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
Texturing feedback - AKM
Hie!!,
Am trying to texture this handuard for my akm, and i would love to get some feedback on them, as idk it just doesn't feel 'quite there' yet. its an older variant so am trying to sell that military wear and tear.
also would love any substance tips
Am trying to texture this handuard for my akm, and i would love to get some feedback on them, as idk it just doesn't feel 'quite there' yet. its an older variant so am trying to sell that military wear and tear.
also would love any substance tips
akshattejas
1 ·
Re: Texturing feedback - AKM
That sort of research/thinking is key to getting a believable look.
if this is an 'in service' weapon for an actual military I don't think it would be allowed to get into this state - you'd revarnish or replace parts before it happened and I'm positive you wouldn't let anything get rusty (rusty bits stop gun shooting). If we're talking about some sort of scrappy insurgents that scavenged the equipment and hide it in the woods that's a different matter entirely though.
Agree with Sacboi on the metals - spend a bit of time watching forgotten weapons videos on AK derivatives and you'll learn all sorts of stuff about how they were made and get some insights onto what flaws there are in the design - this is all food for decision making when trying to represent the materials.
The below picture is an ak74 I googled in what I would assume is acceptable condition for military use.
I've called out some of the interesting wear and importantly the materials it's made of which have a significant effect on how wear patterns develop
These things are painted, not blued/parkerised/whatever which is important.
The receiver is primarly made of thin, cheap stamped steel which is pretty soft - it will take scratches pretty readily but tend to lose paint less easily than harder surfaces
The harder steels used for rivets/charging rod and trunion will scratch much less easily and as you can see the paint will tend to wear or flake off long before any change happens to the underlying surface
it's interesting to see how crude the surface machining is on the harder parts and that they simply painted over it
On a positive note the varnish wear effect on your lower handguard wood looks really nice - if that amount of wear was allowed to happen I'd expect the underlying wood to have gotten dirty/greasy and be a darker tone and i feel like the wear in the middle (hand holdy bit) is overdone but you've done a great job on the transition between materials.
if this is an 'in service' weapon for an actual military I don't think it would be allowed to get into this state - you'd revarnish or replace parts before it happened and I'm positive you wouldn't let anything get rusty (rusty bits stop gun shooting). If we're talking about some sort of scrappy insurgents that scavenged the equipment and hide it in the woods that's a different matter entirely though.
Agree with Sacboi on the metals - spend a bit of time watching forgotten weapons videos on AK derivatives and you'll learn all sorts of stuff about how they were made and get some insights onto what flaws there are in the design - this is all food for decision making when trying to represent the materials.
The below picture is an ak74 I googled in what I would assume is acceptable condition for military use.
I've called out some of the interesting wear and importantly the materials it's made of which have a significant effect on how wear patterns develop
These things are painted, not blued/parkerised/whatever which is important.
The receiver is primarly made of thin, cheap stamped steel which is pretty soft - it will take scratches pretty readily but tend to lose paint less easily than harder surfaces
The harder steels used for rivets/charging rod and trunion will scratch much less easily and as you can see the paint will tend to wear or flake off long before any change happens to the underlying surface
it's interesting to see how crude the surface machining is on the harder parts and that they simply painted over it
On a positive note the varnish wear effect on your lower handguard wood looks really nice - if that amount of wear was allowed to happen I'd expect the underlying wood to have gotten dirty/greasy and be a darker tone and i feel like the wear in the middle (hand holdy bit) is overdone but you've done a great job on the transition between materials.
poopipe
2 ·
Re: Texturing feedback - AKM
By "military wear and tear" assume means throughout its service life? Because at the moment as someone that had trained for years with similar grade ordnance + manufactured using the same materials which from my experience, can't recall seeing anything close to the level of damage applied, especially to those metal components on the receiver assembly, as well.
To start with, I'd recommend more research e.g processes how these weapons were made - their materials - environments where deployed and primarily routine maintenance either in the field or otherwise.
sacboi
1 ·
Re: Sketchbook: Frank Polygon
Subdivision sketch: M2O3
A quick visual overview of some easy ways to streamline [subdivision] modeling and a continuation of the previous posts about iterative block outs, booleans, and modifiers. Less explanations. More practical demonstrations.
Start with the block out. Focus on creating accurate shapes and solving any major topology flow
issues before worrying about subdividing and adding a bunch of minor support loops. Keep things simple. Use just enough geometry to support the details and shape transitions then use the subdivision to smooth the the surfaces. Avoid unnecessary complexity. Model individual components as separate meshes and use well supported flat areas to terminate extraneous loop paths.
Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision modifiers. One of the easiest ways to streamline a subdivision modeling workflow is to move away from manually cutting in every single support loop. Instead focus on resolving major loop paths first then use a bevel / chamfer modifier, controlled by face angle or edge weights, to automatically generate all of the smaller support loops used to sharpen transition areas and the edges of the shapes.
Recessed floaters are a great way to fill in small details without having to carry across a bunch of extraneous loops from the adjacent shapes. Since these floaters are below the surface it's a lot easier to hide any potential overlap issues in the natural break between the shapes.
Boolean base mesh + Mirror + Bevel / chamfer + Array + Subdivision. Use parametric primitives and boolean modifiers for a quick, non-destructive block out. Convert that to an editable mesh, mirror it, then adjust the topology routing and add the edge weights that control the bevel / chamfer modifier generating the support loops.
Asymmetric mirroring... It's possible to mirror a mesh with two unique sides. Just split off the section where the unique details are and attach it with an array modifier. Everything in the stack remains editable and the support loops are still non-destructively generated by the bevel / chamfer modifier.
Curve to mesh + Mirror. Curves can be used to generate geometry or as a mesh deformation path. It's a lot easier to manage a few verts and edges in a curve than it is to try and manually extrude everything as regular mesh components. This works really well for modeling wires and springs.
Solidify + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. A lot of cheap parts are made from sheet metal. No need to model everything. Just create the basic shape as a flat mesh then solidify it. Use vertex weights and a bevel / chamfer modifier to selectively round off the corners. Support loops can be automatically generated by another bevel / chamfer modifier controlled by angle or edge weights.
(The one sided base mesh in the examples below is all that needs to be modeled. Everything else is generated by modifiers that are controlled by the base mesh. It's non-destructive as long as the modifiers are active so it's pretty quick and easy to make changes to individual features.)
(The one sided base mesh in the examples below is all that needs to be modeled. Everything else is generated by modifiers that are controlled by the base mesh. It's non-destructive as long as the modifiers are active so it's pretty quick and easy to make changes to individual features.)
Roll pins.
Stamped sheet metal parts.
Compliant mechanisms.
Latch levers.
Solidify + Boolean + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. A similar approach can also be used to make solid parts without having to manually model all of the curves. Once again the one sided base mesh controls the final subdivision ready mesh, so any changes to it are automatically pushed through the modifier stack. Which makes it very easy to edit.
Screw + Boolean + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. Parametric primitives are great but sometimes it makes more sense to just draw the complex profile of a round part and spin / revolve that profile to create the base mesh. Other details like the hex socket on the head of the bolt are easy enough to create by boolean subtracting a parametric primitive. Support loops are automatically generated by a bevel / chamfer modifier set to detect adjacent faces at a specific angle threshold.
Mirror + Solidify + Boolean + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. Single sided arc solidified and combined with a primitive using a boolean union.
Boolean base mesh + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. Certain linear shapes work well with angle based bevel / chamfer modifiers. Just block out the shapes, add the bevel / chamfer modifier, and subdivide. No need to re-mesh something this simple.
Poly modeling + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. Sometimes poly modeling a base mesh is easier and quicker than setting up all the parametric primitives and booleans needed to define the shapes. Some of the round overs here are non-destructively generated by a bevel / chamfer modifier but most of it just straight poly modeling. The parts are simple enough that if they needed to be completely re-modeled it would only take a few minutes.
Parametric primitive + Boolean base mesh + Poly modeling + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. All of the surfaces that need to be both accurate and consistent are generated by combining parametric primitives but there's a few details that were just easier to create by poly modeling as a continuation of the boolean block out. (Certain internal mechanical details were also excluded because they won't be visible to players and it didn't make sense to spend the time and effort on something that wouldn't be included on the in-game model.)
Surface floaters + Simple twist deform + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. There's a few different ways to create lands and grooves but surface floaters are quick and easy. The obvious downside being they need to be baked down to the low poly and depending on the textel density and poly budget it might make sense to just do this with a texture. In this case it's a large barrel so it needs to be modeled on both the high and low poly.
Geometry + Simple twist deform + Weld + Bevel / chamfer + Subdivision. A slightly more involved solution compared to simple floaters, because the lands and grooves need to line up with the segment count of the bore, but it's easy enough to do by simply modeling everything straight, running a multi loop cut operation, then using a simple twist deform to turn the geometry to the correct angle.
This mesh is mirrored and the only reason that works is there's an equal number of segments on both sides and the twist deform operation runs after the mirror operation in the modifier stack. There's an edge split between the faces on the crown and breach which allows the segments to rotate without stretching and everything is merged back down with a weld operation towards the bottom of the modifier stack.
Adjusting this part of the mesh with destructive editing is fairly straightforward since the selections are saved and if anything had to be re-modeled it could be simplified with limit dissolve then once the changes were made the loop cuts could be added back in with a single multi cut operation.
Boolean base mesh + Re-meshing + Smoothing. Pretty straightforward workflow: It's a combination of parametric primitives for key features with basic poly meshes controlling bevel / chamfer based curves and round overs. Everything is non-destructively editable and any changes are automatically pushed through the modifier stack to the final re-mesh and smooth modifiers that generate the high poly model.
Everything here could be done with subdivision modeling and the segment count on this base mesh could be adjusted down so everything matches for easy clean up but the goal here was to use all of these different tools and workflows on a single model. This is the most complex part that is most likely to need adjustment, to match the details in specific references, so in this case single application re-meshing makes the most sense because of how flexible and immediate the workflow is.
The re-meshing + smoothing part of the high poly model is a little bit crunchy in spots but the entire model is only 6.4 million tris so... That workflow could be pushed a little harder. It's also worth considering, when looking at reference images, the surface finish on that particular part often leaves a lot to be desired and any crunchiness in the high poly will both add to and be covered by the normal details that need to be added during texturing.
A few other things worth considering: Finding and qualifying references is it's own write-up but it's often a good idea to settle on a specific variant of whatever you're modeling. If it doesn't have to be all that accurate then at least try to stick to a specific time period or production run so the final model isn't super anachronistic or apocryphal. (Unless of course that's what the art direction calls for!)
Also, stylization is a thing but it should be both logically and visually consistent within the scope of the project. Sometimes edges can be super sharp and other times they can be really soft. Same goes for proportion, scale, and just straight up shape accuracy: sometimes it really matters and other times it just has to be close enough that the players can look at it and recognize what it is or how it works.
Figure out what the artistic and technical constraints are for the in-game model then think about how those constraints affect what the high poly needs to look like. If the poly count or textel density on the in-game model is severely limited then certain shapes may need to be simplified and the edges may need to be softer so they bake down correctly.
Along similar lines, the required detail level varies depending on the player's average view distance. Certain things may not be visible in a third person game but may be very important in a first person simulator. Knowing what can be abstracted and simplified makes modeling a lot easier because then you're not wasting time on things that don't have a direct impact on the visual quality and player's experience.
Also, stylization is a thing but it should be both logically and visually consistent within the scope of the project. Sometimes edges can be super sharp and other times they can be really soft. Same goes for proportion, scale, and just straight up shape accuracy: sometimes it really matters and other times it just has to be close enough that the players can look at it and recognize what it is or how it works.
Figure out what the artistic and technical constraints are for the in-game model then think about how those constraints affect what the high poly needs to look like. If the poly count or textel density on the in-game model is severely limited then certain shapes may need to be simplified and the edges may need to be softer so they bake down correctly.
Along similar lines, the required detail level varies depending on the player's average view distance. Certain things may not be visible in a third person game but may be very important in a first person simulator. Knowing what can be abstracted and simplified makes modeling a lot easier because then you're not wasting time on things that don't have a direct impact on the visual quality and player's experience.
Related workflow write-ups featuring parts of this model:
https://polycount.com/discussion/comment/2804901/#Comment_2804901
FrankPolygon
3 ·
Re: Sketchbook: sacboi
Ruz said:... not exactly the new Lewis Hamilton?
Well, Lewis won his 7 titles imo via combination of pure killer racing talent alongside his team's engineers but 2026 will bring in new regs, cars and teams basically total reset for the whole grid so again I think will be up for grabs. Also since Melbourne regained first GP spot to kick off the F1 calendar here at Albert Park it'll be exciting even more so if it's a wet weekend....cos our weather is infamous for having four seasons in one day 
sacboi
1 ·
Re: What Are You Working On? (3D) 2025
Hello, I'm working on this new character.
Here's the link to the thread, I will do my best to update it regularly
https://polycount.com/discussion/237984/wip-3d-character-the-course-of-infection#latest
Here's the link to the thread, I will do my best to update it regularly
https://polycount.com/discussion/237984/wip-3d-character-the-course-of-infection#latest
Ghaiira
1 ·
Re: Sketchbook: Zetheros
@Melomad lol I did think about that. Maybe as a substitution to the jump animation if performed underwater. On land I think they would be too cumbersome, especially if they were armoured and geared up.
zetheros
1 ·
Re: What Are You Working On? (3D) 2025
not sure what happened with the shadow being lighter, but will fix that soon
Ruz
1 ·
Re: Sketchbook: Zetheros
Didn't get as much done as I wanted this week. Had errands to run & got sick but am better. Started detailing the swamp abyssal!
Have a great week!
Have a great week!
zetheros
1 ·
Re: Sketchbook: sacboi
Moar work on this Corvette, with panel cuts and thickness done will then move onto carving out insets, windshields plus other bits of 'ephemera' up next.
sacboi
1 ·