Hi there,
Lately I've been involved in making programs for Planetariums and VR content. And I keep thinking that I want to use StudioArtist to paint in panoramic environments. Words fail to describe what I'm trying to get at but there's another program in existence that does something like this: https://www.facebook.com/panopainter
While I have no idea if anything here is possible it'd be insanely helpful / fantastic / amazing if there could be way to add such functionality to StudioArtist.
Basically for now, what I do is I split the 360 panoramic image via a cube projection, where each 6 sides of the cube become separate images for me to paint on. I then process it through StudioArtist which results in 6 painterly images which I combine back to an equirectangular format. Unfortunately, the results are quite mediocre since each side is treated like a separate picture. So I had to come up with a way to naturally blend between each panel during the panoramic stitching process that does alleviate some of the issues. But in the end nothing beats a direct painting application. (I kinda don't have those images due to copyright reasons but if you can imagine being inside a six sided cube with images painted per panel it's kinda like that.)
It is a lot to ask for given the niche-ness of this type of feature but it may prove itself useful within the type of field I'm currently involved in. Either way this was just a passing request! Thanks.
Replies
So if the cube canvas was a 2D surface, what kind of mapping would you want to allow the normal drawing routines to fill in the 3d boundary? Assume we added a more sophisticated path end wrap at edge option for a cube mapped to a 2d surface. Seems like you would want a brush modulation option to finesse the brush size accordingly based on where the nib is located in the 2d surface representation of the 3d cube.
Or would you prefer a real spherical drawing option? Obviously the scenario i'm proposing above is easier to map into the existing paint synthesizer.
Actually spherical/equirectangular projection is a lot easier to handle given the fact that it's really a 2:1 ratio single image rather than it being a cluster of multiple separate image planes. A lot of 3D programs and panorama stitching programs by default output spherical projection instead of a cube with a few exceptions.
I figure the brush being able to modulate/distort along the equirectangular projection would probably do perfectly.
In regards to the question above: So if the cube canvas was a 2D surface, what kind of mapping would you want to allow the normal drawing routines to fill in the 3d boundary?
So in regards to this I thought really hard about it. I don't have a conclusion nor probably a good answer to this myself. I'm less technical about it over all. I've been using Modo to paint simple textures onto a surface and it appears to be using screenspace projection to get get the strokes crossing multiple planes. This is probably a head scratcher when doing it on a 2D flat surface and I'm just unsure how else to answer this to get the sort of result I'd be looking for.
I'll add to this a bit more once I'm done with work today! Thank you so much for your response!
Screenshot 2016-12-01 14.13.07.jpg
Screenshot 2016-12-01 14.13.40.jpg
At least for the side images, you could try putting them all together into one bigger image, and then turn on the wrap at edge option in Path End. That would help with the seam problems, at least associated with 360 rotation in the environment.