Seeking feedback for my WIP stylized UE5 environment.
triangle
Howdy!
I've been working on this UE5 scene on and off while learning Substance Designer, and finally got it to a state that I feel comfortable to ask feedback. I am relatively new to environment art and this time I decided to use exsisting concept instead of making my own.
So, the scene is loosely based on the concept by Aurelien Segeat. It's not supposed to be a 1 to 1 recreation, but I would appreciate any feedback on how to make it pop or just in general how to improve it. It's still missing VFX, animations and any other final touches (like the vertex painted walls), as I am still unsure about the current composition or which light direction works better.
Here are the screenshots:
Cheers!
I've been working on this UE5 scene on and off while learning Substance Designer, and finally got it to a state that I feel comfortable to ask feedback. I am relatively new to environment art and this time I decided to use exsisting concept instead of making my own.
So, the scene is loosely based on the concept by Aurelien Segeat. It's not supposed to be a 1 to 1 recreation, but I would appreciate any feedback on how to make it pop or just in general how to improve it. It's still missing VFX, animations and any other final touches (like the vertex painted walls), as I am still unsure about the current composition or which light direction works better.
Here are the screenshots:
Cheers!
Replies
This is the main reference for (almost) everything in the scene: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/NyrXXd The textures do indeed need a second pass, but I guess I got carried away struggling with the composition. These are the textures I am currently using in the scene, but needs to be adjusted for UE: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/w04kvg. I am actually using the "fluffy" tree method for my trees, but I need to play a bit more with the shaders as it doesn't clearly translate that they are supposed to be pine trees. And yes, as mentioned VFX is coming (including birds and wind whisps).
Why did the builders leave half of the building hanging when there's viable places to build all around on relatively flat ground? To make something look good, you need logic, and to gain logic, in this case you could study how buildings are made, and why/where they are built. If you want a building on stilts for instance, this would mean the surrounding landscape is inadequate for building upon; like marshland, swamps, or on the side of a very steep mountain, or possibly due to artificial limitations, like how you get overhangs on old english buildings due to property tax law being based on the size of your plot on x & z but not y. https://englandspuzzle.com/tudor-architecture/
The wheels connecting the belt to the turbine are too large, and would be energy inefficient compared to the mass of the sails. You're going for a stylized look, but even stylized art requires some logic to work visually.
Currently, I would say large area could use some subtle variation/break up. Both sky and ground have cool colors, maybe push ground towards warm to create some contrast between the two. Maybe some more color accents and groups of rocks or flowers. Additional elements can further support the feeling of wind current, like trees bending or some additional flags.
Keep it up!
That's why I decided to post this here and ask for feedback, instead of banging my head against the wall. :P Also, I understand your point about logic, but I don't want to stray too far from the original concept art. I'll keep your tips in mind when I start iterating on the actual building.
Hi, and thanks for the feedback! I'm not very good at doing paintovers, although it's probably something I should learn at some point. The colors are from the original concept, which has a bit of a cold and saturated tone. As I mentioned above, I don't want to stray too much from it or include more colors in the existing palette since I want to limit myself to working within the given constraints. The trees and grass also have a animation / shader so make the scene more lively.
If you want to stay close to the concept, I think the sky has a gradient, which increases contrast to the gras. Plus there are also elements that pull the focus towards the structure. Rough overpaint:
In the concept, there also some lines in the gras, could be achieved by groupings of flowers. But the structure could be enhanced as well. I think part of the challenge is to adapt the original in a way that it stands on its own in 3d, so I wouldn't hesitate to play. Maybe the lift not being pulled up all the way could also make it's function more clear. But some things are also hard to tell in a still image.
Keep it up!
Next up is fixing minor tweaks I already spotted from the video and then settting up an Artstation page for the project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSke7kVLz4s
On that paneling texture its also hard to see the planks of wood, I think revisiting the normal and/or the ao maps would help it look like its actually made from wood planks.
Tomorrow, it's (finally) time to set up ArtStation and post the project...
Some thoughts on the current state:
I think the highlight on the building ThisisVictoriaZ mentioned is still prominent and it makes the lighting/scene look a bit artificial.
It looks like you interpreted the green streaks as paint. I would have interpreted it as weathering from rain running down the facade and giving grounds for some mossy growth. If its paint I would question why the inhabitants would use such a different color? Generally, some foliage could be used to connect the structure with the environment. E.g. some climbers growing up, moss on walls and between roof tiles.
The building looks a bit barren/simplistic. You can add variation to surfaces using masks (vertex painted, world projected, second UV channel). Modulate Color, roughness, normal strength, ... This is also a way to highlight certain areas.
With the camera getting close to the building, it can look flat and empty. A way to add fidelity would be to use some detail modules alongside the tiling materials. E.g. some individual rocks, or roof tiles that break up the silhouette. Such modules could potentially textured by mapping their UVs to the tiling textures. I believe going beyond the concept here is necessary to make it work in 3d with this camera.
But I understand that you worked for some time on this now and might also want to move on.
Keep it up!
Hi! Yes, if you don't have the resources to improve the fidelity of the structure, I would leave out close up shots. Can add it back in at a later time if you decide to give the project another round.
I just realized the original concept includes some moss/vines and other elements I missed. I should add those, as I already have the moss material made for the stone pavement. Hopefully that should increase the fidelity.