PPSh-41
polycounter lvl 8
Hello fellow polycounters!!
Up next on my modeling extravaganza, is the PPSh-41. This is the high poly as it stands now. Gunna start rockin the low here soon unless someone catches something that i missed. CC's, like always are more than welcomed
Im sure everyone knows what it looks like, but here are some references, just in case
Up next on my modeling extravaganza, is the PPSh-41. This is the high poly as it stands now. Gunna start rockin the low here soon unless someone catches something that i missed. CC's, like always are more than welcomed
Im sure everyone knows what it looks like, but here are some references, just in case
Replies
I'm all for the use of floats, And they are often much faster and more practical in a work environment. That said. Two things
1. I personally like to challenge myself and model geometry as it appears in real life. Just because it will never be harder to go to floats compared to completely integrated geometry, but if your ever called on to integrate complex geometry, you'll be ready if that's what you practice. If you already practice, And your called on to use floats, It will be a piece of cake.
2. Some things will bake better if they aren't floats. In particular, I have concerns about the "Strips" running the back portion of the receiver, right in the FP View. Depending on where the geometry ends up on the low poly and in turn how the cage ends up dictating projection, you may see errors there, or unwanted results. In addition, You may run into problems when baking AO with so many floats. I hear you have to turn off shadow casting, or something to that effect. I can't speak to how that effects the quality, But it's something to keep in mind.
Not to mention, it shows a higher level of technical ability to be able model some shapes like these without using floats.
Another area of concern would be the same as Tim, On the stock. It appears quite wide. I may have a different reference than you, But the only planar(flat) portion I see on that stock is where that metal bracket is, Everything around it is curving. Immediately after that bracket, the curve starts working its way down. The portion where the stock meets (or close to meets) the receiver it appears that your curve is sort of abrupt, and blocky. That part of the stock mimics the shape of the receiver and has a more elongated curve.
Apologies for such a crude paint over.
The only other part that could use some work would be the piece surrounding the barrel. The cutouts from it are pretty nice, But i would loosen up the control loops around the flat portions and let the curve of the ends connect a bit more naturally. and the one closest to the player jumps out as odd, Sense one corner is raised up higher and skewed.
These things aren't all that important, But things I personal would have done differently. Just my opinion here
P.S. Might want to widen up the edges on the front sight, They are looking a bit tight atm.
A couple things, your magazine is clearly too wide. The one in the reference is maybe half of yours. I prefer the barrel mag anyways, its the stereotypical form you think of if you imagine a PPSH and just balances 5x better visually.
Btw what is with all those floaters, they look ugly and do not make sense
- the form around the trigger looks too big somewhat
Also the charm of those old weapons comes a lot from this variation in shape. They are bend and various ways and not straight like your model. They are not perfect and made per hand or not so advanced machines or whatever. Just look at the middle part of the first reference. If you can visualize that in your mesh + a good texture then im impressed.
Aside it looks nice so far
s620- thanks for all the notes!
1. yea generally i like to model in all the pieces too. This time i just decided to go for speed. And for the indents in the back of the front iron sight, i actually did a test bake because i was worried about that exact issue, and it came out pretty clean actually.
Also, i was curious about that last opening too. I have this reference that shows it going up in the back like that. Other references i have, show the same as yours with all of them the same shape, but for uniqueness, i thought i would be different. If its just the angle of the reference, its a simple fix which will be nice
Reference*
Shrike- the use of floaters makes it faster for high to low bake process. This piece im going for speed. Generally i model everything in, but for this particular model im going with floaters. They make sense if you think about the end result..
update*
fixed circular openings in barrel
fixed width issues on stock and clip mag
added hook on barrel and attachment hook on stock
btw, after that fix, there was some added pinching on the nose of the barrel which is fixed now
Keep it up!
AlexCatMasterSupreme- odd like how? you have any suggestions on where else to place it? maybe just let it hang? Because i know people have done this gun in the past i wanted to add some uniqueness to it but if it throws the whole piece of somehow then yea i definitely want to fix it
Needs some gravity adjustments on the part over the mag probably
Here is how the body of the gun turned out post bake
lowpoly+AO+normals
i love
unfortunately im on a vacation right now for the 4th but, il have those textures done as soon as i get back, i promise
it's hard to tell from the given angle but you may want to be allocating a lot more tris to the areas closest to the eye in FPV.
i wanted to still keep it somewhat low even though next gen sub machine guns are going to be around 15-20k but i could still probably push it to 8 or 9 if i wanted to.
thanks for the second opinion and the good eye
fixes implented
-higher polycount for fpv
-tweaked bakes
Hope everyone enjoys
Going to look at this next time I texture realistic wood
Two things I would fix, one is adding a few more segments to the strap and using shadows when presenting it, cause now it lacks shadows it seems which makes it look flat.
And remove the glow around the text, seems a bit unprofessional in my opinion.
It looks like your texturing is off to a good start, but some thoughts I have:
1. The metal appears too rough. Even if the gun is beat up, The specular highlight is going to be a lot smaller, and glossier looking than this. Hike up the gloss map values for the metal
2. The metal is quite light at the moment. It could be quite a bit darker. And use more range in value. Right now the contrast is pretty low on it, and bigger shapes seem to be lacking.
3. The wood is very plastic like right now. Notice how in the picture below, There is no bump or surface change except for dings/damage. right now it looks like you have the grain pattern in the normals as well and that makes it look a bit strange.
4. Also referencing the below image, The wood could use larger shapes in the diffuse/spec as well. Grain direction is looking good atm, But most woods don't have a consistent value like this. And the ones that do are boring! don't look at those
5. Notice the specular highlight size on the wood below. Its very broad, Very soft, Not very reflective. This obviously depends on the wood you're using for you ref, sense they are all different. But I'd work on the spec/gloss relationship with the wood.
Good work so far. Look forward to it refining