Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

3 Dimensional Chat / Fighter Plane

Author
Message
lcfcfan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Feb 2003
Location: North East, UK
Posted: 20th Apr 2003 00:48 Edited at: 20th Apr 2003 00:49
Link
Here is a pic of a plane i am working on not finished yet though, not bad for a beginner i think.


Hope you all like it

2ghz, ati radeon mobility 32mb DDR, 30gb, 256mb DDR ram, Win Xp

http://www.apollo-design.com
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Danmatsuma
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posted: 20th Apr 2003 05:37
Link
Not bad at all for a beginner but it's so high poly!
A fighter plane with that many poly's ain't gonna go very fast, I hope you're gonna reduce it for the actual gameplay
You see the real art is to make it look that good with as few poly's as possible, so you can have a whole squadron of them filling your skies firing multiple missiles and guns, with trails from exhaust and shot-down units etc
That one would be good in prerendered cinematics or stills once you texture it though

ZX Spectrum 48k Issue 3, Radio shack Tape drive, Rank arena 12" T.V. set.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
lcfcfan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Feb 2003
Location: North East, UK
Posted: 20th Apr 2003 17:03
Link
It's actually under 2000 polys which is standard in most games today but i do have another model which is only about 300 or so which is better for games thatthat are designed for low spec machines, on the texturing side i'm a bit crap so that may have to wait a whle.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Arrow
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jan 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 20th Apr 2003 21:13
Link
Yeah, textures are a real pain sometimes. I'm getting a digital pen and tablet so I have more control, mouses can only do so much.

The Legend of Zelda IS NOT an RPG! It's an Adventure, just like Ico or Dark Cloud.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 20th Apr 2003 23:19
Link
a digital pen and tablet, sounds cool

Always has, never will
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Arrow
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jan 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 00:17
Link
Found one on ebay for under $20.

The Legend of Zelda IS NOT an RPG! It's an Adventure, just like Ico or Dark Cloud.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
lcfcfan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Feb 2003
Location: North East, UK
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 00:55
Link
think i might get one from where i work can get one for £5.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 03:22
Link
Icf Remember most of the modeling packages give you polycounts, not triangle counts (which ingames are more affectionately polygons) ... Nurbs models in particular are known for lying about thier weight.
Personally i'd say that craft was closer to 3,500 triangles

would be interesting to see it with a brighter colour (dark red on black is hard on the eyes) - and some shots from around it would be nice too

Tsu'va Oni Ni Jyuuko Fiori Sei Tau!
One block follows the suit ... the whole suit of blocks is the path ... what have you found?
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 03:58
Link
Very nice, did you use the MeshSmooth modifier at all? Because it sure looks like it, and if you did you can lower the iterations to create less polys but yet keep a decent smooth craft.

"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
lcfcfan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Feb 2003
Location: North East, UK
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 05:14 Edited at: 21st Apr 2003 05:22
Link
i have reduced the iterations it says now there are 1147 vertices and 1602 faces and i also changed the color like raven suggested.



Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Andy Igoe
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 12:03
Link
Modelling is a hard skill to master but you are certainly on the right tracks, i've no doubt you'll eclipse the likes of me in no time anyway

1600 poly's isn't a big issue in modern games, infact 3k-4k isn't. If you are aiming for 40,000 polys on screen for a P800 or so then sure 4k poly models eats that up fast.

Personally i've started designing my games to 100,000 poly onscreen which is more inline with modern hardware (P800 owners just have to have some effects turned off) and that sort of poly count isn't a problem, heck one of my projects has character models with around 10,000 polygons and i've had a few onscreen running around at over 100fps no problem.

Keep at it Apollo and yeah, I suck at texturing too - so I get people to do that for me! Now to find an animator.

Pneumatic Dryll, Outrageous epic cleric of EQ/Xev
God made the world in 7 days, but we're still waiting for the patch.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 14:07
Link
its not the polygons onscreen you should be worried about but the number doing more and more complex effects...
also it is no longer the power of the processor that matters, but the power of the graphics card.

on my Centrio 1.2 w/Radeon Mobile 9500 i can push 250,000 polygons using upto 10 shaders without much speed loss - i try this same trick on my AlthonXP 1200+ w/GeForce 4 Ti 4800 and i can push 1,000,000 polygons and 20 shaders without much speed loss.

and those shaders arn't cheap by any means even for hardware that is designed to use them.

that Aside using Meshsmooth/NURBS is an artform of its own, and applying one to the whole mesh is a waste of time in my opinion. Because if you look at the tail plane for example - that should be straight but isn't - same goes for the tips of the wings.
inproper use of the smooth certianly makes the model look smoother yet without using the control points properly ruins the shape.

i can't remember how i'd go about this in Maya (probably same method) but in Max for area smoothing i'd select the faces which need to be smoothed together and use either the tesselate for small flat areas or MeshSmooth for rounded area's or HDRS for Organic Patch areas.

you turn off the whole mesh editing and you can have it only affect the selected areas which suddenly turns it from a slightly useful tool for adding smoothness (which you could do with a shading technique) to a very powerful too for increasing detail in certain areas ... if you use the control points within that you can even add effects - like on a shirt you can add wrinkles but moving a few control points

Tsu'va Oni Ni Jyuuko Fiori Sei Tau!
One block follows the suit ... the whole suit of blocks is the path ... what have you found?
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
lcfcfan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Feb 2003
Location: North East, UK
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 17:25
Link
it's only my first proper model so it's not quite perfect but i'm sure i'll get better with practice.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Andy Igoe
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 18:06
Link
I agree in most respect Raven but I was using the processor as a basis for machine level - not the entire specification Have a little leeway mate

Pneumatic Dryll, Outrageous epic cleric of EQ/Xev
God made the world in 7 days, but we're still waiting for the patch.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 18:19
Link
"that Aside using Meshsmooth/NURBS is an artform of its own, and applying one to the whole mesh is a waste of time in my opinion"

In what sense do you mean? It takes a whole 10 seconds to find the modifier in the drop down list. I see no wasted time.

"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
NickIgoe
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Oct 2002
Location: A bar somewhere
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 18:34
Link
It is possible to model stuff at very low poly counts for stuff like space ships, Because If you look at games like freespace 2, Elite etc the space ships are drawn at a distance and if they are quite close are only on screen for prehaps half a second. So my advice is keep the model as low as possible and spend most of your time on stuff like texturing and special effects ( Nice explosions, missle trails) and make the game move as fast and smooth as possible. If you were to make a really nice looking cockpit, have a few effects and make your space ship as low poly as possible then people will still go wow how did he do that. I tend to try and keep stuff like that at around a 1000 polys

Dark Basic Pro drove me to drink, I really should E-mail them to say thanks.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 21:55
Link
Exeat i'll leave you to figure out what i mean by that... i'm not exactly in the mood to explain the principals and effects of that aspect of modeling.

and its a good point to remember, that just because you can use that many polygons doesn't mean you have to or should.
i've said time and time again over the past 3years over all of the DBS forums that modeling for a game not even half of the work is creating the actual mesh or texture ... more of it is actually understanding and figuring out how you'll go about creating them.

it's never a case of just drawing something and modeling it from start to finish not thinking about anything, as every step of the mesh's development you have to know what you're creating it for.
i mean for example most standard 3D Engines can handle around 1,000,000 polygons right?
but can they handle 1,000,000 Triangle Mesh?
can they handle 1,000,000 polygons textured?
can they handle 1,000,000 polygons animated?
or even animated and textured?

from start to finish a good modeler understands atleast roughly the limitations he is working towards, not for just what the engine can handle in a single instance, but what it can handle for the number of instances that will be shown and with the graphics/effects you want to put with this model. And ontop of the other game aspects.

just as much effort should be focused on how you'll go about making the model as into making the actual model. and you'll find you turn out better and better work as a result too

Tsu'va Oni Ni Jyuuko Fiori Sei Tau!
One block follows the suit ... the whole suit of blocks is the path ... what have you found?
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
NickIgoe
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Oct 2002
Location: A bar somewhere
Posted: 21st Apr 2003 22:15
Link
I`m not going to dissagree with you on that Raven as I am aware you probably know more than I on that subject but I think my principle is correct. How many times have we seen highly detailed models on a model viewer only to see them in a game in the distance and or flashing past on your screen. You could have saved the effort for some thing else. Why model a pilot for a vehicle when you only see the vehicle at a distance and can only just make out the glass. All I am saying is think about what and how the model is going to be used.

What I can see on the above model is lovely curved air intakes and engine exhausts.But in a game when the model is flying past me I would never notice.You could quarter the amount of polys there.

I`m not knocking the model in any way as I do think it is quite good
with a little bit more practice and knowledge I think ICFCFAN will be doing some very good work in time.

Dark Basic Pro drove me to drink, I really should E-mail them to say thanks.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 22nd Apr 2003 03:41
Link
No Raven, please, tell me, I honestly don't see time wasted anywhere in that scenario. Does anyone else know what he's talking about?

"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Danmatsuma
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posted: 22nd Apr 2003 05:50
Link
I'll field that If you use a meshsmooth modifier on your whole mesh, it is indiscriminate and divides the whole mesh evenly. Now you have 4 times as many poly's as you need or more. Really you were just trying to smooth some edges here and there. Meshsmooth should not really be thought of like a blanket effect to shiny up your models, to an experienced modeller that just looks tacky. Like all modifiers, meshsmooth was designed to be used creatively, and sparingly. You'd be wasting time because after you collapsed your mesh, you'd have to spend a whole lot more time reducing the parts of the mesh down you didn't really want smoothed to their lowest common denominators again.
For instance, the wings on that plane, at a guess I'd say to keep each one that detailed, you'd need a maximum of 28 polygons per wing. You need more for those exhaust ports if you want them to be detailed like that though. So you could have just applied meshsmooth to the parts you really need it on, exhaust ports, saving time. Think that's what he meant.
I would encourage everyone into modelling to learn about smoothing groups, and try to rely more on them than meshsmooth modifiers,. Look at that plane. The entire plane only has one smoothing group. You could define the cockpit more by selecting all the faces of it, and assigning them to group 2 instead of 1. You don't always want a curve to another part of a mesh, sometimes it removes definition, kind of like the equivalent of blurring an image in 2d.
If you understand smoothing groups, you won't think of meshsmooth as the thing to put finishing touches to your mesh anymore, you'll design your mesh efficiently in the first place

ZX Spectrum 48k Issue 3, Radio shack Tape drive, Rank arena 12" T.V. set.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 22nd Apr 2003 17:38
Link
Ahh okay thanks, I've never collapsed a Meshsmooth modifier and continued editing. I always did something like explained in this tutorial:

http://www.zoomorphix.com.au/tutorials/purpleAlien/start.html

Where you could always edit the low poly object with the meshsmooth updating afterwards. Always worked out fine, no wasted time.

"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Danmatsuma
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posted: 22nd Apr 2003 18:54
Link
Well the problem with that is that no matter what you do under the meshsmooth, it will always end up smoothed. Tut's like that have a lot to answer for in my opinion, Do things that way and you're guaranteed to have a mesh that will always look like it was done in max, even to the untrained eye - people may not know anything about the software, but they notice a 'sameness' about computer generated artwork. So it's really better to think it out, and never suffer the compromising that you'll always have using that method, and really in the end it's you who should be in control of the output, not some modifier's parameters

ZX Spectrum 48k Issue 3, Radio shack Tape drive, Rank arena 12" T.V. set.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 22nd Apr 2003 20:33
Link
alot of tutorials have ALOT to answer for...
especially from those who believe they know what they're doing but they really havn't a clue.

i mean this is quite easily seen from the difference between tutorials you'll find all over the net from the ones produced by professional modelers/artists.

Tsu'va Oni Ni Jyuuko Fiori Sei Tau!
One block follows the suit ... the whole suit of blocks is the path ... what have you found?
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Danmatsuma
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posted: 22nd Apr 2003 20:49
Link
Yeah I'm sure most of them mean well, but a tutorial should be looked at to get an Idea of what can be done, not adopted as a standard method of doing things. You have to start somewhere I know, but so many of these things have this method as a standard practice, create a stack with a meshsmooth on top, it's like an infection that's spread from one tutorial to another.

That's fine if you're making wobbly purple aliens, and you don't need a low poly mesh, and you don't care that it's gonna have this thing that makes it kinda look exactly like every other model done this way. but an aircraft needs some sharp lines, and a game needs a low poly mesh. Since I started doing game models I have not touched that modifier once (meshsmooth).

ZX Spectrum 48k Issue 3, Radio shack Tape drive, Rank arena 12" T.V. set.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 22nd Apr 2003 20:58
Link
i only use Tesselation normally for adding detail of a degree, and Meshsmooth/Nurbs for a more organic feel for things.
but it is used sparingly, unless i'm doing clothing then it is used to add detail and then use the Mesh Optimiser to get the polygons down (^_^) and good ol' fashion editing to get it just right.

the tools are there to be used as tools rather than a quick alternative ... unfortunately no tutorials i've seen even mention that.

Tsu'va Oni Ni Jyuuko Fiori Sei Tau!
One block follows the suit ... the whole suit of blocks is the path ... what have you found?
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dave J
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2003
Location: Secret Military Pub, Down Under
Posted: 23rd Apr 2003 19:00
Link
You must keep in mind though that Max ships with a tutorial named "Modeling a Low-Polygon Character" (the one where you make that fat guy), this tutorial relies heavily on applying a meshsmooth modifier to the whole model to convert the 'rough' version to 'smooth'.

Another tutorial "Modelling a Low-Polygon Spaceship" comes with max, ironically this is much like the plane done above but rather then applying Meshsmooth to the whole thing, they only MSmooth the cockpit. Is this more to what you're 'getting at'?

"Computers are useless they can only give you answers."
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Shadow Robert
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 23rd Apr 2003 20:42
Link
yes that is exactly more to what i'm getting at!

Tsu'va Oni Ni Jyuuko Fiori Sei Tau!
One block follows the suit ... the whole suit of blocks is the path ... what have you found?
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-04-27 13:30:16
Your offset time is: 2024-04-27 13:30:16