Multiple UDIM Texture Sets are Exported with Wrong Naming Convention

If a model has both diffuse and normal maps, the exported naming convention is wrong for UDIM texture sets:

  • ModelName.1001_diffuse.png
  • ModelName.1002_diffuse.png
  • ModelName.1001_normal.png
  • ModelName.1002_normal.png

SHOULD be:

  • ModelName_diffuse.1001.png
  • ModelName_diffuse.1002.png
  • ModelName_normal.1001.png
  • ModelName_normal.1002.png

Please fix along with various other UDIM export issues! 

Does it mean that with the original naming convention used, you cannot automatically load it in the other software? Does it work for you once rewritten?

That is correct, textures cannot automatically be loaded into DCC software such as Maya, Houdini, Unreal, etc without manually renaming them. Most programs expect the naming convention above, i.e.:

<filename>.<UDIM value>.<format extension>

As specificed here: https://learn.foundry.com/modo/901/content/help/pages/uving/udim_workflow.html

Once the textures are manually renamed, they load correctly. 

Alright, thank you a lot for your input, will report this to the devs.

Hi!

Is this issue already fixed? Recently I followed the great tutorial of William Faucher (https://youtu.be/WrCOhes1Zgg) where he uses the UDIM workflow together with Unreal. Unfortunately when I export my Scans from Reality Capture with UDIMs as FBX (with diffuse and normal maps) I still get the wrong naming convention. Though in Mr. Faucher’s video it looks like he got the right naming convention created by Reality Capture right out of the box.

Do I really have to rename 170 textures now or is there a faster solution already available?

Thank you a lot for your help! : )

Hi HeimlichHeimrich, this bug should be solved but it is not implemented in actual release. It should be done in next release. For now you need to rename the files.

I noticed a similar issue with Blender and UDIMs, I eventually found you can change the syntax Blender uses rather than having to rename them but working straight away without having to edit them all would be great! I guess you’d just have to offer it as multiple UDIM output options rather than completely replacing it?

Anyway plus one vote for this fix. 

Hi Ronski, thank you for the idea. Noticed.