How to present your model in the best way possible
polycounter lvl 18
This was missing, so I had a stab at it.
People are always posting images of their models online and asking for feedback. Unfortunately at times the model is presented so poorly that it makes giving feedback nigh impossible. The main problems are tiny images with no contrast on the model but a huge contrast between the model and the background. Hopefully this will give you some points on how to present your work in a better way - because you'd rather people commented on your model than on your shoddy presentation skills.
Firstly, make the images big enough to see - a 200x200 pixel image just doesn't cut it. The bigger the better, within reason, but remember to crop the dead space from the image as there is no point in posting an 800x800 pixel image and only using a tiny part to contain the artwork. With larger images come largerfilesizes , so you'll want to optimise it (Photoshop and ImageReady both do this well). Compression can be a problem, but if you save as JPG with 60-70% quality you'll probably be fine.
To keep people focused on the artwork, make the background a neutral gray colour. Colours can distract, and very light or dark backgrounds made it harder to pick out details, edges and contrast. Why do you think most 3d packages use a neutral gray background by default?
There is always a debate over whether screengrabs or renders are better. I prefer renders, since I can drop a few lights in the scene to pop out the details, but they take time to set up.
If you do decide to render then you'll want have at least 2 lights, one key light and one fill light so that the shape can be defined. You need lights to to pick out the shadows so that the form can be seen. Skylights are all the rage, but without at least one directional light they can make the model appear flat. There is an excellent tutorial on 3d lighting at http://www.3drender.com/light/3point.html which will help you understand what the key and fill lights do.
The lighting of a model is subjective, and depends on what you want to highlight - the geometry, the colour/diffuse textures, the specular/normal maps all require different presentation to pick out various aspects. It's often much easier to read geometry when there are no textures applied and you have one of two solid colours. Colour/diffuse textures often benefit from very flat lighting, and showing off normal/spec maps usually requires a strong directional light. Experimentation is the key here, but experimentation takes time, which is another reason screengrabs are popular.
Whether you choose to screengrab or render, you really should use a perspective view - using an orthographic view will cause the model to look distorted as you'll have no foreshortening or depth.Ideally you'll also render or grab your model from several angles and either post separate images or compile them onto one larger image. As well as front/back views, a 3/4 shot is very useful.
Render/screengrab with and without a wireframe. The wireframes are essential if you want people to give feedback on the flow of your mesh, and they are easy to setup. The simplest method in many 3d packages is to duplicate your model and make the duplicate every so slightly larger, then apply awireframe material to it.
Some final thoughts
If you want critique on a specific area, ask for it and provide a closeup shot of that area - remember you can crop it to just the part you want to highlight. Similarly if youwant an area to be ignored for the purpose of feedback, state that - but don't be upset if people comment on it anyway.
Flame on.
People are always posting images of their models online and asking for feedback. Unfortunately at times the model is presented so poorly that it makes giving feedback nigh impossible. The main problems are tiny images with no contrast on the model but a huge contrast between the model and the background. Hopefully this will give you some points on how to present your work in a better way - because you'd rather people commented on your model than on your shoddy presentation skills.
Firstly, make the images big enough to see - a 200x200 pixel image just doesn't cut it. The bigger the better, within reason, but remember to crop the dead space from the image as there is no point in posting an 800x800 pixel image and only using a tiny part to contain the artwork. With larger images come largerfilesizes , so you'll want to optimise it (Photoshop and ImageReady both do this well). Compression can be a problem, but if you save as JPG with 60-70% quality you'll probably be fine.
To keep people focused on the artwork, make the background a neutral gray colour. Colours can distract, and very light or dark backgrounds made it harder to pick out details, edges and contrast. Why do you think most 3d packages use a neutral gray background by default?
There is always a debate over whether screengrabs or renders are better. I prefer renders, since I can drop a few lights in the scene to pop out the details, but they take time to set up.
If you do decide to render then you'll want have at least 2 lights, one key light and one fill light so that the shape can be defined. You need lights to to pick out the shadows so that the form can be seen. Skylights are all the rage, but without at least one directional light they can make the model appear flat. There is an excellent tutorial on 3d lighting at http://www.3drender.com/light/3point.html which will help you understand what the key and fill lights do.
The lighting of a model is subjective, and depends on what you want to highlight - the geometry, the colour/diffuse textures, the specular/normal maps all require different presentation to pick out various aspects. It's often much easier to read geometry when there are no textures applied and you have one of two solid colours. Colour/diffuse textures often benefit from very flat lighting, and showing off normal/spec maps usually requires a strong directional light. Experimentation is the key here, but experimentation takes time, which is another reason screengrabs are popular.
Whether you choose to screengrab or render, you really should use a perspective view - using an orthographic view will cause the model to look distorted as you'll have no foreshortening or depth.Ideally you'll also render or grab your model from several angles and either post separate images or compile them onto one larger image. As well as front/back views, a 3/4 shot is very useful.
Render/screengrab with and without a wireframe. The wireframes are essential if you want people to give feedback on the flow of your mesh, and they are easy to setup. The simplest method in many 3d packages is to duplicate your model and make the duplicate every so slightly larger, then apply awireframe material to it.
Some final thoughts
If you want critique on a specific area, ask for it and provide a closeup shot of that area - remember you can crop it to just the part you want to highlight. Similarly if youwant an area to be ignored for the purpose of feedback, state that - but don't be upset if people comment on it anyway.
Flame on.
Replies
as for setting up a wireframe for render:
In 3ds Max, u just need to duplicate your model, and apply the 'push' modifier with a value of 0.1 to make it "ever so slightly larger" and then add a material to it with the 'Wire' checkbox ticked. This is how i do it anyhow.
How many more chapters until you're done with your book?
using an orthographic view will cause the model to look distorted as you'll have no foreshortening or depth.
[/ QUOTE ]
That line bothers me because the image will still have both forshortening and depth (foreshortening simply refers to an object that is coming closer to the viewer and overlaps itself, and depth can be shown through overlapping as well). It just wont contain any perspective. Objects that are really close to you are the same size as objects that are very far from you, unlike real life where objects that are close to you would appear much larger then an object that was far away.
I have to sortof disagree on the perspective view tho. Perspective is required for body shots, but when it comes to head closeups otrho can be better. A matter of preference I guess. Talk to Firestarter about that, he's an ortho evangelist and I must agree it has big advantages especially while modelling.
I also feel like screengrabs have a more dynamic and sharp feel thatn renders. I personnally don't render anymore except if I want a GI look (which often makes the model appear smaller than it should because of the scale model feel it gives).
3point can be great! It has great presentation qualities, even if most of the time ambiant viewport color + 1 omni does the trick for me. There is a very nice automated 3point generator in the Blur script pack, you might want to check it out for the article.
As a general note I think it is nice to have genral purpose renders (grey background, neutral-ish lights, screengrab) and also a moody render (dramatic lighting, shadowcasting pose character, aso). These two together help to demonstrate both the technical qualities of the model and its possible integration in a game world.
Thanks for the read Rickster!
Nice writing rick !
foreshortening simply refers to an object that is coming closer to the viewer and overlaps itself
[/ QUOTE ]
Foreshortening literaly means "to make shorter", ie using shorter lines for the same object to make it appear further away. I think Rick is using the world properly.
As for the zbrush bit : you can have your base obj open in max in perspective all the time and load it whenever needed as first subdivision level in Zb, the details carry on.
On a side note, its a a great technique for working on posed characters within Zbrush! But Im sure you know it already anyway
I think it is not to be abused, or it could become the new lensflare - or even, the new BLOOM!
Hope this is not deviating too much from the original purpose of the thread.
Edit : I need to mention that FireKi11ingburnerstart introduced me to that DOF thing he found... god knows how? But the kid forgot, haha
and you fogot to add : never render a lowpoly model with gi, it will look crap
Nice writing rick !
[/ QUOTE ]
and is also pointless, real low poly fuckers should use 100% illumination, for texture showinoffiness,
nice thread.
maxes DOV is a simple trick of moving the camera slightly and overlaying the display, the more times the better quality/longer, one down fall cant do moving stufff.