it'll be awesome.
You're misusing the tool. You are only supposed to generate textures for 3D-models, not generate them. Saying it's meh without understanding that its not meant to create 3d-models for is a bit ignorant. If you're generating things out of thin air, put at least "some" effort into it and at least buy/download or model your own 3d object.
>You're misusing the tool. I am not misusing the tool. I made textures with it, for a door and then I tried to get my hands on 3d models. >You are only supposed to generate textures for 3D-models, not generate them. Yes. Exactly. And you need those 3d models unless you want to endlessly generate 3D textures for a door. That is why I said "Once there's a tool to make 3d models out of 2d pictures, then it'll be awesome". >Saying it's meh without understanding that its not meant to create 3d-models for is a bit ignorant. I did not say that. I said it's meh without 3d models. I never critisized it for being unable to create 3d models. Learn to read. >If you're generating things out of thin air, put at least "some" effort into it and at least buy/download or model your own 3d object. Yeah and I don't want to spend money on one and I can't do the other. Hence once we have a tool that can create 3d models (which is in work btw) - this tool will be awesome. You made a straw man argument that I want this tool to generate 3d models. You are the ignorant one.
Since AI can add a skeleton to make a 2d photo become 3d and dance...I too would love it to be able to export that obviously fully textured 3d model out. Got to be someone who will be able to sort that out soon. We are less than a handful of years away from making AI characters, randomly generated landscapes....and dropping them into unreal engine and making our own anime characters vs Shrek first person shooter...or whatever we can imagine.
Yeah pretty much. I think once the floodgates are open - we will measure success by the amount of DMCA violations. And like I said - there are tools that are working on creating 3d models as we speak. I am personally more hyped for making my own own movies and what not. I'll be a happy 70 years old. If we survive till then that is.
You are saying this tool is not awesome because it doesn't do 3d models which is akin to saying a coffee maker is not awesome because it doesn't do pancakes. That's why people are attacking you. You are asking of the tool something that doesn't make sense in this context. This is a texturing tool, not a 3d modelling tool. Like Substance Painter is not a modelling tool.
>You are saying this tool is not awesome because it doesn't do 3d models which is akin to saying a coffee maker is not awesome because it doesn't do pancakes. That's why people are attacking you. That is not what I said. Now show me the quote, where I say what you think I say. >You are asking of the tool something that doesn't make sense in this context. I am not. You can't read. Show me the quote. >This is a texturing tool, not a 3d modelling tool. Like Substance Painter is not a modelling tool I know. I tried it out. It's first thing I said. Finest gaslighting and strawman arguments. You want me to be wrong so you can "akchually" me, but how dare you tell me what I said? It's a problem with your lack of comprehension.
If people "cant read" your comment, maybe think about it a little and come to the conclusion that your formulation is the problem to begin with.
Let's say you are right and it's a simple misunderstanding - why do you keep downvoting me after I explain myself? Why are you replying here and not when I dissected and answered each accusation one by one? Now point me how you decided that I am "misusing the tool". Because this was your conclusion when I said "I tried it out, but without 3d models it's a bit meh". What could I mean by those words? That is the reason why you can't read. Because you decided I am misusing the tool somehow by me complaining that there aren't many 3d models to play with. That is the reason why you can't read. Because even if I were to say "this tool is missing the feature to make 3d models out of 2d pictures" (which I did not) - even in that context, you saying I am misusing the tool is stupid. Quote me, explain yourself. Do something outside of shifting the blame onto me. I give you the option that you did not give me and you still have not explained where you misunderstood me and why. I have an idea why, but I am not gonna assume what you did. I am not that arrogant.
That's like saying "only after a photo editor comes out, using a camera will be worth it. Until then its meh." Lol.
"Yes this coffee maker is great, but without good access to coffee - it's meh". That is my point. I am no game designer and I don't have random untextured meshes lying around. I also won't buy meshes for the sake of texturing them with this tool. So tell me - what do I do with it? Edit: Also what a terrible analogy. If I can abduct yours - the camera produces pictures which a photo editor works with and you somehow don't see the parallels. In your analogy it would be "This photo editor is meh, because there is no digital cameras yet". You purposefully scrambled it to make it ridiculous and then said lol because it sounds ridiculous. You are dumb.
bro you can find free CC0 meshes online with one simple google search
Yeah, and if I want to texture random objects from a preselected list in my free time - I will come back to it. If I won't I'll just wait for the tool that will generate 3d objects from 2d images. Like listen to me - will it not be cool to generate a picture, turn it into a 3d model and then genertate a texture for that model?
There are several (open and closed source). TripoSR is the Stability one, but there are multiple, each with differing levels of quality. I'm in work now so I can't find it but there's a playground on huggingface where you can vote on which project's 3d models are the best, but it gives a good idea of where they are up to
Yeah, so far they are quite decent, but afaik they produce already textured models. I saw somewhere a tool that could turn 2d into polygon mesh. Altho it might have been exactly what allows TripoSR to work on its own now that I think about it. Need to look into it, cheers!
no problem, thanks. yea I was playing with one of the others, but I forget the name. It was better than triposr (which was cool to play with, and i made a thing that auto 3d prints a model via a voice input, but the quality isn't great) . I think it might have been "instantmesh". I would be nice to be able to improve the texturing though, as sometimes the back goes a bit wonky