best way to show realtime assets?

CompanionCube

hi

just wondering what the best way to show my game artwork. i think the max veiwport with directX shaders kinda sucks. i've been playing with Xnormals 3d viewer which is really great and so simple to use but i think there could be better ways. gona try sticking in unreal 3 but to get really good materials in unreal u need to know waht your doing, eat3d.com look like they have some good tutorials but can't afford.

so what do u guys use when shwoing off your work?

(i heard there was a thread over at game artists about realtime beauty shots but could not find)

thanks

Mark Dygert

My site is a mess and when I redo/update it, rendering is the way to go. With a nice simple 3 point light set up and neutral background gradient that is consistent for all models. Nice and dramatic but not over the top.

I also suggest mixing it with construction shots of a black wire overlay on a textured model, which can also be rendered or sometimes high res viewport grabs work but not always.

Not sure what 3D app you're using otherwise I could give more specific instructions =/

MoP

I just render out of Max using standard materials, with Catmull-Rom filtering and a simple shadow-mapped light setup.

Sometimes I think viewport screengrabs can look even better than rendering...

Putting them in a game engine makes some sense, because that shows potential employers that you understand at least some of the processes needed to get models working in a game.

vik

CompanionCube wrote: »

hi

just wondering what the best way to show my game artwork. i think the max veiwport with directX shaders kinda sucks. i've been playing with Xnormals 3d viewer which is really great and so simple to use but i think there could be better ways. gona try sticking in unreal 3 but to get really good materials in unreal u need to know waht your doing, eat3d.com look like they have some good tutorials but can't afford.

so what do u guys use when shwoing off your work?

(i heard there was a thread over at game artists about realtime beauty shots but could not find)

thanks

is this the one?

http://www.gameartisans.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3247

CompanionCube

thanks vik !!! was looking for that

vik

no probs mate :>

CompanionCube

had a bit more luck with 3ds max directX shaders. there some great ones here but this one particularly. only down side does not do shadows. http://www.bencloward.com/shaders_NormalMapSpecular3lights.shtml

as for unreal engine, managed to get the character in as a static mesh and make a basic material for it, but it does look pretty sweet and has shadows but still needs alot of work.

Xnormal is good but does not do specular maps or opacity but is still a pretty decent 3d viewer

Mark Dygert

I think you can turn on real time shadows in the viewport by right clicking, and in "Viewport lighting and Shadows"?

CompanionCube

ye, by setting the lighting to best but it doesn't affect the directX shader

MoP

CompanionCube wrote: »

Xnormal is good but does not do specular maps or opacity but is still a pretty decent 3d viewer

Yes it does... it does specular maps, gloss maps, opacity maps, glow maps, normal maps, diffuse maps...

Jet_Pilot

In my own opinion I wouldn't show anything with out some sort of GI in the render, unless it was already baked into the texture. A view port capture of the JUST the normals on the low rez then maaaaaaayyyyybbbeee. But only if it looks freakin sweet.

Ghostscape

Jet_Pilot wrote: »

In my own opinion I wouldn't show anything with out some sort of GI in the render, unless it was already baked into the texture. A view port capture of the JUST the normals on the low rez then maaaaaaayyyyybbbeee. But only if it looks freakin sweet.

Posting things with a GI bake like that drives me nuts - I like seeing good lighting setups, but so many folks don't know how to light something properly and just toss a skylight in to make it look good - it hides flaws in the models, doesn't show off normal maps and spec maps properly (which are usually nonexistent or poorly done in art that just has a GI bake anyways).

I'm all for software renders instead of game screencaps or viewport screencaps, but the GI skylight approach that a lot of people do tends to be there to cover up rookie mistakes.

Michael Knubben

screengrabs ftw!

I was worried that wouldn't be a viable way to work with normalmapped assets, but Xnormal has proven me wrong. Minimal hassle, yet a lot of tweakability.

CompanionCube

My mistake MoP. kinda sounds silly, but i completely missed the scroll bar....what a noob lol

Sage

I suggest you learn to light things, once you know how to set up a simple 3 point light setup that makes your models pop it really doesn't matter if it's a viewport or offline renderer. Both require good light for the model to really look good.

Jet_Pilot

Ghostscape wrote: »

Posting things with a GI bake like that drives me nuts - I like seeing good lighting setups, but so many folks don't know how to light something properly and just toss a skylight in to make it look good - it hides flaws in the models, doesn't show off normal maps and spec maps properly (which are usually nonexistent or poorly done in art that just has a GI bake anyways).

I'm all for software render instead of game screencaps or viewport screencaps, but the GI skylight approach that a lot of people do tends to be there to cover up rookie mistakes.

I'm talking about a real mental ray/ Vray render. Using a light tracer skylight totally flattens anything and your right makes it look noobish.. but you don't need a sky light... you just need something that is going to calculate photon bounces and color bleed.

Peris

Jet_Pilot wrote: »

I'm talking about a real mental ray/ Vray render. Using a light tracer skylight totally flattens anything and your right makes it look noobish.. but you don't need a sky light... you just need something that is going to calculate photon bounces and color bleed.

but why? Your showing off game art, so your model should look good as a realtime asset, theres no point in showing it off with fancy render setups, because thats not how your model will look like in a game engine.

MoP

Indeed, I agree with Peris - you're showing off game art, so display it in a manner that it will actually be seen in-game. Just a few lights, only shadow-maps, no bounced lighting or anything. Stuff like that is essentially "faking" quality - your model/texture should look great on its own without needing any extra bounced light or ambient occlusion.

For stuff like displaying highpoly source meshes, then sure use whatever nice fancy lighting setup you want, but for the actual in-game asset, I'd usually stay away from those. Whenever I see someone's "game art" portfolio rendered with fancy lighting solutions, I always wonder what they're trying to hide...

thomasp

dunno, i'd go for the HDRI-enhanced render if you can be bothered. that will pop next to the average model and work well for convincing a producer every time. at the end of the day you are hired as a make-stuff-look-cool-person and who knows when your knowledge of bending a renderer to your will will come in handy later down the road.

if you want to show off assets like they will look most likely in a game engine, why not reduce the textures, filter them in some nasty way, make sure the lighting casts blocky shadows all over the asset, sort your alpha planes the wrong way and if it's a character, please bend it into some unnatural pose that shows of texture-stretching and twisted normals in all their glory. lastly as the icing on the cake desaturate the colors and put some fuzzy bloom all over it and you#re almost hired.

me, personally i use screengrabs from the max-viewport. but i am too impatient to wait for a render anyway.

MoP

lol thomasp, yes, i get your point - obviously there will be limitations and cutbacks in an actual engine which will make stuff look worse than it started out, but currently you will NEVER get realtime radiosity and soft shadows to the extent that something like VRay will do offline.

but i agree, i'm too impatient to wait for a render

CompanionCube

have you guys seen the Ambient occlusion quailty and other lighting in the unreal update for gears of war 2. still obviously not as good as offline rendering can get but pretty sweet for a game engine.

thomasp when you screengrab from max do you use directx shaders for the normal maps?

thomasp

CompanionCube : yes i do. i usually use the shader the asset was developed with in the first place and i do not just make a screengrab: i set up a bunch of materials and light situations and grab those to compose the images later on. some serve as passes, others as masks. this way, i can fake multiple lights (most shaders do not support them in the viewport), shadows, reflections and all kinds of other stuff while staying in my 2d/3d app environment.

you can easily write a script to screengrab camera moves too, i tried that for making movies with a compositing tool. feasible to create turnaround videos and stuff without the testrender->tweak parameters->testrender-cycle.

i do not like to show things in an engine because of all the import- and material/scene-setup trouble. just wastes my time and if the asset was developed with another technology in mind in the first place, there's the possibility for loads of issues beyond my control.

vik

Jet_Pilot wrote: »

I'm talking about a real mental ray/ Vray render. Using a light tracer skylight totally flattens anything and your right makes it look noobish.. but you don't need a sky light... you just need something that is going to calculate photon bounces and color bleed.

I think the biggest problem is that mnost people use skylight improperly. It is not supposed to be the main/only light in a scene, it should be used (in my mind) as a really low ambient light that complements the main light.

Joao Sapiro

imo showing realtime assets should be done realtime, easy as that, if you only have max to show it off you can do a viewport capture with lights , its the closes there is to a game engine , rendering with vray etc its a little weird imo , its like rendering a lowpoly model with a 256 texture with a skylight and omni with shadow maps when a simple print screen will do.

funshark

same as Johny.
But i omit the "imo". There is no sense to show realtime game assets with advanced offline rendering. The model has to look good without that.

Personally, i'm searching for a good solution to show them inside a 3D applet like enliven by wiewpoint... http://www.viewpoint.com/technologies/enliven.shtml

Mark Dygert

I think the final submissions for contests is a good rule of thumb to stick to. Beauty renders OK, as long as they come with construction shots.

As for 3D applets, they are a waste of time unless they are naturally supported by every type of web browser. No one is going to go down load a plug-in, restart their web browser and or computer just to view some 3D models. I HIGHLY suggest that you also include 2D pics along with the 3D viewer because people just won't bother with the 3D unless it works the first time.

funshark

Vig> yep, 3D applets are way too young to be exploited in this way, for sure... maybe in the next months ( years? )