Texture Mapping with Mudbox and 3ds Max

Publication Year:
2011
Usage 2654
Downloads 2352
Abstract Views 302
Repository URL:
http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/grcsp/64
Author(s):
Holland, Joshua
Tags:
3D; interactive entertainment; gaming; rendering; texture mapping; diffuse; Game Design; Graphic Design; Interactive Arts
article description
The purpose of this study was to determine the intuitiveness of texture mapping and compressibility of files generated using Autodesk 3ds Max 2012 versus Autodesk Mudbox 2012. This will be used by anyone starting to learn how to texture map and who is comparing programs that have the capability to do so. This will save users time in researching which program is better suited for their needs.This study investigated how Autodesk 3ds Max 2012 and Autodesk Mudbox 2012 compared in mapping textures to 3D models. A basic computer skills assessment test and an intuitive test was administered to twelve participants. They were ranked based on their computer skills assessment scores, texture map completion time with 3ds Max, and texture map completion time with Mudbox. Exported files sizes for 3D models using 3ds Max and Mudbox were also compared to determine which was smaller. Participants were not included in the file size portion of the study.Results from twelve participants in the intuitive test showed that Mudbox proved to be more intuitive for first time users attempting to apply a texture to a 3D object. However, 3ds Max offers more control and precision in performing these tasks at the cost of a large learning curve and a less of a fluid interface. The compressiblity test showed that 3ds Max produced a smaller file size.