Home 3D Art Showcase & Critiques

KT-s747 (ZBrush Pistol)

1
s6
polycounter lvl 8
Offline / Send Message
s6 polycounter lvl 8
Hi, First post here on polycount. Was hoping to get some opinions and critiques on my 3d work.

This was made entirely in zbrush 4 R2, With the exception of the lettering on the grip.


(correction) 17Million points. 32 million polies.


35 subtools


3 days(on and off)


Thanks in advance.

sightchange5.png


sightonchange.png


sightchanged2.png

sightchanged3.png

Replies

  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    high poly modeling exclusively in zbrush is still pretty cutting edge stuff and i look forward to any comments you can give about how working this way went for you on this project.
    how did the work flow by comparison to working in traditional high poly workflow in max or maya? do you have much experience in those channels, or are you more of a zbrush guy and this is your first foray into hard surface, so you're doing it the zb way?

    i think a lot of the best guys in hard surface work are going to be very reluctant to try this methodology given their high level work in traditional methods and the likelihood that translating the desired results in zbrush is going to be quite a paradigm shift.
    that said, i am staying open to it because i think it has the potential to be revolutionary in workflow methodology. more than likely it's going to provide an alternate workflow based largely on program familiarity (an artist most comfortable in zbrush rather than max would probably prefer it?)

    as for the model, from what i can see it looks good, but i can't see very much of it. could you please repost with lighter levels so we can see more, also higher resolution to better gauge detail?

    i think the model also suffers from being flat black on a black background, try giving it a more interesting color profile. quick photoshop to illustrate:

    tXbhF.jpg

    so anyway, it looks pretty good, post more and better shots, and let's get to talking about modeling weapons in zbrush, because i know a lot of people around here are very curious about it :)
  • Ghostscape
    Offline / Send Message
    Ghostscape polycounter lvl 13
    I'd be very interested in knowing how you did the handle, specifically. Those sorts of organic/hard surface shapes, where the shape is very consistent and follows a bunch of organic curves is the kind of stuff I'm currently having issues with. The hard, geometric shapes can be built out of clip brushes, masks, shadowbox, etc, but the hard-but-organic stuff that shows no signs of the hard clip brush edges is what interests me.

    As a guy who does a ton of weapons professionally I'd love any infromation you can provide on workflow. Are you using shadowbox to build the major subtool forms, or just carving them out of primitives directly?

    How animatable is this? Does the slide rack back and forth? I'm not familiar enough with zbrush to know how you'd test mechanics like that quickly.

    As for the gun itself, the concept is pretty awesome, although I think the rail on the bottom has its grooves too close together, both from a practical point I believe those are usually wider, and from a strictly design point they add a lot of high-frequency noise on part of the gun that doesn't really want it. The handle is a bit blobby, too, I'd have liked to see the handle have a bit more bulk in the back and a bit more defintion to the bottom.

    Overall it looks aces, though (at least in gauss' lightened version).
  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    also from that bottom-up angle i just noticed that the trigger is too thin. trigger guard is about right, but the trigger should be closer to two thirds the thickness of the trigger guard.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    First off, Thanks and I’ll do some fresh renders a little alter. I didn’t do much with the above. Just a few different shaders and did a BPR. I plan on doing some high quality renders in max once i learn the ins and outs of Vray.

    To start from the top going down;

    I started modeling out of boredom and curiosity in 3ds max. Modeling vert by vert never really clicked for me, so i never got very far into learning max. Not too long after a friend told me about Zbrush, and once i tried it, i was sold.
    It was less restrictive, more intuitive, and more complementary to the kind of person that creates things on the fly. This gun, For example, I started as a blank canvas, not knowing what i was going to make, then created the grip, and worked my way up. Constantly changing things as i went. Max isn't very helpful when it comes to that kind of approach in my experience.

    As for the potential shift from tradition packages like those from Autodesk to those more un traditional like zbrush, I'm optimistic. Just from zbrush 4 to 4R2 there has been some major game changing features. Such major features that if they keep coming, they will soon make 3ds max obsolete in my opinion. For example, Dynamesh. I don’t know if your familiar with it, but it essentially gives you the power to add and subtract geometry from or to and existing piece of geometry. This makes the creation of complex shapes and hard surface pieces in particular extremely fast and useful. Pieces like the mount for this scope were made in a matter of minutes. One solid piece of geometry without "hard" floating geometry seams, that I have personally grown to dislike.

    dynamesh.png


    Now i don’t know how fast it would take someone fluent in max or Maya to create that, But I’d be surprised if it could be done as fast as in zbrush.

    As far as I’m concerned, the only thing max and traditional packages has going for them is the "Cleanness" of edges. In those programs the edges are exactly the way you made them. In zbrush, while you have a ton of control over edges, the results are often varied and inconsistent.

    As computers keep becoming more powerful and more powerful, the poly restrictions are going to get less and less. I think there will be a point were the poly limits (as far as high poly modeling) will virtually disappear. When this happens do you think people with be modeling vert by vert in max? or creating extremely complex and detailed models in zbrush?

    So in short, yes, one day i believe Programs like zbrush will be dominant over programs like 3ds max.
    And I’ll fix the trigger ;) thanks for the tip. Two thirds sounds like a great rule of thumb.

    @Ghostscape: Thank you for the advice. I love how people don’t just say "It looks good" here
    For how i create the organic hard surfaces, it’s a combination of shadow box for shape, Sculpting and smoothing form into it, clipping brushes, and the biggest contributor is dynamesh. How I work all these together would be a bit hard to explain in text alone. I can create a walkthrough of how i did it though.

    And depending on what the object I’m trying to create will determine what i use to start is. The scope, I started with a cylinder, hollowed it out with dynamesh. Duplicated it, shadowbox for the piece in the center, clipped for shape edges then use deformation to "Bubble" out the ends(Gravity on the z axis, To be specific). Then use subdivided primitives for the little nobs. I masked and deformed (inflated) for the grooves in them.

    I will change that lower rail asap. I want to change the grip to be more "Lending" to having a magazine within it, And like you said sharpen the bottom. Not sure when i will do this though. it’s going to be a lot of reworking.

    As for how animatable it is, I couldn't say :P I can move the slide to the back postion and everything still looks sound. Its going to be for a game project me and buddy are working on, So i'd hope we can animate it :)

    I need to remake the slide, The sides got way to thin somwhere along the way.


    slidei.png

    Thanks again guys. I can't tell you how refreshing it is to get some real advice.
    :thumbup:
  • njc6425
    Looks amazing! I find weapons can be the most enjoyable type of hardsurface scultping because you can concentrate on the different parts! Love the subtle noise on the handle, maybe some noise on the rest could tie it in but it still looks very professional
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Thank you :) Just sat down to work on it some more. Should finalize the HP tonight and include everyones advice
  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    turns out i had a little more to say. take it as you will :)

    Hj4Xv.jpg
  • KartoonHead
    Offline / Send Message
    KartoonHead polycounter lvl 4
    That paintover is absolutely spot on, Gauss nailed it I think! It's really not worth me trying to make hard surfaces in ZBrush, my rig can't handle the polycounts required to give you sharp edges. No single tool can go above ~1.2 mil or it crashes on me. Even when using multiple subtools I'm lucky to push 4 mil total before a crash. 3.25GB of RAM, letting me down :'(
  • dirigible
    Offline / Send Message
    dirigible polycounter lvl 8
    3.25GB of RAM
    That's the saddest thing I've heard all day, man :(
    Gotta get more RAM!
  • JoshC
    Ok, comment time. To complement Gauss, I've noticed a few other things that can make your firearm more realistic. First is that your feeding chamber is to far back for a magazine loaded pistol. Your pistol grip itself isn't wide enough, even for a single stacking magazine. Also the absence of feeding ramp into the bullet chamber. The biggest thing to remember when making any type of firearm (pistol, MG, assault rifle, etc) is that it has to complete eight functions to fire. These are loading, chambering, locking, firing, unlocking, extracting, ejecting, and reloading. If your firearm that your are modeling can complete these functions from a visual then that makes the weapon believable.

    I've taken a few pictures of my FNP .45cal pistol to help give you more of an idea of what I'm refereing to. Apologies for the low quality, I only have my Iphone :(

    IMG_0032.jpg

    IMG_0030.jpg

    IMG_0025.jpg

    IMG_1.jpg
  • AlecMoody
    Offline / Send Message
    AlecMoody ngon master
    There are a couple of technical issues with the OPs model. Especially the razor sharp and unbakable edges. Overall it looks nice and clean but I think the design is suffering from being made in zbrush. Using zbrush from the ground up is really limiting what forms you are able to produce. You can always greeble something or cut an edge off but that will only take you so far.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    LOTS of awsome advice here guys. I'm really excited to rework and meet everyones expectations :)

    and Alec, I can create a smoothed edge anywhere its needed. Just run the smoothing brush over any edge and it will soften. I'm guessing the slide was one of the most noticable? :

    slidemask.png

    edgechange.png




    That i just masked what i wanted to stay sharp, blured the mask, And ran "Polish crisp edge" deformation. Theres not really and edge you couldn't get from the right combo of Cliping, Masking, Dynamesh, and deformation. Just after seeing so many "Hard surface" zbrush models that were all pillow like, I prefered make very hard sharp surfaces :P Guess i can get to carried away with them.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    and just read all the advice in detail from Josh and Gauss. All very great ideas! I appreciate you taking the time to explain them to me. One thing i might argue with, That silencer is HUUUGE :P I dont know if want it that long. Gonna get work working right now.

    And josh, The reason all the alignment for the internal fuction is off, Is because the gun used to look like this(Below) and then i decided to scrap that and slamm it down quick. Didn't pay much atention to fuction very much :( Will definatly fix it though :thumbup:

    whitebgz.png
  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    AlecMoody wrote: »
    There are a couple of technical issues with the OPs model. Especially the razor sharp and unbakable edges. Overall it looks nice and clean but I think the design is suffering from being made in zbrush. Using zbrush from the ground up is really limiting what forms you are able to produce. You can always greeble something or cut an edge off but that will only take you so far.

    As the OP says, I wouldn't be so quick to assume on the smoothing point. It is is undeniably a different workflow, but there are a crazy host of options for tweaking meshes (creasing/smoothing etc) in rollouts, which combined with zb's ability to handle a lot of shapes quickly that would be time consuming for even veteran high poly modelers, it's nothing to dismiss easily.
  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    I dunno if you were maybe a little too hasty in dropping the bullpup magazine configuration! This means it's a good time to maybe spend a little more time calibrating scale. From the first couple of pics with the rounds in them, I can see that your scale is more consistent with the original machine pistol concept, which would make sense for why the silencer is the size it is. For example compare the H&K MK23 pistol (the one Snake uses in MGS) to say a Sig or a Glock. Side by side, just looking at pictures, they look pretty similar. Except the MK23 is obscenely large by comparison to just about every semiauto pistol this side of a deagle. So how sensibly scaled things are on your weapon (grips, slide, suppressor, scope) are all relative to the overall size of the weapon.

    And the most consistent way I've found is to start with a dimensionally correct round of your chosen caliber, and then make sure that the rounds all fit in the magazine (don't need to get obsessively detailed here for parts unseen, but it helps make sure the logic of the weapon is intact) and that the bullet is pretty close to the diameter of the barrel.

    JoshC's FNP pics are hugely helpful here, because you're looking at a big fat round (.45 ACP) laid against the pistol frame, and you get a sense of the scale of his hand relative as well.

    So it might do you good just to figure out exactly what round it's firing (your first pics look like FN 5.7
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Well, My zbrush doc decided to erase all my progress for this morning. have back ups, But will have to redo some stuff. Here is as far as i got on a walk through for the grip process, for those interested. Couldn't get an upload anywhere that would do full size except DA.

    http://s620ex1.deviantart.com/art/Zbrush-Pistol-grip-Tutorial-283825933
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Wow....Aparently it was just hidden in the tool pallet. Generaly appeared on the tool pallet on the right of the interface, But it someone was only visible from the expanded viewer -_-.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Here are some pictures of the new grip, and a link to the revised walk through :



    http://s620ex1.deviantart.com/#/d4ozdhp


    grip19.png

    grip20.png

    grip21.png
  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    Nice! Good edits. "Kill Tech" makes me laugh, good work on the new backstrap. I also hope you actually go with that color scheme, since modern pistols are so damn boring. makes me think of a makarov grip. the soviet style plum+metal color scheme is understated but i think could look really fresh on this gun.

    Makarov.jpg
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Thanks :) and here is some internal progress. The feed ramp isnt quite like the FNP, But it ended up looking pretty similar to the one on an HK USP .45, Which has been a lot of my reference for this :P

    Will work some more after errands and dinner.

    internal.png
  • JoshC
    Outstanding progress so far, really coming along now with your changes. I agree with Gauss about changing up the color scheme from a straight gunmetal black. Plan black firearms are just so boring. I love Gauss's idea from the Makarov and I'm also partial to a nickel slide with a black frame. You could also try doing some nifty camo designs, something spray painted. Just some food for thought XD

    MORE!!! :D
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Its so odd you say that, Because i've had a friend on skype from a different forum constantly bugging me to put a silver slide on it for about 5 days :p

    I think i will make at least two version of every gun. Its easy enough to have one with all the attachments, Being a gun metal black "Authority" version, Then a stripped down "locals" version with another color scheme. Then maybe a "Rebel" version that merges the two. WIth some cammo and stuff.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    So i'm faced with a decision. Clip the edges to a nice sharp point, or leave them with a softer dynamesh edge? I can dup the slide come back to it later when people have put in their .02

    If neither of these look right, I can do anything in between really. Could clip then smooth. Clip very little so i get a hard edge into a small curve. Lots of options.

    slidenewest.png

    slidenewest2.png
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Little update:

    wip19.png


    Edit

    lightlaster.png


    wip20.png
  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    really coming out well! as far as the edge hardness question, definitely err on the side of softer. it looks weird while working on the HP, but as a baked asset it's really going to make a big difference in making sure all the parts read from a distance as well as they can.

    earthquake/racer445 talk a lot about handling edge hardness. i would take time to really browse all the gun models they did for brink, which were exaggerated in aspects but the edges/shape reads were perfect basically no matter how stylized the game it's for is. i am continually amazed at how soft some of the edges are on their high polys, but it ends up looking like it ought to as the finished product, and in the end that's the only thing that matters.
    also be sure to check out the "how do you model dem shapes" and some of the related discussions in technical talk, if you haven't already.

    looking good!
  • JoshC
    Looking good. I agree with Gauess on the edges, softer is better. One thing I did notice also is the rail attachment for the tac light/ lazer is off. I don't have a ready made reference right now so try looking up some pistol tac lights or lasers to get an idea how they attach to a rail.

    Other then that, great progress.
  • Racer445
    Offline / Send Message
    Racer445 polycounter lvl 12
    i think the more important thing isn't so much "softer" edges but "wider" edges. if you look at the 3 point models for brink you'll see that while the edges are very thick and beefy you'll also see that the shapes still read as being tough, mechanical objects. it's a really common misconception that softer edges must = mashed potatoes. i keep seeing people talk about edge "softness" but nobody has ever really explained it, so i guess now is the time.

    edgewidth2dx.jpg

    EDIT: better showing the difference between the last two variants:
    edgegif.gif

    here i've recreated a section of your model with edges similar to yours, then one i thickened a fair bit, then one i really spent some effort on to get the falloff to look str8 obese. in the top right closeup you can see that the "fat" bevel has a really thick falloff, thus grabbing even more light than the "good" example. so though all of the examples look technically fine up close, the good amd fat examples catch the most light without being "soft" as people tend to suggest. this of course makes them much more attractive to look at, especially when the entire model has a consistent edge treatment.

    the visual difference between the last two isn't big and doesn't matter too much, but if you can do it, why not?

    you can also see that while they all look technically fine up close, as you zoom out, the specular highlights start to alias into oblivion. this is more apparent in the popular example image i made a while ago (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1725586/crits/edgewidthmodel.jpg) which does not have any form of anti aliasing like this new one. in that image you can really see how zooming effects this.

    this however doesn't stop me from being interested in this zbrush stuff you're doing. i think it's really cool, and has the potential to be insanely fast, but i'm concerned about the control you have over edges, as well as changes to shapes for clients. how is that stuff handled? is it pretty easy to make changes like traditional subd? that's really what it all comes down to, as i want changes for clients to take as little time as possible, even at the expense of a slightly longer initial creation time.

    oh also you need to use simpler materials to present wips. a simple dark/midtone slightly tinted diffuse with a slightly colored bright, low gloss specular highlight is best.
  • fearian
    Offline / Send Message
    fearian Polycount Sponsor
    I wish I could favourite posts! Racer I'm not following exactly the difference between the last two examples there. They're better than the original, yes, but I'm not sure you make an edge 'wide' and not 'soft'. Wires please?
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Fantastic advice ! Thank you very much. And to adress edge cotrol, Theres alot. But its very different than max or maya i think. While i was reading, I thought to my self, How can i widen the edges on the slide? And i couldn't really think of anything, Aside from cliping and smoothing. But i thought of a few ways that could potentialy work.

    Here is a little example picture of a harsh clipped edge, a "Dynamesh" edge(just happened, Wasn't really made), and an edge i masked, Blured then deformed a bit.

    edges.png

    I'm not arguing that zbrush can control edges as well as max, cause it can't. And it probably never will. But you still have a lot of options for zbrush.

    For editing shapes on the fly, It depends what shape really, and how. Zbrush can create shapes extremly fast, So in some cases it would be more effective to redo the shape entirely. If it was a proportion change, Between masking, Deformation, and dynamesh there isnt really a proportion you cant change and retain even topology.

    Other than those, zbrush can still hang with changing things on the fly, Just not as cleanly as max or maya i think.

    Keep in mind here, I'm 16 and have been using zbrush for about half a year. So i could know little to nothing on the subject.

    Again, Great advice. I seeing that slide really makes me want to get into max ;)

    Out of curiousity, If you even come back to this thread, How long did that take you? and could i see some wires of it?
  • Computron
    Offline / Send Message
    Computron polycounter lvl 7
    Racer445 wrote: »
    i think the more important thing isn't so much "softer" edges but "wider" edges. if you look at the 3 point models for brink you'll see that while the edges are very thick and beefy you'll also see that the shapes still read as being tough, mechanical objects. it's a really common misconception that softer edges must = mashed potatoes. i keep seeing people talk about edge "softness" but nobody has ever really explained it, so i guess now is the time.

    edgewidth2dx.jpg

    here i've recreated a section of your model with edges similar to yours, then one i thickened a fair bit, then one i really spent some effort on to get the falloff to look str8 obese. in the top right closeup you can see that the "fat" bevel has a really thick falloff, thus grabbing even more light than the "good" example. so though all of the examples look technically fine up close, the good amd fat examples catch the most light without being "soft" as people tend to suggest. this of course makes them much more attractive to look at, especially when the entire model has a consistent edge treatment.

    the visual difference between the last two isn't big and doesn't matter too much, but if you can do it, why not?

    you can also see that while they all look technically fine up close, as you zoom out, the specular highlights start to alias into oblivion. this is more apparent in the popular example image i made a while ago (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1725586/crits/edgewidthmodel.jpg) which does not have any form of anti aliasing like this new one. in that image you can really see how zooming effects this.

    this however doesn't stop me from being interested in this zbrush stuff you're doing. i think it's really cool, and has the potential to be insanely fast, but i'm concerned about the control you have over edges, as well as changes to shapes for clients. how is that stuff handled? is it pretty easy to make changes like traditional subd? that's really what it all comes down to, as i want changes for clients to take as little time as possible, even at the expense of a slightly longer initial creation time.

    oh also you need to use simpler materials to present wips. a simple dark/midtone slightly tinted diffuse with a slightly colored bright, low gloss specular highlight is best.

    Racer, you really should check out the eat3d hard surface 2 DVD. Their method is good because you pretty much have all the controll you need over edge obesity since you usually start by concepting and blocking out the mesh with dirty/ugly hard surface brushes and dynamesh booleans, then you retopo it right inside of zbrush. now that you can use creasing in zbrush, you controll the edge obesity as you create the topology. OPs method if using smoothing brushes isn't ideal.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Computron wrote: »
    Racer, you really should check out the eat3d hard surface 2 DVD. Their method is good because you pretty much have all the controll you need over edge obesity since you usually start by concepting and blocking out the mesh with dirty/ugly hard surface brushes and dynamesh booleans, then you retopo it right inside of zbrush. now that you can use creasing in zbrush, you controll the edge obesity as you create the topology. OPs method if using smoothing brushes isn't ideal.


    Oh yeah, Forgot all about retopo. Here is a thread for a zbrush mech that was part of zbrush 4 R2 beta. he goes over retop on a hard surface.

    http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?161185-ZBrush-4R2-Beta-Testing-By-Nicolas-Garilhe&p=892733&viewfull=1#post892733

    and to clairify, I never use smoothing brushes to fix an edge. i hardly ever use any brushes, in fact. too in consistent. Was just saying it was a posibility :)
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    So here i did a quick retopo of the slide. At this point, you can treat it basicaly like a mesh in max and play with all your edge loops and such. With this method, Like computron mentioned, a huge array of edge control is possible.

    retopo2.png

    retopo1.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us



    Only down side to this really, is zbrush crashes A LOT when retopologizing. It trained me well to save my work often. If i can keep it from crashing long enough, i can try and make some example of potential edges to get from that LP base mesh.
  • Racer445
    Offline / Send Message
    Racer445 polycounter lvl 12
    s620ex1, i don't know how long it took me, but i can try again later and time myself and come back with wires. if i had to guess though, i'd say that shape there took me under 10 minutes to create with all the variants.

    i think that's really cool how it just works like that! could you try and match the shape with edges in similar width to what i've done and see how long it takes? i'm interested to see what you can come up with. i'm also interested in the tricount of the model you end up with, since there's no point in shortening the modeling time if it's going to eat 16gb ram and take forever during the bake process. :)

    computron, don't get me wrong; i'm not in any way trying to hate on this method. rather, i'm quite curious into the details about it. it seems like something that could be very useful.
    fearian wrote: »
    Racer I'm not following exactly the difference between the last two examples there. They're better than the original, yes, but I'm not sure you make an edge 'wide' and not 'soft'. Wires please?

    you think i actually saved this model? :) the difference is more apparent in motion. it's really just abusing chamfers to create edges that are very wide and have a short falloff. the geo can be extremely messy but it works and catches tons of light.

    edgegif.gif
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Racer445 wrote: »
    s620ex1, i don't know how long it took me, but i can try again later and time myself and come back with wires. if i had to guess though, i'd say that shape there took me under 10 minutes to create with all the variants.

    i think that's really cool how it just works like that! could you try and match the shape with edges in similar width to what i've done and see how long it takes? i'm interested to see what you can come up with. i'm also interested in the tricount of the model you end up with, since there's no point in shortening the modeling time if it's going to eat 16gb ram and take forever during the bake process. :)

    computron, don't get me wrong; i'm not in any way trying to hate on this method. rather, i'm quite curious into the details about it. it seems like something that could be very useful.



    you think i actually saved this model? :) the difference is more apparent in motion. it's really just abusing chamfers to create edges that are very wide and have a short falloff. the geo can be extremely messy but it works and catches tons of light.

    edgegif.gif

    I coulnd't do three variations in 10 minutes, Thats for sure ! I'm having a hell of time making an example out of a square. And to clarify, when i said "you can treat it just like a model in max", I meant you can add edge loops. The way you add them is much, Much, Slower. But i should be able to come up with a few examples. :thumbup:

    and just had a thought. If you made a concept model in zbrush, ( like the original slide i made) then retopologize it, Like the pictures i just posted, Then went to max for edge control, That would probably be a pretty nice work flow. I think i'm going to try that sometime very soon :)

    ...Even with this square its taking me a while to make the loops, and zbrush keeps crashing :( So doing it on somthing like that slide would be pretty far fetched i think. Possible, But hardly worth the hassel and time to get an edge that would be so similar to one you can get from other methods.

    Instead of making accturate loops you could make rough loops where you want edge control, Sub divide a few times without smooth on , Then sub divide with smooth, and probably get a decent result. again taking a while to get something so close to what you already had.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    The point here isn't "I can make a cube! And in only 3 minutes!", But for example, here is a cube. From the point i opened zbrush, Make the default primitive square a poly mesh, selected a zSphere, Make the ouline then added a loop on each face point by point, It took about 5 minutes. Duplicating and subdividing the the tools took seconds. After that i went to max to unwrap :p UV master is fantastic for organic shapes, And absolute garbage on hard surfaces.

    Noob max question here, What needs to happen for me to apply normal maps to a plain shader? ...

    Getting back to the point, Retopologizing a mesh then adding really general edge loops would probably be possible and even effective given a stable zbrush(which i dont have).

    Anywho For what relevance it has:

    squareexample.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    I decided to do the rear sight for better example. I tried making a proper material in max, but it seems its beyond me to get that workng properly.

    Anyway, This was made in about 20 minutes. Thats mesh variations, Unrwrap(in max), and then subdivide and bake in zbrush. Screen grabbed from UDK, Sense i had no other way of getting normals on the model.

    Original HP:


    sighthp.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us



    Retopologized(Left side was finished, Then mirrored to the right)



    sighttopo.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us


    Edge vartions. Keep in mind at this point, The subdivide depend on how i retopologized. So if i wanted sighter edges with less polies, I could have made the edge loops closer to edges. and less loops.


    84733986.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us

    93539295.png

    93263653.png

    26969773.png




    LP In UDK with normal variation



    normallineup.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us
  • Computron
    Offline / Send Message
    Computron polycounter lvl 7
    s620ex1 wrote: »
    So here i did a quick retopo of the slide. At this point, you can treat it basicaly like a mesh in max and play with all your edge loops and such. With this method, Like computron mentioned, a huge array of edge control is possible.

    retopo2.png

    retopo1.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us



    Only down side to this really, is zbrush crashes A LOT when retopologizing. It trained me well to save my work often. If i can keep it from crashing long enough, i can try and make some example of potential edges to get from that LP base mesh.



    NONONO!!! The point was to re-topo it into a new sub-d (all quads) mesh and use creasing instead of control loops. not make a lo poly with super hard edges.

    picard-facepalm2.jpg?w=450&h=302
    Racer445 wrote: »
    computron, don't get me wrong; i'm not in any way trying to hate on this method. rather, i'm quite curious into the details about it. it seems like something that could be very useful.

    I didn't take it that way.:)

    I am just as curious about adding zBrush to my hard surface arsenal as you.

    OP was just doing it in a way that requires a lot of manual work and ends up with varying edge-width. the retopo method from the eat3d dvd is very different from what's being shown, I recommend you take a look at that dvd or any ryan kingslien hard surface DVD. If you know your way around zBrush you can very quickly pick it up.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Computron wrote: »
    NONONO!!! The point was to re-topo it into a new sub-d (all quads) mesh and use creasing instead of control loops. not make a lo poly with super hard edges.

    Not sure if you missed the post right above your own, But i beleive thats what your talking about? :)

    and normals, if they are relevant.

    normallayout.png
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us




    Also, My way requires a lot less work than making everything i make, Then an aditional Retopologization and edge control pass. Though, Given consistent results, I may add that into my workflow :thumbup:


    Also, I've yet to find out what the creasing fucntion is used for in zbrush. If you could infrom me, that would be great. If it helps with hard surface modeling, I would love to learn it :)
  • Computron
    Offline / Send Message
    Computron polycounter lvl 7
    the zbrush central thread posted erlier shows it in the first video at the end of the post.

    What you got is pretty good for the result, but it can be easier to retopo certain pieces into true sub-d meshes berofre dynameshing and polishing.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Took a break to work on some other things yesterday. Here is an update though:

    lightsge.png

    Uploaded with ImageShack.us

    lights2.png

    Uploaded with ImageShack.us





    Also, i totally forgot about zbrushs edge loop functions. You could make a retopologize version in quads, Then Just hide everything but your edges and add edge loops with the click of a button. I might try an example or two on that slide. If things go well, I'll try and match racers 3 and see how long it takes me.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    New sight. I'm curious to know what you guys think of it :)



    reddot2.png
    By s620 at 2012-02-12

    reddot.png
    By s620 at 2012-02-12

    reddot3.png
    By s620 at 2012-02-12

    wip25.png
    By s620 at 2012-02-12
  • Weirdboy
    Offline / Send Message
    Weirdboy polycounter lvl 5
    Do they actually make sights like that for pistols? It's nice, but I like the old sight better.

    One of these days I really need to get into Zbrush.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Yeah, They do. I like the old sight as well, and i may still make a variant with it. But i was having issues placing a nice looking mount either on the frame or the grip, or anywhere but the slide :P can't be mounting be heavy objects straight to the slide.

    Here is an example of the sights:

    glockz.jpg

    Uploaded with ImageShack.us
  • Computron
    Offline / Send Message
    Computron polycounter lvl 7
    Looks good, cant wait to see the bake!

    Gun question: Does the red dot appear to hover in front of the scope? Is it usually adjustable? How far ahead can it appear?
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    For this is will apear to pop out a bit, using a simple bump offset for the lense material. In real life, it seems to be "Within" the lense. Having shot only an M&P 15 with an Acog sight behind a reddot, I have only one reference personaly. So that may be uncommon. But for his game (the gun is for a game) the red dot will pop a bit, and appear to hover slightly.


    For the bake, it may be terrible the first few times :) This is the first weapon I'll have been doing the entire process on, But i will do it until its right. Hopefully once i fail the first time I'll get some decent feed back from the great group here at polycount :)
  • Weirdboy
    Offline / Send Message
    Weirdboy polycounter lvl 5
    Another gun question: What's the advantage of an Acog/reddot versus a traditional sight?
  • gauss
    Offline / Send Message
    gauss polycounter lvl 12
    great progress s620ex1! also very cool to see racer weigh in on edge weight stuff. "fatter edges" is a much better description than "soft edges". i really dig the new scope, personally, huge scopes on pistols has always been goofy in my book

    computron: the dot is invisible until you look through the sight within a few degrees of having your eye directly behind the sight. this is a tremendous advantage to old timey laser pointers, which are visible out in the world; a red dot sight is invisible to everyone else.

    weirdboy: generally speaking, faster target acquisition, and they're just plain easier to shoot for most people. instead of lining up your irons with the target, which might involve actually covering the target with the sights depending on range and how the sights have been calibrated. some guns are set such that you should "float the bull," which is to say, your target and where the bullet goes is actually above the sights, not right on top of/behind the front sight.

    a red dot gives a more open "sight picture" as it's called, which is simply how you see your target relative to your gun.
  • JoshC
    Gauss has pretty much hit the mark. The only point I will add about sight choice is that now a days (at least from what I've seen) in the military and law enforcement areas Iron sights are more of a backup to modern holographic and red dots. Sight choice really depends on what the shooter is planning for.

    Since red dots and holographic sights have an "open" sight picture they make for great rapid target engagements especially in close quarters and even mid range distances.

    Acogs and other 4x scopes are more for the mid range and long distance shooter but can be used in the short range area with much practice.
  • s6
    Offline / Send Message
    s6 polycounter lvl 8
    Prototype rail. Needs work, But I'm not hating it :)


    newmount.png
    By s620 at 2012-02-14



    newmount2.png
    By s620 at 2012-02-14


    newmount3.png
    By s620 at 2012-02-14
  • Computron
    Offline / Send Message
    Computron polycounter lvl 7
    Bake that shit.
1
Sign In or Register to comment.