A race track, suggested by my friends' son, in action
The BRAWL² Tournament Challenge has been announced!
It starts May 12, and ends Oct 17. Let's see what you got!
https://polycount.com/discussion/237047/the-brawl²-tournament
It starts May 12, and ends Oct 17. Let's see what you got!
https://polycount.com/discussion/237047/the-brawl²-tournament
Best Of
Re: Sketchbook: Frank Polygon
Subdivision modeling: working through complex shape intersections.
A fair number of questions about mesh topology [on curved surfaces] are focused on finding an answer that completely explains a very specific type of complex shape intersection. While this approach to trying to solve all of the topology problems at once can sometimes yield results, if someone else has solved the exact same problem, it may not be the best way to frame the question.
Instead try to break down each part in the reference images into a series of simple shapes. This will make it easier to search for solutions that solve the problems with similar shape intersections. Which can then be applied to each individual shape that was identified earlier. Each of these simple solutions can then be layered on top of each other to build up the shape without having to spend hours trying to find or wait for someone to post a perfect solution to the whole problem.
The example below shows how a series of simple shapes can be combined with basic subdivision modeling principles, like placing intersecting shapes between existing geometry, matching the number of edge segments in intersecting curves and blocking out the shapes to resolve topology flow issues before adding support loops, to create a very simple but effective base mesh.
Once the basic shapes are blocked out and the segments are matched the shapes can be joined with boolean operations and cleaned up with limited dissolve. From there it's a simple process of cutting in additional support loops that snap to the existing vertices and adding support loops around the edges that define the shapes. Solving the majority of the topology flow issues at the lowest possible level helps keep the mesh relatively simple and can reduce the amount of work required to get a clean result.
Once the basic topology problems are solved the same process can be used to iterate on the existing model by adding more complex shapes. The example below shows how changing the shape and position of the block out primitives will produce a more complex variation of the first model that more closely matches the reference images.
Again. It's very important to solve most of the topology flow on the simple block out mesh. Doing this will help ensure that the intersecting shapes define the path of the supporting topology. Which makes it much easier to add support loops without generating smoothing artifacts. Starting with an appropriate number of segments for the size of the object and matching the segments of the intersecting shapes to the underlying geometry will also help prevent smoothing artifacts.
Recap:
When trying to solve topology issues around complex shape intersections: start the block out process by breaking the object down into simple shapes. Look for existing topology solutions for each individual shape. Solve the topology problems with each individual shape and layer each solution onto the previous one to create the complex shape intersection out of simple shapes.
Use fundamental subdivision modeling techniques like placing intersecting shapes between existing edge segments on curves, matching the segments in intersecting shapes whenever possible and resolving topology flow problems before adding a lot of support loops.
Here's a link to another write up that covers how break down complex shapes into simple ones and blocking everything out before adding more complex support geometry. https://polycount.com/discussion/comment/2745166/#Comment_2745166
FrankPolygon
1 ·
Re: Star Wars Outlaws: Character design was the least of this games problems.
As much as I agree that this isn't the most productive thread, I also think there is definitely something to be said about how the most recent realistic character/facial tech is seemingly messing things up in a weird, hard to describe way.
Of course the average gamer and game journalist doesn't have the background to pinpoint it, but these facial animation systems just seem to have a tendency to make things slide towards a weird uncanny look. And it just so happens to be especially noticeable on female characters attempting to be realistic but without closely matching a real life actress.
I am replaying Revengence at the moment and I am amazed by some of the visuals. The rendering engine is of course way outdated, but it is fast and butery smooth. And the facial animation on some characters is really damn cool, even showing some nice anticipation on the phonemes which to me illustrates an art team in absolute control of their craft, even with lower ressources from 2013. And something as simple as covering one of the eyes of the characters or keeping them in shadows seems to make the viewer "fill in the blanks".
Of course calling a game woke for featuring yet another sassy girlboss lead isn't the most elegant way to express it, but game studios and the american media and cultural landscape in general are 100% responsible for that anyways after years of advocating for sexist "representation" and expressing overtly racist positions - not gamers. I feel like under the surface gamers might be simply expressing that they just want more cool "game-games" as opposed to yet another attempt at retro 80s nostalgia.
Also I find it hilarious that the team at ND didn't even take the time to look at a real person buzzing their head. This female bounty hunter protagonist is holding the trimmer the wrong way around
Of course the average gamer and game journalist doesn't have the background to pinpoint it, but these facial animation systems just seem to have a tendency to make things slide towards a weird uncanny look. And it just so happens to be especially noticeable on female characters attempting to be realistic but without closely matching a real life actress.
I am replaying Revengence at the moment and I am amazed by some of the visuals. The rendering engine is of course way outdated, but it is fast and butery smooth. And the facial animation on some characters is really damn cool, even showing some nice anticipation on the phonemes which to me illustrates an art team in absolute control of their craft, even with lower ressources from 2013. And something as simple as covering one of the eyes of the characters or keeping them in shadows seems to make the viewer "fill in the blanks".
Of course calling a game woke for featuring yet another sassy girlboss lead isn't the most elegant way to express it, but game studios and the american media and cultural landscape in general are 100% responsible for that anyways after years of advocating for sexist "representation" and expressing overtly racist positions - not gamers. I feel like under the surface gamers might be simply expressing that they just want more cool "game-games" as opposed to yet another attempt at retro 80s nostalgia.
Also I find it hilarious that the team at ND didn't even take the time to look at a real person buzzing their head. This female bounty hunter protagonist is holding the trimmer the wrong way around
pior
3 ·
Re: Typewriter lowpoly question
a lot depends on how you imagine the "low poly" asset being used.... as a prop in a fast paced action game not so much.... as part of an atmospheric real time cut scene of some historical detective game and it's seen close up (e.g. someone perhaps typing) then yeah you could make it work with a bit more geometry.
Klunk
1 ·
Re: What Are You Working On? (3D) 2024
trying to recreate a vray type of look using cycles
Cycles has a bunch of filters in the compositor, including sharpen
Ruz
3 ·
Re: Typewriter lowpoly question
I think what is usually meant by that is polycount doesn't matter for rendering.aSocialCrab said:dimwalker, the number of polys doesn't matter for a portfolio showcase, they said
Here it's not the polycount itself that I think will be a problem, but object's design. You can see everything through everything, can't just bake it to a box (like a fridge or old TV set for example). Most parts would need to be a separate piece. Cylinders will probably require support loops to get rid of wavy edges etc. I guess it comes down to what you consider to be a lowpoly.
dimwalker
1 ·
Re: Typewriter lowpoly question
One thing that’s worked well here is to start a new Topic and post your work in progress, with frequent updates as you go along. Ask for feedback. But keep going whether you get any or not. Be a force of nature! Kick ass and chew gum! You got this.
Eric Chadwick
1 ·
Re: Can I use Marmoset 4 offline with a perpetual individual licence?
That means that I cannot use the application when the internet connection is down - which happens regularly here unfortunately, and longer than 24 hours sometimes. We all know that those things tend to happen at the most adverse times. This could get uncomfortable far too quickly when there is a deadline to be kept and you are keeping me from using the software I have (not yet) paid for. No, thats unintelligible, and a reason not to buy the software for me.
wilson66
1 ·
Re: Do 3D artist jobs last longer than concept artist jobs?
As in man-hours per project? Of course, unless someone is extremely indecisive and/or willing to spend a lot of time on exploration. Usually, you'll also need more people doing 3D than people doing concepts and while there will often be some overlap, the concept artists will start and finish first.
And just in case you mean which is more future-proof: Who knows? As it stands, AI can be used as a tool to speed up ideation and concepting or even replace a concept artist, although with increasingly questionable/inconsistent/half-baked results for each step. But how much it will actually catch on remains to be seen and the same could be true for 3D tomorrow. At the very least, it's very likely that less people will be needed to do the same amount of work in the future. Which could result in more / more detailed assets being created or smaller teams.
And just in case you mean which is more future-proof: Who knows? As it stands, AI can be used as a tool to speed up ideation and concepting or even replace a concept artist, although with increasingly questionable/inconsistent/half-baked results for each step. But how much it will actually catch on remains to be seen and the same could be true for 3D tomorrow. At the very least, it's very likely that less people will be needed to do the same amount of work in the future. Which could result in more / more detailed assets being created or smaller teams.
Noren
1 ·