Substance Source

[Fritzi Vanderweel]

Nextis the terms, Im just wondering if the restrictions under terms actually allow you to without limit `use models commercially` like the article says, or if its some grey area / miscommunication between teams etc or even if I have misunderstood.

I have tried to find an email to ask this more directly. Once I did find one to ask, the reply I got back was "I am sorry but this is not the correct group to answer that question." So without further help from that source im back to searching for another email to ask and in the meantime posting here to see if anyone could enlighten me.

Also to what extent does a model need to be modified if at all and at what point does adobe no longer hold rights over the modified model? Or is it becaause the model stemed from the base, Adobe forever owns the rights?

You are allowed to use and redistribute the assets commercially without restrictions if they are part of a "larger works", which means a film, game, render, video etc. where it is not the asset itself being distributed but a different medium.

To be able to redistribute the asset it has to be made into a "Modified Work", which means that the asset has to be modified in such a way that it can not be recognized as the original Adobe asset. For a material, that means that you can use a

To be able to redistribute the asset it has to be made into a "Modified Work", which means that the asset has to be modified in such a way that it can not be recognized as the original Adobe asset. For a material, that means that you can use a "mossy brick" material, use some of the moss, add it to your own concrete material and redistribute your own "mossy concrete" that uses part of the original Adobe asset. For models it could be using the pillows from a couch model from Adobe and adding them to your own bed model.

From what I understand in what you want to do, you intent to modify the assets, so it would depend on how much you plan to modify them. If it is using elements that would be fine with the EULA, however if you don't modify or only do small modifications that would be "using the Substance Source Assets in a way that allows a third party to use, download, exctract or access the Substance source asset on a stand-alone basis". Indeed Adobe still owns the IP of the asset and only people who own a license to use the asset (people such as yourself who have licensed them on the website) have the right to use it.

Please let me know if that was not clear!

I am upgrading a project from UE4.27 to UE5.0.3, but every time I attempt to open the project in 5.0.3 it crashes. The only way for me to avoid this appears to be to disable the substance plugin before upgrading. If I re-enable the plugin after upgrading then the project begins crashing on startup again.

The invalid textures had a few things in common. They did not update if I made a change in the substance factory, and when I opened the texture there was no image displayed. It did say it was invalid somewhere (after opening the file) but I do not remember where in the UI that message was located.

Rendered an old NURBS model using Rhino 7 and SBSAR files from Adobe Substance Source. The Substance material support plugin is available in Rhino 7 in the PackageManager command to allow drag and drop. I used a couple point lights set to Linear with decreased shadow sharpness and an HDR from the Rhino library as well as the usual post effects like Filmic tone mapping and Intel denoising (also from the PackageManager)

Nice render! Have you tried rendering the same model in Rhino Render without using the Adobe source? Since I am no longer interested in subsidising Adobe products; I would be curious to know if there is a drastic difference between the two renders.

I quickly visited the Adobe site, and if I am not mistaken, they are asking $40 a month to use their material resource. I suppose that kind of subscription would be justified for people selling render work, but not for occasional users. I actually wonder how many Rhino users utilize Adobe substance?

Oh, I see what you are saying, thank you for the explanation! Out of all the products I own (Flamingo (defunct), Vray, Octane, Keyshot) I would say the latter was probably the easiest to create or manipulate the textures imho ( I prefer Vray rendering quality though).

Browse thousands of fully-customizable 3D assets for your creative projects. Explore and use models, lights, and materials created by specialists and world-class guest artists. Download up to 50 assets per month as part of the Adobe Substance 3D...

I saw that on the front page there was mention of the substance source library. I know that we can export/bake the texture from those materials in either painter or designer (two complementary texturing options from the substance suite) as png and then use them in R5. But I wanted to know if the dev planned to allow reading directly the .sbsar or .sbs proprietary files from substance, as a way to quickly iterate materials for rendering ?

Substance Source is an ever-growing content library where you can find physically based, high resolution and tweakable assets for texturing. From fully procedural materials to physically based scans and hand-painted materials, Substance Source is the place to find assets suited to any type of 3D project. Substance can be used directly in Unity. Download materials every month with the Substance Live monthly payment plan, or make a one-time purchase of Substance Source access (includes 12 months of updates).

I have Substance Database and read on your forums that some of the substances from Database are in Substance Source. Will Substance Database be a discontinued product in the future due to Substance Source? What is the relationship between the two? Thanks.

Yes, we will be discontinuing Substance Database as a product. However, we will support current database owners. You will always have access to the database from your account. Substance Source is replacing the database going forward for new users. We will not be updating the database further.

You can still buy access to Substance Source like you could Substance Database but now Substance Live includes Substance Source downloads. I guess as further enticement to go with the subscription route.

If your Substance Painter and Designer are the latest versions, you should have 120 free Source downloads (60 each). I received 120 downloads for having Substance Designer and B2M3. My Painter version is still the first version so I did not get the free downloads for that.

That was my first thought as well, but then I saw that I already had received 60 credits per program that I owned already, and 180 credits is going to last me pretty long. If I ever need more, then 20$ for 30 more substances a month seems like a fair deal considering I already got 180 for free.

Use the sbsar file in a custom substance to create a new substance. Here you are using the sbsar as a base material and modifying it to be your own material. You then publish your sbsar file which also uses the sbsar file from source. You can then sell your sbsar file anywhere.

Just to officially clarify, @GoesTo11 is correct. You can still buy Substance Source just as you could with the database. Substance Source is a new product that is replacing the Database. We are offering an upgrade for existing database owners to Source. This is working just like a new product upgrade. Just log into your account and you will see Source as an upgrade option if you own the database.

3a8082e126