I could use a hand here :\
Hey Polycounters,
Still working on bringing this 2D maple structure to life and hit a wall here. Trying to model out this emblem, then I realized "how am i supposed to apply this flat object onto this curved surface"
here's how the whole emblem looks. here's half. Also, No matter what I do it seems I can't get those edges to line up perfectly with the align tools. Any tips on how you guys would go about this, and fixing those edges? I don't wanna just cut them emblem into 2 halves and place each half onto those 2 flat surfaces of the curves, unless that's the best way to go about it which I doubt. :shifty:
Still working on bringing this 2D maple structure to life and hit a wall here. Trying to model out this emblem, then I realized "how am i supposed to apply this flat object onto this curved surface"
here's how the whole emblem looks. here's half. Also, No matter what I do it seems I can't get those edges to line up perfectly with the align tools. Any tips on how you guys would go about this, and fixing those edges? I don't wanna just cut them emblem into 2 halves and place each half onto those 2 flat surfaces of the curves, unless that's the best way to go about it which I doubt. :shifty:
Replies
EDIT: looking at your wireframe you might need to add some veritcal segments for it to work.
I used the FFD3x3x3 and it worked great, thanks Vis
Perna, this method looks really good and I like boolean for attaching objects however no matter what options I use my boolean isn't coming out with results like yours. meaning, the edges of my emblem aren't being cut into my cylinder the way yours are. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing wrong here.
I'm also a little confused by the segments thing you mentioned
thanks again, open edges were in the back of my emblem
As for the cylinder, I suppose I could throw in 3 edge loops to get the geometry of the wood, but I was hoping a normal baked from my HP would show that, once I get around to it. Would that work as well?
I see what you mean now I think. For the top, pillars and rings I used 12 segments for the radius, but for the base I used 18. Is this what you mean? noob mistake
I don't have a set-in-stone number for the polycount, I'm just generally trying to keep it low or what's considered low, I guess.. Maybe under 3k tris, or 1.5k polys?
well I suppose I was trying to get into the practice of having multiple poly versions of the same object (LP/MP/HP?) this would be the LP version that would be from afar, and when LOD is used, as the player would get close would switch to the MP and so on to the HP. Of course if LOD wasn't going to be used, and this was going to end up being a close-up model as in the photo I would aim for much higher polys/detail work instead of going through the trouble of making 3 versions. This is typically how it's done from what I've found, unless I'm mistaken again
Haven't gotten to touch this in a while but I'm back trying to push forward again. As you mentioned Perna I instead tried focusing on getting the exact shape of the base, without worrying about LOD and such, but I did try to keep clean geometry in mind (obviously
Keep this for my LP model, I cloned it to begin trying to put in the edges and loops needed to keep its form once I bring this into ZB to Sub-d it. However I dont know how to go about this because of the strange shape of my object
What you are starting off with is a Low Poly model. This might be what you use in game, and what you bake the normal maps on to, but when you smooth it and scuplt it and decimate it in zbrush that low poly geometry means nothing and will get in the way. What you want to start with is a Base Mesh - a low poly, but simplistic mesh that doesn't need to run in realtime, it just needs to go into zbrush to be made into a high poly.
A clear example of this can be found here:http://www.brameulaers.com/tutorials/generic_wall_tutorial/generic_wall_tutorial.html
One of the important takeaways from that tutorial is that Bram makes individual meshes for individual stones. make new meshes where there are splits in real life, and reuse these meshes to build up an object where possible.
Hope that helps!
This leaves me with more questions now though
the next question it brings up is if I were to make the stairs a seperate modular piece, I don't know how it would intersect into the base without looking..silly, i guess?,ugh I'm sorry guys, I'm really trying to understand this I swear. I feel like I'm close but at the same time I'm so unsure
I understand Perna, I know I don't have a firm grasp on all the above mentioned areas, just bits and pieces. Right now I am currently focusing on just the poly modeling part, but everything does eventually tie together. I'm just trying to build this base in the most efficient way possible, in the case if I wanted to take it into zbrush and do the sculpting. I'm not actually going to attempt to, as I know that's way out of my reach at the moment and too much to juggle. But I'd like to start developing good habits now rather than later. (IE good topology, suitable for sub-d when I have to in the future)
If i'm not to be focusing on any of that, I would say this base is considered done, no? Just wondering
I understand that they're different things. Whenever I've been referring to "Base" in this thread, i'm referring to the piece in the recent screenshots, the "base" of the entire structure. the cylinder piece with the stairs cut into it, not an actual "base" mesh.
As you said, forgetting zbrush even exists, I'm still trying to poly-model this base piece of the entire structure with clean topology. I would say that's good practice and worth trying to do when creating any model, no? Just by looking at this, I don't know what's wrong, or what's right. Believe me I've been taking my time and trying to do as much research as possible, but I'm always running into a different million answers