hmmm...i like it but its still mising stuff. You dont have a rim ligth on this, and it doesnt look like its outdoor ligthing, which is what you are going for it seems.
Nice cool little touch with the spec there! Tho, it doesnt seem like its covering the surface too well.
very nice man, I keep looking back and forth between reference and I can't seem to find anything wrong with yours. Keep up the great work! really looking forward to seeing this one done! Can't wait to see how the bake comes out.
::conte:: thanks man, will do for sure
::raul:: wasn't really going for outdoor but I do see what yer talkn' 'bout. Was trying to get close to this! http://www.peperaart.com/
::JonathanF:: thanks buddy!
Yeah that's wut it seemed like well his deal is like an outdoor ligthing set up a simple 2 ligth rig. A key ligth and a fill ligth ( skyligth) which is wut I showed u the other. Half of the cool comes from your shader and possibly compositing in photoshop.
Again, I'm a render noob. So I'm just quoting wut I was told lol.
::conte:: thanks man, will do for sure
::raul:: wasn't really going for outdoor but I do see what yer talkn' 'bout. Was trying to get close to this! http://www.peperaart.com/
::JonathanF:: thanks buddy!
Ah, then what you're missing is shadows! You have a nice soft AO in there, but no real shadows being cast from your key light.
::raul:: lol. my render skills lack for sure. how's this?
::JonathanF:: indeed!!
::EricV:: thanks dude!
::rahul_shrimali:: thanks!
::Slum:: is it... it is!,noway! what's up man? yeah... you would probly have a good laugh if you saw my scene.
Well, I thought I finally had something cool with the helmet after another go at it. When I try the same light, camera and material setup on other props, it doesn't seem to have an ideal effect. Is there something to be learned here? My lights are placed wrong, maybe? Should each prop have it's own unique lighting? Rendering is definitely, an art in itself.
I shall get back on track... time for loPoly!
Ok, loPoly action! Here is the first pass at a loPoly crunch. It stands at 3,296 tris. For the cast maps, I used 2048 on this post. Also, I have a base started for the diffuse with an AO blended over.
I have a couple questions. How might I go about choosing a map size? and... Is it ideal to render out at double the intended map size and then shrink to size?
nice work! my question would be, can you make a seperate flat plane for your bird for the normal map? then of course have the alpha that cuts it out of that plane. Just thinking that you could get so much more detail from your bake if you had a plane(that would add a few extra tri's that could bend with the eagle as it is kind of a separate piece from the helmet) nice and close to all the parts of that eagle... seems like you are losing a lot of your awesome work you did with that. I'm no expert in this, its just a thought if that would work?
As for map sizes, personally as a portfolio asset, I would use 1024, just so you can really make it look awesome. But, in a game, like on a character, it would be lower.
looking cool! Since you are showing just your cast. And trying to get the most out of it. Wouldnt it be more desireable to ONLY show your cast on the low poly with one solid color. I maybe be quoting someone here, but just saying. My eyes get lost trying to examine your low poly super human skills!
At least mask out the alpha planes...geezz... Phillip!
::JonathanF:: I see what you mean. I may try that.
::Cody:: Thanks man. 1024 it shall be.
:: Raul:: You got it. one solid color cast coming right up. As soon as a I make some noticable tweaks.
hey, sweet! much better on the head of the eagle details! Inside looks great as well! really loving this piece. looking forward to seeing some texture on it!
your eagle looks bit flat after baking, I think you should check while modeling to make "cone" shapes of the poping objects
after bake they will look more 3d coz more info will be baked into texture, without it youll often find a 1pixel size info that determines your high and itll appear flat like your eagel now, in hipoly it look beautiful but in low poly only thing that shows it poop is only the occlusion now
nice work! my question would be, can you make a seperate flat plane for your bird for the normal map? then of course have the alpha that cuts it out of that plane. Just thinking that you could get so much more detail from your bake if you had a plane(that would add a few extra tri's that could bend with the eagle as it is kind of a separate piece from the helmet) nice and close to all the parts of that eagle... seems like you are losing a lot of your awesome work you did with that. I'm no expert in this, its just a thought if that would work?
Sort of off topic here, but people seem to think adding alpha is free, the truth of the matter is that a a compressed 1024x1024 with alpha is the same size as a compressed 1024x2048 without alpha, so adding alpha doubles the size of your diffuse texture.
So really, in virtually every case, if you need some details with alpha it is better to use an extra, smaller texture JUST for your stuff that needs alpha(you also then do not need to run alpha in the shader on the bits of your mesh that do not need it, which may be good depending on engine).
But giving a few small bits of a complex unwrap alpha is generally a very bad idea.
An example is this:
32bit Diffuse, 24bit Normal, 24bit Spec, all at 1024x1024 = 3mb(3072kb)
24bit Diffuse, 24bit normal, 24bit Spec at 1024x1024(2304kb) PLUS
32bit Diffuse, 24bit normal, 24bit Spec all at 512x512(768kb) = 3mb(3072)
So you can do 1024(A), or 1024 + 512(A)
So, watch where you put your alphas! They add up quick.
A final thing to consider is that alphablend is very expensive in terms of rendering and can be very glitchy, and alphatest looks like dog dicks, so you may be better served to just forgo the whole thing! With the specific example of the detail on the sides of the helmet, i would bake this this onto a simple cylindrical shape welded into the helmet and call it a day, the performance loss you'll get using A. extra texture memory and B. more complex shaders would likely not be worth the virtually unnoticeable effect you get from the way it is done now, which will only be very subtly noticed very close up.
Now for the case of the eagle on the front, giving excessive resolution to this area is only going to be inconsistent in the end, and result in a mess of noise where the rest of the game looks blurry and low-res. I would rather have consistent pixel density in a game than one thing REALLY REALLY sharp. Simply put, the amount of detail there with the texture size you have is way more than acceptable, and would likely still be nice at 2x or 4x less, if you take into consideration how the asset will realistically be viewed.
Even in the above LARGE shots, you start to lose some of the detail, this is not however a problem of resolution, but simply massive overkill in terms of level of detail vs what is seen. Not to say it isnt cool, because it turned out great! Simply that this isnt a technical problem, its a side effect of excess.
EarthQuake - Thanks for clarifying that information. Im still in my high poly modeling practice right now and will be getting to the low poly/texturing in a couple of weeks. This will be good to think about when i tackle those situations.
::Earthquake:: :poly115: Wow... thanks for the enlightenment. This information definitely put efficiency into perspective.
::Danielmn:: What's up man!!
So here is a first pass on the textures. I'm working at 2k having the intent to reduce to 1024s for the all textures. Critiques, comments, concerns or complaints? Oh, and the polycount is 2498.:D
Sort of off topic here, but people seem to think adding alpha is free, the truth of the matter is that a a compressed 1024x1024 with alpha is the same size as a compressed 1024x2048 without alpha, so adding alpha doubles the size of your diffuse texture.
But giving a few small bits of a complex unwrap alpha is generally a very bad idea.
thanks for that EQ I recently made a bus and put it in udk and didnt know how a pro would approach all those tiny windows - so now I know simple answer is to make one window with its own uv and maps seperate from the bus and duplicate it
phillip the bake came out really nice and the texture is looking great.
but you have a 2k texture job with the intent to reduce down to a 1024 on an object that in a game engine would take up 256, possibly less, all depends on the game.
Really anyone can make a texture job look pretty good using an outrageous size map on an asset that will be so small. You really should think about how this item will be used in game, what the realistic limitations you will be working with. For something this small you would never require the amount of detail or realistically be able to see that detain in an object this small. It would just become noise if the helmet didnt cover the same screen space as your picture dose.
good start, its looks a little dark and you are not posting your reference to compare how close you are....u made me go back to your 1st page and dig for it. I lost 2 minutes of my life, but i know u will make up for it!
Sweet modeling and good texturing. Yeah, sure unless it was on a character, it would probably have to be lower poly and lower resolution, and you would probably have a shorter timeline than what it took you to make this, but so what. If you were trying to put it in game, someone would probably tell you to lower it, but that's not what you're doing. As a demonstration and augmentation of of your skill, this is perfect. Keep pushing, and doing what you are doing. Anyone who says otherwise, is just a hater, as far as I am concerned. Learning to work within certain restrictions is necessary, but for personal projects, why not just have fun (learn as much as you can) and try and make it look as good as you can?
Thanks all, for commenting. All useful and encouraging! Thanks for getting my back on that referende Raul. Did you really lose 2 minutes of life?lol. dtschults, nail on the head! and I agree, I spent way too long on this piece! I'm using every minute I have after work to hammer away and starting to get more comfortable with the process. Will definitely start to focus on not taking time for granted in my workflow.
-Phil
Loved how it came out! sure its a little dark, but I think I have come across dark versions like this online... For sure a piece to be proud of! Great job! and the eagle came out awesome!
::JonathanF:: Thanks man. Yeah the reference above is a little blown out. Definitely had a lot a fun making this piece.
So, the textures remain 2k for this image (can't help it.) and the polycount at 2498. I'll call it finished for now so I can get a move along to other models.
...and the textures. originally 2048x2048
This looks great, it all really came together very well. The only crit I have is the bird appears almost like it's outlined when you compare it to the side piece with the same material and there's a little bit of wavyness in the texture near the bird's beak.
Replies
you could add some folds to the straps though
Nice cool little touch with the spec there!
::raul::
::JonathanF:: thanks buddy!
Again, I'm a render noob. So I'm just quoting wut I was told lol.
Ah, then what you're missing is shadows! You have a nice soft AO in there, but no real shadows being cast from your key light.
::JonathanF:: indeed!!
::EricV:: thanks dude!
::rahul_shrimali:: thanks!
::Slum:: is it... it is!,noway! what's up man? yeah... you would probly have a good laugh if you saw my scene.
Well, I thought I finally had something cool with the helmet after another go at it. When I try the same light, camera and material setup on other props, it doesn't seem to have an ideal effect. Is there something to be learned here? My lights are placed wrong, maybe? Should each prop have it's own unique lighting? Rendering is definitely, an art in itself.
I shall get back on track... time for loPoly!
::conte:: the folds... something like this?
I agree. I'm reserving my judgement on you... sir.. until I see lowpoly stuff! Great work on the high poly... now make us all proud.
now give them what they want ... the hardest part you've left behind ...
I have a couple questions. How might I go about choosing a map size? and... Is it ideal to render out at double the intended map size and then shrink to size?
As for map sizes, personally as a portfolio asset, I would use 1024, just so you can really make it look awesome. But, in a game, like on a character, it would be lower.
At least mask out the alpha planes...geezz... Phillip!
::Cody:: Thanks man. 1024 it shall be.
:: Raul:: You got it. one solid color cast coming right up. As soon as a I make some noticable tweaks.
nice work dood!
after bake they will look more 3d coz more info will be baked into texture, without it youll often find a 1pixel size info that determines your high and itll appear flat like your eagel now, in hipoly it look beautiful but in low poly only thing that shows it poop is only the occlusion now
But overall look of hipoly is astonishing !
Sort of off topic here, but people seem to think adding alpha is free, the truth of the matter is that a a compressed 1024x1024 with alpha is the same size as a compressed 1024x2048 without alpha, so adding alpha doubles the size of your diffuse texture.
So really, in virtually every case, if you need some details with alpha it is better to use an extra, smaller texture JUST for your stuff that needs alpha(you also then do not need to run alpha in the shader on the bits of your mesh that do not need it, which may be good depending on engine).
But giving a few small bits of a complex unwrap alpha is generally a very bad idea.
An example is this:
32bit Diffuse, 24bit Normal, 24bit Spec, all at 1024x1024 = 3mb(3072kb)
24bit Diffuse, 24bit normal, 24bit Spec at 1024x1024(2304kb) PLUS
32bit Diffuse, 24bit normal, 24bit Spec all at 512x512(768kb) = 3mb(3072)
So you can do 1024(A), or 1024 + 512(A)
So, watch where you put your alphas! They add up quick.
A final thing to consider is that alphablend is very expensive in terms of rendering and can be very glitchy, and alphatest looks like dog dicks, so you may be better served to just forgo the whole thing! With the specific example of the detail on the sides of the helmet, i would bake this this onto a simple cylindrical shape welded into the helmet and call it a day, the performance loss you'll get using A. extra texture memory and B. more complex shaders would likely not be worth the virtually unnoticeable effect you get from the way it is done now, which will only be very subtly noticed very close up.
Now for the case of the eagle on the front, giving excessive resolution to this area is only going to be inconsistent in the end, and result in a mess of noise where the rest of the game looks blurry and low-res. I would rather have consistent pixel density in a game than one thing REALLY REALLY sharp. Simply put, the amount of detail there with the texture size you have is way more than acceptable, and would likely still be nice at 2x or 4x less, if you take into consideration how the asset will realistically be viewed.
Even in the above LARGE shots, you start to lose some of the detail, this is not however a problem of resolution, but simply massive overkill in terms of level of detail vs what is seen. Not to say it isnt cool, because it turned out great! Simply that this isnt a technical problem, its a side effect of excess.
::Danielmn:: What's up man!!
So here is a first pass on the textures. I'm working at 2k having the intent to reduce to 1024s for the all textures. Critiques, comments, concerns or complaints? Oh, and the polycount is 2498.:D
thanks for that EQ I recently made a bus and put it in udk and didnt know how a pro would approach all those tiny windows - so now I know simple answer is to make one window with its own uv and maps seperate from the bus and duplicate it
fantastic quality in this artwork phillip!
but you have a 2k texture job with the intent to reduce down to a 1024 on an object that in a game engine would take up 256, possibly less, all depends on the game.
Really anyone can make a texture job look pretty good using an outrageous size map on an asset that will be so small. You really should think about how this item will be used in game, what the realistic limitations you will be working with. For something this small you would never require the amount of detail or realistically be able to see that detain in an object this small. It would just become noise if the helmet didnt cover the same screen space as your picture dose.
That cast is sick!! Keep it up homes!
So keep on keeping on.
-Phil
So, the textures remain 2k for this image (can't help it.) and the polycount at 2498. I'll call it finished for now so I can get a move along to other models.
...and the textures. originally 2048x2048
Judging from the UV there should be alot of streching on the outside of the helm, but in the picture there is none. How did you do that!? Witchcraft!!