DatterBoy Posted November 27, 2003 Posted November 27, 2003 Hey Zeta, What application are you using? :Dat
Aztek Posted November 27, 2003 Author Posted November 27, 2003 Zeta, for your artifacting, I'd up the poly count unless you are conserving. More polys are usually a bigger headache but there is no substitute for the appearance. ... and Dat, I'd say the Yamato looks good in ALL modes, but if I had to pick one, it's battroid. I honestly feel they sacrificed a little I mean LITTLE of the toys' fighter appearance to give it the beef it has in battroid.
Zetaplus Posted November 27, 2003 Posted November 27, 2003 I'm using 3DS Max. And somehow, I don't think more polygons will help. Somehow, the area around the front of the canopy has started to wrinkle up kinda; that's what I meant by "artifacting".
Zetaplus Posted November 27, 2003 Posted November 27, 2003 Addendum: Hey, whaddaya know, I went back and put a few more iterations of MeshSmooth on my nosecone before using Booleans, and it turned out just fine. Only problem is that I have two booleans, one for the general shape of the canopy in profile view, then another to hollow out the cockpit tub...hmm.
lparisek Posted November 27, 2003 Posted November 27, 2003 OK guys and gals. This is another mockup of the poster. If I missed anyone's name I am sorry. I am actually on my laptop at Mom's house getting ready for T-day and I did not have anything but this render with me. When I get home, I will add the other mecha to the image. If you have a new render of your model in the pose you would like to see it in the poster, please send it to me and I will add it. Dok and I would really like some feedback to see if we are going in the right direction with this. Good, Bad, Suggestions, and/or Constructive Crits are all welcome. (This is after all, a group thing.) Image is HUGE!. Follow the link to view it. Have a happy Thanksgiving... Les Poster WIP
Rodavan Posted November 27, 2003 Posted November 27, 2003 I like that poster !!! Can't wait to see it complete !
Aztek Posted November 27, 2003 Author Posted November 27, 2003 Happy Turkey Day to all that apply, and for those that do, NO CG TODAY! Spend time with your families and enjoy the time off (if you are lucky enough to have it ) Take care all, Az
lparisek Posted November 27, 2003 Posted November 27, 2003 Well the down time between my family's Thanksgiving dinner and my wife's family's dinner was several hours. So I DL'ed the last image Dok and I were working on and imported all of the mech that we had on the original work. If there are any new mech out there, please let me know. I have yet to get even my stuff on there. Again, comments & suggestions are most welcome at this point. (Tell Dok the flames...) Les New Poster WIP... BIG! 1/2 a mb. (Sorry) I thought that detail was more important than size for this test.
NERV Posted November 27, 2003 Posted November 27, 2003 why does the vf-1s have red accents on the legs but yellow chest?
lparisek Posted November 28, 2003 Posted November 28, 2003 I think it is because Doktor Gonzo is in the middle of retexturing his valk. We just grabbed these images from the forums and cut and paste them into the image to give an idea what the final poster would look like. These are not the final renders. Les
Aztek Posted November 29, 2003 Author Posted November 29, 2003 Les and DG, Are you guys leaning toward the pose you currently have in the corner of mine? or still waiting for the textured boosters? I don't want them poking to far up into someone elses space. That's one of the reasons I wanted to get the DYRL money shot pose going. We really need to figure out this lighting rig deal. I also think that even though the lighting is somewhat an issue, it's probably not going to be as bad as we think. If whoever is doing the compositing has a semi-powerhouse PC, then adjusting and filtering the individual valks to a baseline shouldn't be a prob. I'm changing shifts this week so my mornings and late evenings should be opening up to start smoothing out my piece of the pie. I haven't forgotten about the new and improved tex for the ARMD platform. That's still in the works as well. Tomorrow I'm off on a trek to Fry's Electronics up in Phoenix. Those of you who know how fun that can be, HA! I'll be thinkin of ya ... BTW, does anyone have a PC that uses Intels Hyper Threading function in their 3d apps? Is it worth the hype? Are the gains noticeable? Is high res rendering sped up at all? Thanx if anyone has the info ... Az
Mechmaster Posted November 29, 2003 Posted November 29, 2003 BTW, does anyone have a PC that uses Intels Hyper Threading function in their 3d apps? Is it worth the hype? Are the gains noticeable? Is high res rendering sped up at all? Thanx if anyone has the info ... I too would be interested to hear what anyone has to say on this, I seem to recall reading that the gains were not that great and that ordinary dual processors gave better results than a single hyperthreading chip.
lparisek Posted November 29, 2003 Posted November 29, 2003 Hey Aztek. How was your turkey day? As for the pose, everything for just about everyone's mech is up in the air. We only had a few images to work with so Pete added them where they fit in. I think the only mechs that are relegated to a set location are those mechs that can not fly (i.e. Destroids). So, if you (I mean everyone participating in this porject) have a pose in mind or an idea that you would like to table, let us know. As for the lighting. I simply used levels and the diferent color channels to make the background look a bit more like the forground. I don't see why we can't use a similar technique for the final render. We will have to start out with a similar lighting rig for the models but the fine touches can be done with this method. (I was on an old laptop with this really huge file, 84 MB PSD, so the filters/blurs/etc had to be kept to a minimum.) I have noticed one thing over the last week. I was on site at a clients shop and rendered a 3D version of the plastic housing of a sensor we are trying to pass off to production. I took the 3D files home and rendered them again from my house for my "I love me" board. When I compared the two renders (One from a Wintel PC using C4D and mine from a Mac using C4D), the brigtness needed to be brought up about 10% to match the Wintel render. We might find that more problems like this creep up when we start mixing renders from different platforms and different packages (i.e. LW, Maya, 3DS, Max, C4D, etc...). I did not know they had a Fry's out in Phoenix. My wife hates that place. I can spend a lot of time and money in that store. Kind of like her in a Mall. Les
lparisek Posted November 29, 2003 Posted November 29, 2003 Hyperthread technology shares everything. Memmory bandwidth (to cache, RAM, VM, & HDD), access to hardware (internal cpu bus and main system bus), and some lower level processor operations. Dual procs only share the main system bus (which means access to hardware, RAM, VM, & HDD). Basically everything off the proc. Each processor has its own internal L1, L2, and/or L3 cache (most L3 is off CPU), internal busses, and they do not share lower level operations. To make it short and simple, if you have the extra cash go for a real dual proc system. One more thing of note, make sure that the software package and the operating system you are using supports dual processors or this discussion is mute. Four processors in a Windows 98 machine is a waste of three processors. I am not sure but I think All "Home" or "Personal" versions of the Windows OS do NOT support multiple procs. You will need a "Pro" version. For those of us that use Macs, you will need some version of OS X for multiproc support. For the software packages, I think most of the major 3D apps out on the market support multiple processors. At least I would hope so. Les
Capt Hungry Posted December 1, 2003 Posted December 1, 2003 This thread just continues to grow! Great work guys!
Mechmaster Posted December 1, 2003 Posted December 1, 2003 Originally I quite liked the plain "anime style" appearance of my battroid model but having seen some of the gorgeous high detail valks in this thread I decided to add panel lines to my own model. My VF1-A has just undergone a virtual respray and in addition to panel lines it even has a little "dirt" too. Here is the new look leg, what does everyone think? Is this a desirable effect or a huge, steaming pile of poo?
Rodavan Posted December 2, 2003 Posted December 2, 2003 Hi Les Can I still add to poster , I know I am just a tad late , but I think I can add my valk now - Do I need to render with specific spec - I remember something ..... Thanks
Rodavan Posted December 2, 2003 Posted December 2, 2003 I now there is still some colour issues , lights on the wings and legs not right but ...... Does the flaps look correct .....? <_< What does the valk experts think ?
Aztek Posted December 2, 2003 Author Posted December 2, 2003 Mech, I like the realistic look a thousand times better than anime style. Your texs are beautiful ...
Doktor Gonzo Posted December 2, 2003 Posted December 2, 2003 Mech: Looks great! Big improvement IMHO. Rodavan: I think it looks awesome. We're trying to corellate lighting, so that everybody renders using the same settings. What program are you rendering in? Somebody might have a lighting rig they could lend you... Oh, and when we do do our final renders, it would be best (if your renderer supports it) to output as .tif. These files have built-in alpha channels, which would make compositing the poster much easier. -pete
cobywan Posted December 2, 2003 Posted December 2, 2003 OK. I am seeing some very incredible work going on here. Much better than anything I would do in Macross CGI. So this has me thinking that It would be great to put the best Variable CGI model through the CNC process of patterning. Is anyone here interested?
mechaninac Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 (edited) OK. I am seeing some very incredible work going on here. Much better than anything I would do in Macross CGI.So this has me thinking that It would be great to put the best Variable CGI model through the CNC process of patterning. Is anyone here interested? Now, there's an idea! What scale would you CNC into? 1/32? 1/24? And wouldn't you need enclosed volumes as opposed to double sided surfaces that only mimic shells? The reason I ask is that I work as a designer/engineer and utilize Pro Engineer (a high-end parametric solid/surface engineering application, for those who don't recognize the program) as my primary design tool and know that non-volumetric models are useless for Stereo Lithography unless you close all gaps either before-hand or in the 3D-Lightyear application used to prepare the STL files for construction, but this can cause unwanted patching because the program is only doing it's best guess at filling in the blanks (perhaps tool path vectoring requirements for CNC are not as stringent as those for SLA; please enlighten me). Regardless, this is a bold and fantastic idea, and would love to see it done. Only one word of warning: Beware of Harmony Gold...the pricks Edited December 3, 2003 by mechaninac
Aztek Posted December 3, 2003 Author Posted December 3, 2003 Mech, All the objects in my valk have an stl check run on them. I've seen other meshes where people haven't been concerned about open edges on polys. But as I've always wanted a realistic valk ... I've always "built" it realistic. It makes for a high poly overhead, but I think it has been worth it.
DatterBoy Posted December 3, 2003 Posted December 3, 2003 I model in polygons so all my pieces are closed as well. Like Aztek said, I always wanted to go for realistic as much as possible so my vlak has no morphs and each piece is an independant piece and not just a shell. The transformation modes don't cheat either (other than the swing bar). If I had the capability, or even the money, I'd definitely go for a solid model of the CG. :Dat
Brianw76 Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 I also model in polygons, all my pieces are closed. Well, since Macross Zero episode 3 was realeased the other day I decided to dust off my VF-0 model and mess with it. I started a gunpod for it yesterday.
cobywan Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 I'll start a new thread later with the details. Of course NURBS models are the best to use but if you can output an IGES or STL mesh then things are set. It is just a matter of designing the mesh for the purposes of tooling out wood/foam. By the way totally awesome work guys. This stuff kicks the Star Wars and Star Trek CGI fan meshes to thte ground.
EXO Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 I also model in polygons, all my pieces are closed.Well, since Macross Zero episode 3 was realeased the other day I decided to dust off my VF-0 model and mess with it. I started a gunpod for it yesterday. Exciting stuff Brian!
DatterBoy Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 BRIAN: Beautiful man! Still love the renders you put out. Theylook soo good. DG: I'd like to be able to make an arm or a leg, parent it up and then duplicate a mirror for the opposite side, but can't seem to do it and can only do by parts and then re parent each peice individually. Is there a better way to do this cuz it just takes too much work. :Dat
NERV Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 i fail to see how that gunpod could possibly predate the GU-11, it's sleeker and looks more advanced, thats like saying the sword predates the cudgel
mechaninac Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 (edited) Aztek, Datterboy: I was only speaking from personal experience. Most meshes I've downloaded off the Net have been modeled with optimization and poly-count reduction in mind. Take a fighter's canopy for example: most people will create the outside shape, make the resulting polygons double-sided, and proceed to texture and/or assign material properties (extremely efficient, but the end result has no volume). The fact that you guys create everything as enclosed volumes speaks volumes to your dedication to realism (at the cost of increased polygons). Cobywan: Tooling out of wood and foam...I guess what you have in mind would me more akin to a solid resin kit then a styrene or hollow-cast one. That would definitely make things simpler. Brianw76: Stunning! Just stunning. Edited December 4, 2003 by mechaninac
mechaninac Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Now for my humble contribution. A small break from the Orguss Ishkicks. May I present the Ishforn (quite a ways to go yet).
cobywan Posted December 4, 2003 Posted December 4, 2003 Cobywan:Tooling out of wood and foam...I guess what you have in mind would me more akin to a solid resin kit then a styrene or hollow-cast one. That would definitely make things simpler. The first step in what I need to do is get a precise form made solid. After that a mold will be made of that form and a casted shell detailed. A new mold is produced form the detailed shell. The end result being a resin kit that looks like an injection molded one. Here is what I had done before. I just want to start off with a better form and be more precise in generating it. http://home.comcast.net/~cobywan/Templates/VFfoam.htm http://home.comcast.net/~cobywan/Templates...es/VFShells.htm http://home.comcast.net/~cobywan/Templates...s/VFscribes.htm I'll move this to a new forum at some point.
DatterBoy Posted December 5, 2003 Posted December 5, 2003 COBYWAN: I've seen your stuff before. That looks superb. Just womndering, sending models through the motions to have it done.. what does it cost? :Dat
Recommended Posts