|
|
Generic Starship or....
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
Generic Starship or.... // Work in Progress
Post by TigreStripe // Jan 14, 2008, 1:33am
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Greetings all!
This may be a long drawn out WIP as I stop every now and then to try out some tool, function or to pull hair out at random. Since I bought TS 7.5 when it first came out I've had very little time to work with it. What that means is the first time loaded it up and gave it a go I ended in one of those dream moments that Homer Simpson gets into and I end up back in reality with drool down my chin. After that I walked away for a few weeks and then would go back every now and then and try it again. After many months (as other stuff kept me away), I started to give it a more aggressive try. The manual is difficult for those with no experience in 3D but it's still useful.
The Starship below is my second attempt at modeling. My first one went the way of Truth and Justice along with my WinXp installation.
I started with a primitive cube, stretched it, quad divided it a bit, removed some edges here and there, 86ed a few verts and then just tried this and that and the shape came out. Originally based on a 2d design I did in a the way old DeluxePaint (PC version) from a thousand years ago. Perhaps I dig that image out one day so all can have a chuckle.
Long winded mode off. Here is where I'm at with it. I'll have other shots of it later. It took me about 6 hours total over a few days and with about 10 minutes of looking up the manual for some things, the rest was just try this, try that. I tried the demo of Cinema 4D and all I could do was move the view around and and few minor things without reading the help system so TS is intuitive.
Your comments, good or bad, are welcomed.
TS |
Post by 3dfrog // Jan 14, 2008, 4:46am
|
3dfrog
Total Posts: 1225
|
This is a nice second attempt at modeling. Your geometry looks nice and clean. How about posting a wireframe? Ithink you have the start of something good. |
Post by TigreStripe // Jan 15, 2008, 1:33am
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
This is a nice second attempt at modeling. Your geometry looks nice and clean. How about posting a wireframe? Ithink you have the start of something good.
Thanks 3DFrog. I guess this is a learning in progress and nothing was really by design. I started using tools and went with what looked okay. I had to move between Workspace and modeler to get things the way I wanted them.
I do look forward to 7.6 :)
Looks like the pic was crushed a bit in the upload. :confused: |
Post by TigreStripe // Jan 15, 2008, 1:40am
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
A few more angles. Just trying to decide if I'll add roll bars on the bottom as well. Maybe a few vertical wings (I know, don't need wings in space). Then engines of course then I'll try to work my `ead around textures and mapping.
I think it needs more hull detail. Plating and other such stuff. |
Post by Norm // Jan 15, 2008, 5:16am
|
Norm
Total Posts: 862
|
Looking good so far. Textures can add detail nicely to a model. Look forward to seeing next renders :) |
Post by Michael Billard // Jan 15, 2008, 8:13am
|
Michael Billard
Total Posts: 125
|
Looks cool, like a stealth version of the USS Defiant. |
Post by 3dfrog // Jan 15, 2008, 9:33am
|
3dfrog
Total Posts: 1225
|
Yeah your wire looks nice and clean as I expected. Texturing with normal maps you can add a lot of little details which is cool, may be worth a shot. Texturing is another whole art in itself, with good textures you can make this ship look great. Keep up the grea work. |
Post by TigreStripe // Jan 16, 2008, 12:07am
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Looks cool, like a stealth version of the USS Defiant.
Cheers! It's funny you mention as the other day I noted that it had a basic shape of one of the concept drawings for the Defiant. From the Art of Star Trek book that is. Save for the curves and graceful lines. Since I put a con tower/bridge at the top the scale would be larger than the Defiant. I just need to work out how to go about proper scale in Truespace.
Thanks for the comments! |
Post by TigreStripe // Jan 16, 2008, 12:13am
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Yeah your wire looks nice and clean as I expected. Texturing with normal maps you can add a lot of little details which is cool, may be worth a shot. Texturing is another whole art in itself, with good textures you can make this ship look great. Keep up the grea work.
Thanks dude! I had trouble the first time out putting the roll bar, specifically the left side. You can't see it in the wire I've posted but I noted there was another face and edge inside it. That's what I got for using the add edges tool. I was able to fix it using Bridge/Blend. I really need to read the manual more in depth.
As for texturing. On my first attempt, I tried to unwrap the original mesh and it looked like my kid got ahold of some wire and twisted it up. So I agree, it's a fine art. |
Post by TigreStripe // Jan 19, 2008, 3:08am
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Greetings!
I had a chance to have a look at the interface for Lightwave and thought it was pretty good. I wasn't able to use it but it did look like it would have been easier to figure out then when I tried my hand at Cinema 4D (R10.111). Now having said that I think I've managed to get over the initial hurdle with TrueSpace.
When I tried to use the manual for a few of the tools I noted that it lacks a basic step by step. It's good on examples though. I guess I'm one of those that need a clear progression. I think I've done pretty good so far.
And with that also comes a few updates. I've removed some stuff from the bottom and added another roll bar. Added a (don't know what I would call it) spine on the top. I've also spent a good few hours making an engine. The engine's poly count blew out a bit, something like 1500 faces. It's in two parts and they are on separate layers for now. |
Post by TigreStripe // Jan 25, 2008, 8:48pm
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
The wing structures and the engines are on separate layers for now. As for the lighting I just used one of the presets, skylight. I've been reading the manual more than I've worked on the model. Mapping and textures is still giving me a pain but I'll work it out.
So I've added some stuff and removed a few things. The engines are 2600 faces each or there abouts. I'm still trying to decide if I'll redo them or add something more.
I beveled every face, top and bottom but now I think I've two layers of faces. |
Post by TigreStripe // Feb 2, 2008, 1:25pm
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
I removed the spine at the forward part of the ship. In a earlier render I had beveled just about every face which in turn added more polygons. I've removed all the beveling.
The engines in the previous render were 2600+ faces each. I've redone them with about the same look but only a few hundered faces. You can also see I need to work on my lighting skills. :) And render skills... and..etc...
Still having some trouble with texturing. I tried to unwrap this and I got a strange wire. I've tried to look at other applications help files to get an idea of the general technique but it doesn't seem to apply in TS. I must be doing something wrong. |
Post by TomG // Feb 4, 2008, 12:50pm
|
TomG
Total Posts: 3397
|
Hi TigerStripe,
If you just tried to unwrap, you would get strange results - this is a complex model and by default you will see all areas of the model combined into one UV map, which will look rather messy!
The best bet is to go through and apply separate UV mappings to separate parts of the object - each engine could get it's own cylindrical mapping for example, with a large planar mapping for the top of the ship, and another planar for the bottom.
Then in the UV Editor you will be able to navigate to display just those separate UV maps (the default on opening will show you them all, but you can move through the UV spaces to see just one at a time). You can then either apply different textures to each part, or you can move around those now separate UV mappings to lay them out neatly in one image.
Things to note - you can select faces in Point Edit, then apply UV Maps just to those faces, which is how you can start applying different maps to different parts of the object. Sometimes using color helps, as you can then select all faces of the same color (and it also helps see what is happening better in the UV Map sometimes), so you can paint those different areas with different colored materials.
Also note that a UV map will almost always look a little strange, most things once unwrapped and laid out flat might not look entirely as you would expect :)
Hope this helps get you started! UV mapping is very complex, perhaps the trickiest bit in modeling, and generally even the best automatic procedures won't work without some help and work from a person in how to best lay out the UV spaces.
Tom |
Post by TigreStripe // Feb 4, 2008, 8:43pm
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Thank you very much for your input Tom.
That would explain the strange unwrap. I did note that when I selected a face or edge in perspective it would highlight in the UV editor. Also, the engines and the fins are on different layers. I thought that might make it easier to texture later.
I really have to read the manual more in depth! :) |
Post by jayr // Feb 5, 2008, 2:44am
|
jayr
Total Posts: 1074
|
like tom said unwraping is a complex business but worth the time invested. Ive spent longer mapping an object than doing the texture just to avoid the dreaded streching you get if an incorectly mapped object.
This software is pretty good:
http://www.unwrap3d.com/index.aspx |
Post by TigreStripe // Feb 5, 2008, 11:23pm
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Cheers, Jayr. I have seen Unwrap3D mentioned before. I'll give it a go. |
Post by TigreStripe // Feb 9, 2008, 6:20pm
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
I've added the spines back again. The thing that gets me about this render is all the shadows. I used the light library setting for skylight.
I haven't tried to do my own light set up yet but that might be the way to go. One or two other things I might add to it before I hunker down and try to texture it. |
Post by kena // Feb 9, 2008, 6:22pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
You could try an image based light It might give you a bit better look, but it will take 8 times as long to render. Well.. maybe not 8 times... probably more. I am using it for the first time, and if I leave it out of my scene, it takes 94 seconds to render and if I put it in, it takes 3.5 hours. ;) |
Post by TigreStripe // Feb 9, 2008, 10:57pm
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Imaged based light. Would that be HDRI? |
Post by kena // Feb 10, 2008, 12:23am
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
I think in Workspace, the HDRI would be like the image based light in Model view. Yes - try that. |
Post by TigreStripe // Feb 10, 2008, 2:34am
|
TigreStripe
Total Posts: 75
|
Thanks for the advice Kena. I will give image based lights and HDRI a try, when I'm ready to wait for the renders. :) So what I did was mess around with the lights. These renders are in workspace with Vray. Most of the other renders have been LWs. I turned shadows off some off the lights (in modeler, a pain switching.) Not what I was going for but better I think. Still trying to get that realistic look that I almost had in the previous posts. Ah well. I'm getting there. |
Post by TomG // Feb 11, 2008, 5:24am
|
TomG
Total Posts: 3397
|
HDRI and IBL are fairly different in many ways. Note that HDRI exists in both workspace and Model side. IBL only exists in Model side (and is an older approach). HDRI gives generally better results to my eye.
It also need not be too time consuming to render, you can keep settings low for test renders and only turn it up for final renders.
For soft shadows in your first image, you could try using Mapped Shadows rather than raytraced. These have soft edges, and can be faster than raytracing to render sometimes, but less accurate and more prone to artefacts.
For an IBL, they worked better with Mapped Shadows. You could turn up the resolution of the IBL to get it to work with raytracing, but that meant slow render times!
HDRI gives very good soft shadows very easily I find.
HTH!
Tom |
|
