Merge Texture sets at export

[Cyril Dellenbach]

Currently, the Texture sets are clearly distinct UV maps. This suggestion would add the possibility to merge those together at export, instead of having multiple sets of maps.

EDIT : I've merged a similar user idea thread with this one. This way, the feature suggestion will have more upvotes, therefore more visibility on our side.

This thread has been created in regards to a future QOL (Quality Of Life) release. We’re trying to prioritize users’ needs; therefore, your voice is very important!

Please write your feedback below and don’t forget to vote for your favorite suggestions!
All shared images are purely for visualization and not functional features.

[DezCookies]

Hello, 

I'm working on a project that involves a complex mesh with a collection of single mesh and combined mesh objects (think large scale machinery). I am using UDIMs (12) and I have made ID maps in my DCC.

To get the best baking results from a High Poly to a Low Poly version I have been using a combination of the baking methods, including adding multiple materials to the object where I need to control the baking parameters either with or without custom imported cages, varying ray-casting, or using the low poly as high poly mesh. Using different materials was the best way to achieve these results in a timely manner that was easy to troubleshoot. I will add that the project has the mesh 'exploded' and is taking advantage of the 'Match: by mesh name' baking feature where possible.

The issue is that the multiple materials generate multiple texture sets, which is not an issue for adding materials, smart materials, etc; I honestly think it is an essential part of the software. Rather the issue arises when I need to export the textures to return to the DCC and for one UDIM tile I am exporting anywhere between 10 and 30 images because I may be using multiple materials on that tile and consequently, across any number of the tiles. 

There is no way to combine texture sets for export from Substance Painter.

I've seen forums dating back to 2015 calling for this feature, and nearly 10 years on this is past the stage of an oversight.

I have seen and read the suggested solutions but most involve either re-baking the mesh maps - something that, in my use case, is impractical and means I need to commit to a texture resolution. Or using additional software to combine the maps, which can result in artifacts.

Also, I see a common answer to the multiple texture set problem is to use a Material ID map. While this is a good solution at the 'painting phase', it removes flexibility in the 'baking phase' where, as I have stated above, the different materials generate flexibility in baking the mesh maps essential to good results in the painting phase. 

I will concede that perhaps my baking work-flow could be altered. However the material method worked so beautifully with such wonderful results I have to believe that it was an intended feature of the software.

Therefore my suggestions are to:

a) allow the optional combination of texture sets at export

b) allow the export of texture maps based on a UV/UDIM tile

Thank you for reading and considering this improvement for near-future updates.

[Cyril Dellenbach]

Hello @DezCookies,

Thanks for the interesting suggestion and the detailed workflow.

Initially, the Texture set defined by a Material ID was simply a method to determine whether two objects share the same UV map or not, and avoid mixing UVs. Therefore, it wasn't built for merging multiple Texture sets, but the opposite.

Now the application has greatly evolved a lot more people are using it, and with that a lot of new workflow emerged. Your message is a good example of why this could be useful to merge multiple texture sets.

However, adding such a feature wouldn't be trivial. How to detect UV islands? What happens if two UV islands overlap? How to handle different size/dilations parameters? etc.

In addition, this would also complexify how Substance 3D Painter builds Texture sets/UDIMs, which is already not always perfectly clear for beginners.

We have obviously already discussed about this topic, but I'll still share your message with the rest of the team.

Thanks again for your message.

[olemid]

This would be the feature of the decade!

[Richard35875221agmg]

We definitly need this!

[Adrien353578279rkc]

Yep, it could be awesome !

[Rincewind 3D]

highly needed

[Sandrine35879166kgl0]

Would be a great feature to have! 

[Jeff37444003k2vy]

This would be a huge feature for those like myself who create DAZ3D products, where you need to consolidate textures into one map.  

[James37598801wbyl]

@Cyril Dellenbach 
I dont know why it wont let me reply to your comment. So I just replied to the original...

I think you might be overthinking it.
The people who want this feature are probably the ones who know enough about UV layout to know not to try to combine textures with overlapping UVs.
Maybe you can just start by making the feature, and then work your way up to making it beginner friendly?
It is obviously something that people want badly, because there are a ton of solutions being made by other people for this issue. But none of them work smoothly, and certainly not as smoothly as a direct solution in Substance export setting would work. 
https://christena.gumroad.com/l/TextureSetCombiner
https://phillipjenne.gumroad.com/l/StackNPack
Here are a couple examples (the first does not work with UDIMs, the second is an extra expense that my company will not pay for). I have also seen tutorials for how to do it manually in photoshop, but doing that for a UDIM model would be a nightmare.
But it doesnt seem like you should need another program to do this. It is an important feature that you should build into Substance.
Think of your professional users who need to build complex materials and plug in the out putted textures. It would be great if we didnt have to output a bunch of different texture sets (which means loading a ton of extra texture files that will eat up ram) just to be able to use texture sets as a feature for masking in Substance.
We know how to pack our UVs, or else we would not be asking for this feature.

[adami43222452]

Yea I agree with this.

I dont think the users who are looking for this level of optimization wouldnt be informed about the UV issues. This is one of those advanced user tools that work as long as youve sety yourself up beforehand. I wouldnt expect the software to figure out how to reorganize and move the uv islnads to make everything fit, it just needs to simply Pack all materials into just the UDIMS.

[Just Another Rappy5C4A]

This would be a welcome change and might even be simpler to implement than you think if approached the right way. If there are concerns about the user experience for new users, my counterpoint is to make it optional, so the experience remains unchanged for them. Additionally, providing documentation for this feature would ensure clarity for those who want to use it.

My rough initial vision of what I'd like to see is a system similar to selecting shaders for texture sets, but instead, it would involve selecting sets for UVs. Additionally, we could reference UV channel names for a quicker setup, making the process more efficient and streamlined.

[Olena30683049g48d]

I don't agree that it's unnecessary. I have a model that has one UV map for all parts, but the model has several variants of itself, and I am not ok working with them, because they overlap each other, and if I split them into different texture sets, then when exporting I will have 4 textures instead of one.