No point really in rendering this in marmoset. You'd be better off taking a screen in your native 3d package with just a basic 75%self-illuminated lambert. In fact rendering in marmoset is making your work look worse.
Marmoset is better off being used for something that is normal mapped.
dur23, thanks for the crit. The problem is I did normal map the treads and wheels, as well as did a height map for the regular texture so that I wouldn't have to model everything out, and then I just did a composite with all the normal maps together into one.
The problem with Maya(is what I built the tank in) is that the High quality rendering in the software is really crappy..my machine sometimes just crashes altogether from it, and yet if I do lighting in either Marmoset or Unreal, it works a lot better.
Perhaps I can adjust the normal map so that it stands out more?
EDIT: here are the texture flats.. let me know if you want to see a full on Normal map instead of the 50/50.
dur23, thanks for the crit. The problem is I did normal map the treads and wheels, as well as did a height map for the regular texture so that I wouldn't have to model everything out, and then I just did a composite with all the normal maps together into one.
The problem with Maya(is what I built the tank in) is that the High quality rendering in the software is really crappy..my machine sometimes just crashes altogether from it, and yet if I do lighting in either Marmoset or Unreal, it works a lot better.
Perhaps I can adjust the normal map so that it stands out more?
Were the normal maps generated from high poly mesh? If so then perhaps you should try inverting the green channel of the normals maps. If it wasn't then you probably need a whole lot more geometry in your low poly to account for the details of making a high poly. Make sense?
edit: Oh, and maya's high quality render is actually quite nice (no not as good udk or marmo) but if it's crashing your machine, then, well....that sucks for you, i guess?
Were the normal maps generated from high poly mesh? If so then perhaps you should try inverting the green channel of the normals maps. If it wasn't then you probably need a whole lot more geometry in your low poly to account for the details of making a high poly. Make sense
Yes, the normals for the treads and wheels were generated from a high poly mesh of them. The other things I just adjusted using a height map(adjusted the areas I wanted to pop out with white and then made a revised normal map of those other pieces I didn't model in Crazybump.)
edit: Oh, and maya's high quality render is actually quite nice (no not as good udk or marmo) but if it's crashing your machine, then, well....that sucks for you, i guess?
Guys relax, I didn't mean to insult your preference for maya's high quality rendering. What I meant to say is that it is easier to just import my models into Unreal or Marmoset, and have the normals appear in there, as opposed to Maya. For some reason, when I use high quality rendering, Maya will crash or sometimes the model will be all black, and I am not sure as to why. The normals(directional normals, not the maps) seem to be displaying properly in Maya, and I know it can't be an issue with my video card because these models obviously will shown up in Unreal or Marmoset with even more complex lighting setups then in Maya.)
The Maya viewport is real hit or miss. I recently discovered I can use the high quality again after one of the recent ATI drivers. On this and my previous card, it was extremely slow, with sierpenski-like shadows.
Back on topic, it really doesn't look like your marmoset render is using the normal map. The maps are awfully blobby around the edges, and likely need fixing up.
Back on topic, it really doesn't look like your marmoset render is using the normal map. The maps are awfully blobby around the edges, and likely need fixing up.
Yes I agree. Thank you for the constructive crit throttlekitty. I need to go back and rework- the normal map.
The thing that strikes me the most, is that the low resolution mesh looks VERY rough compared to the texture size.
Because if it is for a RTS game, or maybe some iphone thing, the texture is too high res; on the contrary if it is for use in a FPS or third person game in the current generation of games, the model is very crude.
bbob makes a good point, other than that, try creating a spec map, even just turning specular on without a map will make the normal map much more apparent. If you do have it turned on(which it doesn't look like atm), then turn the settings up higher. A tank is metal after all...
I'm guessing there wasn't ever a highpoly, you really made the normalmap in the worst possible way, and you could be better without it.
Try involving a highpoly in your process, or keep the normalmap flatter than what it is now, if you didn't bake anything, use it more like a flatter but sharper bumpmap.
I'm guessing there wasn't ever a highpoly, you really made the normalmap in the worst possible way, and you could be better without it.
Try involving a highpoly in your process, or keep the normalmap flatter than what it is now, if you didn't bake anything, use it more like a flatter but sharper bumpmap.
I only modeled out the high poly parts of the tank treads, wheels, and that was it. Thank you all for your crits.
I believe I am going to start a new model(something like a science-fiction dropship-vehicle) and I will start with the high-resolution for the entire vehicle, and then transfer map the whole thing..
I have realized that I can't rely on Crazy bump and height maps to "fill in" the other areas of the tank with crude normal maps that I didn't model out in high poly and transfer map. It appears as though the normals would come out much nicer if I x-mapped the whole thing.
Again, thanks all for the crits, I have been working on this(among many other projects) for the past 3-4 months last semester of school(and I'm getting a tad tired of it) and I want to start on a new model, but I will take what I have learned here and do my best to apply that knowledge to my new model.
Ah yes, one more thing, for future reference what would you all recommend as an appropriate poly budget for a current generation xbox 360/ps3 game tank?
I feel based on the bulk of your work that this learning process would be a great benefit.
cholden, I agree entirely 100%. I need to do more hard surface, high poly models. Rest assured, this next semester of school(in my last one I will definitely tackle more high poly, hard surface vehicles and environmental props.
If what you are looking for is todays consoles, your mesh is way too lowpoly.
What you should be aiming at, is using up about 8000 tri's, depending on how much screen-space it is designed to take up. For a reference on fidelity, take a look at this screenshot:
Replies
Marmoset is better off being used for something that is normal mapped.
The problem with Maya(is what I built the tank in) is that the High quality rendering in the software is really crappy..my machine sometimes just crashes altogether from it, and yet if I do lighting in either Marmoset or Unreal, it works a lot better.
Perhaps I can adjust the normal map so that it stands out more?
EDIT: here are the texture flats.. let me know if you want to see a full on Normal map instead of the 50/50.
:poly122:
Were the normal maps generated from high poly mesh? If so then perhaps you should try inverting the green channel of the normals maps. If it wasn't then you probably need a whole lot more geometry in your low poly to account for the details of making a high poly. Make sense?
edit: Oh, and maya's high quality render is actually quite nice (no not as good udk or marmo) but if it's crashing your machine, then, well....that sucks for you, i guess?
Yes, the normals for the treads and wheels were generated from a high poly mesh of them. The other things I just adjusted using a height map(adjusted the areas I wanted to pop out with white and then made a revised normal map of those other pieces I didn't model in Crazybump.)
Guys relax, I didn't mean to insult your preference for maya's high quality rendering. What I meant to say is that it is easier to just import my models into Unreal or Marmoset, and have the normals appear in there, as opposed to Maya. For some reason, when I use high quality rendering, Maya will crash or sometimes the model will be all black, and I am not sure as to why. The normals(directional normals, not the maps) seem to be displaying properly in Maya, and I know it can't be an issue with my video card because these models obviously will shown up in Unreal or Marmoset with even more complex lighting setups then in Maya.)
Back on topic, it really doesn't look like your marmoset render is using the normal map. The maps are awfully blobby around the edges, and likely need fixing up.
Yes I agree. Thank you for the constructive crit throttlekitty. I need to go back and rework- the normal map.
Sort of like this:
http://www.ilyanedyal.com/images/big/ghost_recon2_big.jpg
I feel based on the bulk of your work that this learning process would be a great benefit.
Because if it is for a RTS game, or maybe some iphone thing, the texture is too high res; on the contrary if it is for use in a FPS or third person game in the current generation of games, the model is very crude.
Try involving a highpoly in your process, or keep the normalmap flatter than what it is now, if you didn't bake anything, use it more like a flatter but sharper bumpmap.
I only modeled out the high poly parts of the tank treads, wheels, and that was it. Thank you all for your crits.
I believe I am going to start a new model(something like a science-fiction dropship-vehicle) and I will start with the high-resolution for the entire vehicle, and then transfer map the whole thing..
I have realized that I can't rely on Crazy bump and height maps to "fill in" the other areas of the tank with crude normal maps that I didn't model out in high poly and transfer map. It appears as though the normals would come out much nicer if I x-mapped the whole thing.
Again, thanks all for the crits, I have been working on this(among many other projects) for the past 3-4 months last semester of school(and I'm getting a tad tired of it) and I want to start on a new model, but I will take what I have learned here and do my best to apply that knowledge to my new model.
Texture size I would assume would be 1024x1024.
cholden, I agree entirely 100%. I need to do more hard surface, high poly models. Rest assured, this next semester of school(in my last one
What you should be aiming at, is using up about 8000 tri's, depending on how much screen-space it is designed to take up. For a reference on fidelity, take a look at this screenshot:
http://www.game-over.com/gamenews/wp-content/gallery/battlefield_bad_company_2-2/tank-firepower.jpg