Low-Poly way too low ? Objects that were "sitting" on it now just "float"

Raphael_Bouch

Hello everyone. I have this fuselage over here with all these little details sitting on top that were matching perfectly while I was doing the highpoly. Now however when making a low things just "float above it". I do plan to bake everything. How should I fix this ?

Thanks in advance !

kanga

If it is your own design make separate pieces with overshoot: extend the nose of the fuselage or the depth of the cap. If you use selection sets to bake there wont be artifacts. Parts that can be joined should be: the cap and the fuselage could be joined. Look at retopo techniques. Sometimes curves just need more polys then you can use hooks to control the mesh resolution over the model:

Raphael_Bouch

@kanga Hey thanks for the reply ! I don't fully understand though : If I extend the exhaust pipe (the cylinder thingy) then it will create baking errors no ? Should I also extend the highpoly mesh then ? Would need some visual examples lol

Eric Chadwick

Examples http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Normal_Map_Modeling

Neox

you could also adjust the lowpoly of the plane to be planar to these elements. the normalmap should easily compensate for the mesh difference.

pior

@Raphael_Bouch You're thinking of this the wrong way around. The ingame lowpoly is not supposed to be a passive result, dictated by whatever was done to create the high. The ingame lowpoly *is* the model that requires 100% control and proactive care on how it is built - because that is the one that gets in the game. And *from there*, the amount of edges you decide to put in it will dictate how the bakes will behave.

Put differently : just because you built you source highpoly first, doesn't mean that everything will be dictated from that. The amount of edges needed for the low to look good and for the bakes to behave well comes first, and requires planning (or at least some foresight). There is no rule of the universe that states that the low has to come from the subd cage of the high. As a matter of fact it is rarely the case (even though they have things in common of course).

If anything, even though it might seem to make sense initially, building a full high first is not always the best idea - for the reasons above, but also because not every part of a game model necessarily needs to be baked from high.

Raphael_Bouch

@pior Hey ! Thanks for your reply !

I decided to add verts all around the fuselage so it matches perfectly with the exhaust pipe. Is it what you meant by making it the "proactive model" ?

Thanks !

pior

What I mean is that what to do with the low is 100% up to you to control, as this is the one and only model that goes in game.

Alex_J

i'm not super keen on this sort of thing, but if you are trying to save total edges and make things look as good as possible, wouldn't just adding more edgeloops along the long side of the cylinder be best? Then you dont see the unrealistic faceting which gives away the low poly, and you don't need so many triangles just for the one spot.
like if you can afford triangles for all the protruding bits, is saving 20 extra edge loops for the fuselage really doing any favor? 

pior

I think that for some odd reason the OP is still under the impression that the # of edges of the low has to be the same as that of the highpoly cage.

Klunk

seems a odd way to go, given the must have quads on the pipe surround to then add a load of thin tri's. As Kanga suggested in the second post just add more polys in that area of the fuselage so it can be matched to the pipe with no gaps.
in the simplest terms something like....
or in your case something like....

if you want to stitch it in adding this geometry would make that neater too and the the tris not so long and thin.

Raphael_Bouch

@Klunk Hey ! A picture truly worth 1000 words. I just added a couple extra loops around and it matches the shape now. Is it fine if there are still some mini-gaps (nothing noticeable though) or will it cause issues later like some clipping maybe ?

Regardless thanks a lot everyone who replied you guys all rock !

pior

I would say that you are currently dwelling/overthinking way too much about "the current step", which is blinding you about the requirements of the overall process.

Of course I understand the desire to progress carefully in an attempt to do things right, but with something as complex as game asset baking this is IMHO the wrong approach and a recipe for a lot of wasted time (and misunderstandings). Instead, just focus on a mini project (for instance : a simple propeller, a simple crate) to get a good feel of the process *as a whole*, all the way to texturing and ingame integration. Only once you've done that will you be able to take proper decisions about this particular project/asset.