Imagination PowerVR SDK Blog

powerVR model pipeline questions




I’ve studied the tools from PowerVRSDK3.2 to export pod models from maya2012. I have some questions to ask, and I’ll appreciate if anyone could help.

  1. My maya file and the tga textures it used are in one folder, what’s the best way if I want to export the .pod and the .pvr files all into a different folder? So far I find no way to export the pod and the pvr together, I can only use the PVRGeoPOD to export the pod file, and the PVRTexTool to export the texture file respectively, and when I open the exported pod in the Shaman tool, I find the texture missing because it refers to the original tga files, so I have to correct them manually to relink to my pvr files, and then save the pod. I’d like to know if there is a better way for this.

  2. If my pod file need to refer to a texture(.pvr) in another foler rather than where the pod file locates, there is a problem. Although it works when I edit the properties, the relative path cannot be saved. So if I open the saved pod next time, it says that the texture file cannot be found. Is this a known bug?

  3. I also tried the the PVRGeoPODCL tool, and it seems to me that it requires the input file as a dae file rather than a maya file. Is it so?

  4. Although most of my maya models can be exported, there is one cannot be viewed correctly in Shaman after export. The meshes are mostly invisible. I use the same PVRGeoPOD options to export all the models, don’t know why this file has an issue. Is there any help on this please?

    Thanks very much in advance.



Sorry for the late reply.

  1. PVRTexTool has a Maya plug-in that will allow you to use .pvrs directly in your scene instead of .tgas. This way you can skip the step of setting the textures up in PVRShaman.
  2. This is more a design choice than a bug, the exporters and PVRShaman only save the texture filenames, no path.
  3. Yep, the standalone version of PVRGeoPOD is used to convert collada files only.
  4. Please could you create a ticket in our developer support portal ( with the scene attached and we’ll take a closer look.





Thanks for your kind reply. As for the model issue, we’ve identified that if we have more than 1 materials for a mesh node, we will have this issue. However, if we export to dae first, and then to pod, it can be fixed.



I’ve created feature request BRN48512 in our bug tracker. The request is to increase the flexibility of the POD format to allow an array of Materials to be associated with each mesh.