Hard Surface Modeling - Sculpt or don't sculpt
So what's your preference? I've focused more on organic models than ever hard surfaced ones, so I'm having some issues finding out what is the best way to go about it. I've found that sculpting doesn't seem to do it for me, and I'm going to be trying modeling it entirely rather than trying to sculpt it. But that might also just be me not being totally familiar with the sculpting tools available.
Do you prefer to build your hard surface models from scratch in programs such as max or maya? Or do you prefer to do it in sculpting programs? Is it faster or slower to sculpt? If you do sculpt them, whats your favorite tools in the sculpting program to get those perfect edges?
I'm very curious to peoples preferences here! If you have any favorite techniques you'd like to share, I'm curious to hear about them too!
Do you prefer to build your hard surface models from scratch in programs such as max or maya? Or do you prefer to do it in sculpting programs? Is it faster or slower to sculpt? If you do sculpt them, whats your favorite tools in the sculpting program to get those perfect edges?
I'm very curious to peoples preferences here! If you have any favorite techniques you'd like to share, I'm curious to hear about them too!
Replies
this sounds horribly inefficient. in a production environment you're gonna start with making a greybox blockout, which is a blockout that has all the main shapes and major details made already. to be honest, with hard surface modeling the hardest part is laying out all the shapes, so once that's done all you need to do is separate out the parts and start adding loops.
using zbrush is a complete pain in a production environment where you will be told to make major design changes to the high poly while you're making it or even later in development (if your dumb art director wants to waste time just to look important to execs). this is sort of comparable to making a model house out of blocks vs out of clay; with blocks you can just move stuff around and it'll look right, whereas with clay you can do the same, but it requires a lot more work to make it look like it was made that way to begin with.
imo with hard surface, zbrush should be reserved for final detail passes, if absolutely necessary at all. for most cases you're much better off sculpting some generic damage and saving it as generic normal map overlays--that way you can handle damage in photoshop quickly and skip exporting your model to zbrush, sculpting things, decimating the mesh, and finally loading it back into a program for baking.
If you really know and control the tools in 3DS Max well, it will be fast.
got any examples of what forms are a nightmare to model in maya or max?
I still prefer traditional apps for making base meshes above all, dynamesh is indeed cool and powerful and z can do hard edges, but the much more technical toolset I think gives you good versatility.
I think the best thing is not to take any piece of software off the table and to remove yourself of all prejudice, at first I just knew max, then I learned how to use Z, then went over to mudbox, then back to z where I really got in depth with it, then most recently I got into maya and god damn! I am really liking maya, and UV layout is craaazy good for UVs despite its terrible UI
The only exception to this ive seen is some people doodling or exploring concepts in zbrush, then redoing it in max later. Not really a production pipeline, but could work to mess around with new ideas if you are designing stuff from scratch.
No, not really. I've seen quite a few character artists create 'blockout' sculpts which is just a basic sculpt really roughed in, plotting where all the details would go, then they retopologize or model over that with final details. I find it a good way of laying down what you need quickly so you can try different ideas out, if you like it then great, it can be modeled in and finalized, if not then it can be scrapped - I just find it a faster process.
Inefficient.
also, if you're making a very large and detailed hard surface item like a vehicle or gun (read: not character accessories), there is no point in blocking something out--only to scrap it and make it all over again. it is better to start with a relatively detailed blockout in max that you can use as a base when doing the real modeling.
even better would be to have your concept artist paint over a simpler 3d blockout (PLEASE DO THIS FOR THE LOVE OF GOD), then send that simple blockout to the 3d artist who details it a bit more, gets it approved, and can use that as a base to start the high poly.
But when you're doing some more "sci-fi" stuff, like mechs, or semi-organic armor with hard surfaces pieces, sculpting in Zbrush is really fast, and it allows quick iteration if the concept art isn't so well defined (which is often the case depending on where you work, unfortunatly).
I use both techniques depending on the object I need to produce, but more and more I turn to Zbrush to quickly mesh out shapes and proportions as it feels much faster and pleasant to work with sculpting tools rather than push points around (which doesn't mean I won't sometimes finish it in sub-d modeling later on, again totally depends on the piece).
That.
1) the file is lighter
2) much more precision/control
3) you dont need retopo (huge task! dont trust in autoretopo tools)
4) in the end you can import the model in zbrush/mudbox/blender and add the amout of details that you prefer.
5) your model even is at blockout stage, is ready to be rigged for animatics.
Zbrush of course is really good for concept artists and for hardsurface that maybe dont need to be rigged and animated.
goodluck!
But I can see maybe if your doing a highly organic designed hard surface model where mudbox or zbrush might actually work better especially due to how hard it can be to control loops on curved surfaces and have tons of detail with no floaters.. But even that stuff is still doable in Max or maya no problem it just takes skill. Plus there is always photoshop to fall back on for now with panel detail etc. there are lots of other areas though where mudbox and zbrush exels for instance doing ornate wood details, or metal carvings etc. it depends on the type of work and design.
Designing a new character or weapon or vehicle etc is not the same as making a nice clean hard surface model. Those are 2 very different jobs, usually done by 2 very different people within the same studio in my experience.
It seems like a lot of people on here, including me, would like to do both concepting and modelling at the same time and go straight from zbrush blobby design to retopo and hardsurface, which is fine at home but most likely wouldnt work so well in a studio environment where the management may ask for changes and redesigns at any point.
Zbrush is great for quick, stream of conscious concepting without artwork, but I can see how that wouldn't work in a production environment wher ethe concept art is provided. I generally start with a mesh from Maya, using the crease tool to keep corners crisp without adding loops so that Zbrush subdivides evenly.
BUT, I have to say that ZBR is making it a lot easier to do hardsurface. The "Polygroup by Normal" - "Crease by Polygroup" one two has been my go to workflow for any sculpt, hard or organic. Super fast and easy to do/undo. The Hpolish, Clipping and Trim brushes, and Panel loops as well.
Anyone worried about bringing their sculpts back in Maya/Max, decimation master works extremely well especially for hard surface sculpts. In fact, they would recommend it because it keeps cornered edges really sharp if needs be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKfgEx5Z1h8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doazrHltwa0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYs7M1I2cFw
And by the way, All depend of the purpose. If i need to do a high poly subdivision model for animation, i won't be using Zbrush, it's of common sense for me (i don't like to waste time stupidly in retopos). BUT, if i'm doing something for game art and i need it as fast as possible, i won't care about topologies, nor about polygons. For too many assets i use sculptris... sculptris eh!
If you're at a high budget studio working with strong concepts for precise material like guns and vehicles, subd is the safest and most direct route. Imo. If it suits your skills & workflow.
My stance on game art is to do whatever works, and in less restrictive or smaller teams, that also amounts to doing whatever you /want/. Especially if you're indie or working with looser concepts.
I mean. An aNet artist once mocked me for "still doing subd"... just a means to an end. Their 3d artists just happen to be the ideal game artists with the concept, sculpting, modeling, and texturing skills & sensibilities to finish their own shit. That's the way I like it, personally. Trust your artists' competence levels and they'll not only deliver (or not), but also grow more rounded in the process.
You still using Modo 302, I believe
Haha... you too, huh. For small forms or organic elements, its tools just feel the best. Pop in, muck around a bit, there's your base... love it.
Blender's dynamic topology is way cleaner to the point of blowing my mind every time I doodle with it, but the tools just don't feel as good. Drpetter really put some love into that little piece of Pixo-bought abandonware. :')
Yep, sculptris is very handy, it saves me a lot of time. I don't need to model nor the exact form, just a fast block out full of triangles
Unfortunately, the sculpting tools didn't change for better, they are still the same
but still the most accurate way todo stuff
Unrelated to the sale, here's the new Gnomon Modo tutorial.
[ame="
317 for the upgrade, that's almost what i paid for modo 301 in another sale :poly122:
And i don't use the sculpt, nor the rendering, nor the bones, nor the animation, nor the painting, nor the particles... just only the modeling and UV mapping features
I wouldn't care paying less for a lite version (for what i will use), but as fast as modo 302 in viewport perfomance. With all the scripts i use i have more than enough right now. there's no point upgrading, but thanks anyways. I tried the trial of modo 401, 501, 601 and a few months ago the one for 701.. and i disliked it.
A lot of the hard surface stuff for the infiltrator demo was done inside of zbrush with retopo in max + alphas for detailing. In fact the statues were even posed after using decimation master and then finalized after that.
As everything moves towards realtime booleans though I think that will be come the preferred method for hard surface modeling.
Modo seems to be the furthest ahead in achieving this. But before everyone jumps in about clean topology lets remember that if you're baking a normal map and it's hard surface that you probably shouldn't care anymore as long as it looks good.
I think we're getting very close to a paradigm shift in modeling. One which I can't wait for it to arrive. We've been stuck modeling in the same manner for far too long. I can't wait until hard surface has a revolution similar to how zbrush changed organic modeling.
Exciting!
Hm, do I need to be registered on ZBC to view the videos, or is it a geolocation thing? None of the videos work here (not found/access denied errors) ;-/
hrmmm?
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?178005
The tools in brush have really come a long way for hard surface imo. But it's very task dependent so I like to get into some hand retopo as soon as I have a good overall shape. (sorta like sewly's work flow)
For me, the game changer is dynamesh. In some cases it really speeds things up to block out in z-brush instead of vert pulling because it's just so much faster. If you're blocking out in maya, and then going to z-brush, you've missed the point entirely!
cptSwing sorry those videos don't work! I have no idea why.
Thank you
I think that most of the confusion in this thread comes from this. But at least, Zbrush/mudbox can be useful at the blockout stage of both.
Yeah, if you need to follow something very precise from the start then zbrush is not an ideal tool since everything needs to be eyeballed.
Going from a block out to finalized/perfectly clean hard surface model entirely in zbrush isn't a good idea at this point in time.
I find that using predictable brushes instead of the fancy tools that are hard to control gets me a lot further, faster. (just inflate/flatten and H polish with some trim dynamic are really enough to get a solid blockout for fast retopo.) The advantage here is that you have something much quicker to show your AD and get feedback on before you invest a lot of time into getting proper topology and clean edges.
You cannot spit without hitting ten high detail organic modeling tutorials.
But try to find a complete high detail hard surface modeling tutorial complete with high res and low res and materials and textures and normal maps and there is bupkiss!
It like you see these 80+ hour organic modeling tuts where they model every single pore and create gorgeous models with flowing cloth, awe complex materials, textures, normal mapping. The for hard surface you get lets demonstrate how to model a cube!
I want to see something complex! With panel lines and rivets complex surfaces like this ... http://www.military-meshes.com/forum/showthread.php?4847-Mi-24&highlight=hind
https://www.3dmotive.com/f1122
also the Max one with a different tank is pretty good. I wasn't clear if you meant Z-Brush only though.
Should be interesting to see how things turn out with zbrush's 4R7 as well.
I like the kit bash / boolean approach but I cant help but wonder if its really the concept artist that would be using that approach and then passing the concept model along to the 3d modeller to be cleaned up and baked? maybe the line between concept artist and modeller will get blurred a bit by this.
This is all true, but these inconveniences can easily be offloaded to outsourcing or less senior staff.
I think zbrush hard surface modeling will definitely upset the scene in a similar way as it did with organic modeling, but not necessarily in a good way.
At some point, a job as 3D artist might be basically a glorified retopo position where you will be cleaning up and rebuilding hard-surface zbrush models to make everything nice and tidy, then hand it to outsourcing for the lowpoly and baking.
Making a decent looking hard-surface zbrush "concept" doesn't take much longer than doing it in 2D. So studios will be getting those from off-site high-profile 3D concept designers, leaving little creative input for the actual studio positions.
It can make the modeling process much faster and streamlined, but, as you said, at the expense of a tidy pipeline and creative ownership for many professionals.