Hey you were right Jesse thanks I went back and fixed it.
And thanks Jdinges for the feedback. I shy away too much from experimenting and tend to stay true to what I know. Which generally ends up with a pretty bland diffues... Ill go back to it sometime this week and see what I can do.
In the mean time! Im finally on break, So Im working on portfolio pieces. Heres one Im working on. Its a tree growing through some rubble. Im having trouble making the leaves look full. Any help on the model or texture would be appreciated!
Alright well Ive been spending alot of time on trying to get the hang of normal maps and went back and practiced on three of my props. Im posting the renders with the normal maps I created for them. Any critiques on the normal maps and what I should do differently would be really helpful. Thanks.
So Im trying to figure out how to do better normal maps by building a high poly model and baking it onto the low. So heres what I came up with.
I think it looks alright? but the normal map it baked looks like this.
And this dosnt look like the normal maps I see everyone else here on polycount making. If anyone could give me some thoughts on this and let me know what I may be doing wrong that would be awesome. I built both the high and low poly in max 8.
You should tweak your projection cage a bit to get rid of that waviness that you have at the bottom of the curved surfaces. Simply pick the vertices of the bottom of the cage and move them up so that they are almost touching the bottom of the figure, and do the same for the other loop that has the horizontal adjoining faces, and then do a bake to texture. It should create a better map without the waviness. Also, make sure that high poly is not poking through the cage/envelope. And yeah, switch to tangent space, most likely you will want to use that type of normal map.
Tangent is relative to the model's normals, where as object/world space are relative to the world. So you'll get the full range of colors for the different sides of the model in object space maps.
pros and cons on object space:
good:
Can get better results with less geometry with hard edged mechanical stuff, whereas you would need to add in a lot of extra edges or seperate your mesh into multiple smoothing groups(which looks like shit) with tangent. Some engines handle tangent maps much better, like ue3. Lots of them dont.
bad:
Cant do mirroring, overlaying extra detail in photoshop only works *sometimes*.
also bad is that you cant use a world space normal map on a dynamic object since it would look funkeli funk when moved/deformed since the normals will still point in world space rather than with the objects new position.
Hey thanks alot for all the help and info. I went back and smoothed it first like you said animatr before baking it, and I also did what you said fogmann. It did help with the waviness. I also changed it to tangent instead of world. Heres my results.
Anyways I was still kinda thinking it would look more rounded on those two carved in lines. Should I be able to get better results than this? or is this the best the normal maps can do with such low poly? Thanks again for the help so far.
[ QUOTE ]
also bad is that you cant use a world space normal map on a dynamic object since it would look funkeli funk when moved/deformed since the normals will still point in world space rather than with the objects new position.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is wrong, if your programemrs tell you this they are just being lazy. We have dynamic props with object space, and can even rig and animate them. I'm pretty sure it even works with deformable meshes, but we havent really tested it much. Mainly just use it for hard surface stuff.
What you cant do is this: Rotate your model after generating normals in a 3d app or whatever, like if your workflow for level stuff involved placing all your objects in XSI or something you couldnt do it unless you had an instancing system that would keep track of the transforms for the meshes. But if you throw it on a world builder and your engine handles the transforms properly it will work just fine and you can place it however you want and make it dynamic or whatever, dosent matter.
I'm told object space is also cheaper, because tanget has to be converted to object space to be rendered anyway.
alright eq cool. I never really questioned the info, just the way i learned it back in the days.
nate: normalmaps cant do magic, that chesspiece is really low poly and no matter how much you tweak or fix the NM it wont get more roundnes until u add some more polys to the mesh. normalmap creates an illusion of depth. the geometry breaks it.
[ QUOTE ]
alright eq cool. I never really questioned the info, just the way i learned it back in the days.
nate: normalmaps cant do magic, that chesspiece is really low poly and no matter how much you tweak or fix the NM it wont get more roundnes until u add some more polys to the mesh. normalmap creates an illusion of depth. the geometr
y breaks it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah i was a little shocked myself one day, after having tons of problems getting decent results from tangent space maps i just asked, hey can i use object space? "Yep, we'll jush have to tweak the exporter so it will work on animated objects" Was a very happy day =D
So Ive been trying more and more to figure out normal maps. This one I think came out pretty good. I just want to explain my "normal map process" to everyone, and it would be extremely helpful to me if you would let me know if Im doing things right or wrong or what you might do differently.
So here it goes
I started by making the low poly version. Then I went in added smoothing groups so that it would smooth properly when I applied a turbosmooth. Then I turbosmoothed it with one iteration. I added some details then added another turbosmooth, added more details and then added one more iteration and added more details. Then I just baked the normals.
Anyways, any feedback on the model or my process would be very helpful to me. Thanks!
Ahh this is for Asas class huh. Ok your process isn't too bad but things to think of in the normal map. Stitching, Creases, Loose and Tight wrinkles. I am assuming its leather right?
Maybe the wood grain on the wood parts of the couch.
With the high poly you really want to put in every single detail that you can imagine would help the low poly.
Looking good Nate. I would just say to add a bump map for the wood grain. Because its not going to need to set out as much as a normal. Or just try the bump see how it looks first and make a decision. Usually a bump and a normal look very good together. I can't say anything else at the moment about it. The texture will bring out most of the issues. One last thing that I can see is that the closest two cushions look repetitive because of that pushed in bubble. You may want to add some pinching in the cushions to give it a tight in the corners and relaxed in the middle feel. Best thing to do is to go look at your couch or a chair cushion thats equivalent to the cushions on that piece of furniture. Hope this helps... Oh, could you post your reference?
Hey I appreciate the feedback, yea this is for Asa's class
For some of the smaller stuff like wood grains and stitches I was going to go back in and use either crazy bump or the nvidia filter. And yea Josh I see what you mean about the cusions, Ill go back and fix that. And unfortunately I dont know how to use zbrush or mudbox yet so I was just doing what I know. But Ill definately make another pass at this.
I was thinking more like crazybump or nvidia filter. Ya might try to reuse some uv space for some of the fronts and back of the cushions. the back of them aren't really too visable, so perhaps giving them smaller space or us the the fronts uv.
address's most of the things i see wrong with this.
remember its all about the texture and getting the biggest bang for your buck. If something can use the same texture and still look good then it should. All it takes to throw someone off is rotating something 90 or 180. you can get a whole lot of mileage off one section. The pillows are another one to use this with. Unwrap one then deform it and rotate it not the other way around. make your geo and your texture space work for you not the other way around. try going back threw and cleaning up the uv's and geo with my suggestions and youl find that it will save you lots of work on the texture.
If you need to learn some zbrush stuff. I wouldnt mind showing you. It would only take you 5 minutes and the results would be awsome. Thanks for posting reference. Helps the crit alot. Did you want that cushion on the bottom section to look like it was sat on or like the ref image? the ref image is really rounded compared to your model. Keep up the work. I also would say that you could add more polys to it if you wanted. I think the notches look fine modeled but if you feel you want to get it as low as possible the Normal would look find there too.
Hey thanks alot godzero for the critique. I went back and did what you said about the unwrap. I decided to keep the one pillow on the right seperate though, Im trying to make it look more used than the others. And I also tried to normal map the pegs and it looked really weird so I just changed it back, I think they might be sticking out too far to be effective in the normal map. And I havnt gotten a chance to do another pass on the high poly but Ill hopefully get to it in the future.
Anyways heres what Ive got now.
And thanks for the offer Josh. And yea I strayed from the reference on purpose, I wanted it to look more "sat in".
Finally got around to building a room to house these assets Ive been working on. Any feedback or critiques on the composition or models would be awesome.
Finished modelling the room (with the exception of that rocker) Anyways let me know what you think! Im gonna start unwrapping and texturing everything tommorow.
Your right about the fireplace, though I dont really know what to do make it more detailed...I just added a fireplace screen (which will be alpha mapped) and a few more chamfers to get rid of the sharpness. Any ideas?
And no Im building this from a blueprint I had to make first. here it is. (its not super accurate)
however Im using photo reference for all of the furniture.
have you found fireplace reference? if you're not clear on the detail, that would help. find a picture of a fireplace you like that will fit in the scene and model it near to it.
TGZ I have to disagree with some points in your image there.
The sofa is low enough poly that those divets on the arm sections could remain, they're only 10 triangles each and are on something that already is low poly. Also, the arm sections can be weird from the left of the couch to the right, but I wouldn't mirror them top-to-bottom. It'll look mirrored and throw the quality and reality of the couch out the window.
I do agree though that he only needs to do 2 cushion models. I'd also give more texel density to the cushions than I would the arm sides, not much - but more than what you've got there. Cutting the cushion count in half will make this rather easy to do - especially if you mirror the arm pieces.
Yea Ill go searching for better reference for the fire place sometime soon.
And Adam did you see the updated unwrap? I had changed it to just two cushions and gave them more texture space. Or did you actually mean that I should still give the cushions even more texture space than I gave them in the update? Sorry just a little confused by your post. In the mean time Ive moved on to texturing. Heres the first pass at the couch.
Im working with a 2048, Ill downsize it when I finish. Any critiques would be appreciated!
U need to work a lot more on this texture. U should add more chafe on corners, and the leather need some wrinkles 'cos u don't add them on the HP model. The leather texture is reapiting too much. Try to add them more varius details like scratches or some stains.
And IMO 2048 its huge texture, maybe too huge. 1024 shall be enough
hey I appreciate the feedback. I was only working with a 2048 to get alot of detail in then I was going to downsize it to 1024 or 512. And also I said this was only my first pass, I plan on making a couple more passes still on it still . Ill definately work with the leather texture more and put an AO pass on it. Thanks
Alright Im done with this one for now. I need to get to the other furniture if I want to get this done in time. But Id still like to hear any critiques you have for this one, cause Ill probably go back and fix things after I turn it in.
Texture is now 1024 not 2048. I didnt have time to go back and paint in wrinkles unfortunately like you suggested Porszek. And I tried to do the AO pass, but couldnt get it to work. When I tried to bake the AO, it kept coming up black. Anyone know why?
Doesn't look much like leather to me either. Definetly the spec map after looking at it. It doesn't have that shine that leather has. Need more spots of bright white in your spec map. Also with leather it wouldn't hurt like with wood to have a little bit of color in the spec map to really make it pop. Also the normal map can show texture of the leather a lot more.
Actually it looks like a decent suede leather, if that's what you're going for. Suede is cow leather turned inside out to give it a much more soft texture, which would have very little to no spec. Suede makes more sense for a couch like that than regular leather would, IMO.
The wood looks pretty nice, but a 1024 still seems too large for a single couch. If you have time try shrinking it to a 512 and sharpen it a little to get the detail back. If it looks good then keep it at 512, if not then stick with the 1024.
Keep trouble shooting the AO render, it should make a nice difference if you can get it to work.
Thanks for the critiques! Yea I agree about the leather. And no, unfortunately, I wasnt really going for a suede look heh. So I went back and I played around with the normal map and made the leather pop more. And I also added highlights and little bit of color to the spec map. So heres what I came up with. I think its a little bit more "leathery" now, but let me know what you think!
Hey thanks alot animatr. Your link didnt work though, it went to a page that said "you shouldnt be here". Unfortunately though I had to move on from the couch. Ill hopefully go back and tweak it some more in the future.
Anyways moving on! Ive started the table. Im going to try and finish it today so Ill be posting updates of it throughout the day. Any critiques would be awesome! Thanks.
You should really show things in tris. Well poly counts that is anyways. As for the low poly table you have a lot of wasted tris when the normal map should be giving you the shape you need.. Right now there is not much of a difference between the high poly and low poly from what i can see.
Thanks for the feedback Jesse. Yea with the high poly all I really added was the slits and the insets. I kind of ran out of ideas after that. What would you have suggested? And which waisted tris are you reffering to?
I think the bronze inlays for the design would really make this piece pop. Not sure though if that would work since it is from the arts and crafts period but I'm sure you can use some artistic license on this one and change it up a bit.
Replies
And thanks Jdinges for the feedback. I shy away too much from experimenting and tend to stay true to what I know. Which generally ends up with a pretty bland diffues... Ill go back to it sometime this week and see what I can do.
In the mean time! Im finally on break, So Im working on portfolio pieces. Heres one Im working on. Its a tree growing through some rubble. Im having trouble making the leaves look full. Any help on the model or texture would be appreciated!
Diffuse
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/RubbleTreeTexture.jpg
Normal
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/LCVPNormal.jpg
Normal
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/forkliftnormal.jpg
Normal
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/Statuenormal.jpg
I think it looks alright? but the normal map it baked looks like this.
And this dosnt look like the normal maps I see everyone else here on polycount making. If anyone could give me some thoughts on this and let me know what I may be doing wrong that would be awesome. I built both the high and low poly in max 8.
pros and cons on object space:
good:
Can get better results with less geometry with hard edged mechanical stuff, whereas you would need to add in a lot of extra edges or seperate your mesh into multiple smoothing groups(which looks like shit) with tangent. Some engines handle tangent maps much better, like ue3. Lots of them dont.
bad:
Cant do mirroring, overlaying extra detail in photoshop only works *sometimes*.
Anyways I was still kinda thinking it would look more rounded on those two carved in lines. Should I be able to get better results than this? or is this the best the normal maps can do with such low poly? Thanks again for the help so far.
also bad is that you cant use a world space normal map on a dynamic object since it would look funkeli funk when moved/deformed since the normals will still point in world space rather than with the objects new position.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is wrong, if your programemrs tell you this they are just being lazy. We have dynamic props with object space, and can even rig and animate them. I'm pretty sure it even works with deformable meshes, but we havent really tested it much. Mainly just use it for hard surface stuff.
What you cant do is this: Rotate your model after generating normals in a 3d app or whatever, like if your workflow for level stuff involved placing all your objects in XSI or something you couldnt do it unless you had an instancing system that would keep track of the transforms for the meshes. But if you throw it on a world builder and your engine handles the transforms properly it will work just fine and you can place it however you want and make it dynamic or whatever, dosent matter.
I'm told object space is also cheaper, because tanget has to be converted to object space to be rendered anyway.
nate: normalmaps cant do magic, that chesspiece is really low poly and no matter how much you tweak or fix the NM it wont get more roundnes until u add some more polys to the mesh. normalmap creates an illusion of depth. the geometry breaks it.
alright eq cool. I never really questioned the info, just the way i learned it back in the days.
nate: normalmaps cant do magic, that chesspiece is really low poly and no matter how much you tweak or fix the NM it wont get more roundnes until u add some more polys to the mesh. normalmap creates an illusion of depth. the geometr
y breaks it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah i was a little shocked myself one day, after having tons of problems getting decent results from tangent space maps i just asked, hey can i use object space? "Yep, we'll jush have to tweak the exporter so it will work on animated objects" Was a very happy day =D
So Ive been trying more and more to figure out normal maps. This one I think came out pretty good. I just want to explain my "normal map process" to everyone, and it would be extremely helpful to me if you would let me know if Im doing things right or wrong or what you might do differently.
So here it goes
I started by making the low poly version. Then I went in added smoothing groups so that it would smooth properly when I applied a turbosmooth. Then I turbosmoothed it with one iteration. I added some details then added another turbosmooth, added more details and then added one more iteration and added more details. Then I just baked the normals.
Anyways, any feedback on the model or my process would be very helpful to me. Thanks!
Model was done in 3dsmax8, 666 polys.
Maybe the wood grain on the wood parts of the couch.
With the high poly you really want to put in every single detail that you can imagine would help the low poly.
Keep up the hard work.
For some of the smaller stuff like wood grains and stitches I was going to go back in and use either crazy bump or the nvidia filter. And yea Josh I see what you mean about the cusions, Ill go back and fix that. And unfortunately I dont know how to use zbrush or mudbox yet so I was just doing what I know. But Ill definately make another pass at this.
Anyways heres the reference.
address's most of the things i see wrong with this.
remember its all about the texture and getting the biggest bang for your buck. If something can use the same texture and still look good then it should. All it takes to throw someone off is rotating something 90 or 180. you can get a whole lot of mileage off one section. The pillows are another one to use this with. Unwrap one then deform it and rotate it not the other way around. make your geo and your texture space work for you not the other way around. try going back threw and cleaning up the uv's and geo with my suggestions and youl find that it will save you lots of work on the texture.
Anyways heres what Ive got now.
And thanks for the offer Josh. And yea I strayed from the reference on purpose, I wanted it to look more "sat in".
And no Im building this from a blueprint I had to make first. here it is. (its not super accurate)
however Im using photo reference for all of the furniture.
The sofa is low enough poly that those divets on the arm sections could remain, they're only 10 triangles each and are on something that already is low poly. Also, the arm sections can be weird from the left of the couch to the right, but I wouldn't mirror them top-to-bottom. It'll look mirrored and throw the quality and reality of the couch out the window.
I do agree though that he only needs to do 2 cushion models. I'd also give more texel density to the cushions than I would the arm sides, not much - but more than what you've got there. Cutting the cushion count in half will make this rather easy to do - especially if you mirror the arm pieces.
And Adam did you see the updated unwrap? I had changed it to just two cushions and gave them more texture space. Or did you actually mean that I should still give the cushions even more texture space than I gave them in the update? Sorry just a little confused by your post. In the mean time Ive moved on to texturing. Heres the first pass at the couch.
Im working with a 2048, Ill downsize it when I finish. Any critiques would be appreciated!
And IMO 2048 its huge texture, maybe too huge. 1024 shall be enough
Diffuse:
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/CouchUnwrap2.jpg
Spec
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/CouchSpec.jpg
Normal
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/CouchNormal.jpg
Texture is now 1024 not 2048. I didnt have time to go back and paint in wrinkles unfortunately like you suggested Porszek. And I tried to do the AO pass, but couldnt get it to work. When I tried to bake the AO, it kept coming up black. Anyone know why?
IMO, of course.
The wood looks pretty nice, but a 1024 still seems too large for a single couch. If you have time try shrinking it to a 512 and sharpen it a little to get the detail back. If it looks good then keep it at 512, if not then stick with the 1024.
Keep trouble shooting the AO render, it should make a nice difference if you can get it to work.
new spec
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/CouchSpec2.jpg
new normal
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/CouchNormal2.jpg
And unfortunately I have to be finished with this one and move on. But again Id still like to hear your critiques.
check this out:
http://images.evalu8.org/images/leather-couch.jpg
leather has a lot of shine and contrat of lights and darks. keep it up man, your stuff is looking real nice!
Anyways moving on! Ive started the table. Im going to try and finish it today so Ill be posting updates of it throughout the day. Any critiques would be awesome! Thanks.
Anyways heres the first pass on the texture.
Diffuse:
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/MainTableUnwrap.jpg
Normal:
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/TableNormal-1.jpg
and thanks for the reference squated.
Diffuse
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/MainTableUnwrap-1.jpg
Normal
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/TableNormal-2.jpg
Spec
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e117/SkepticalNate/TableSpec.jpg