|
|
Apr MMC - Character - Dragn
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.
Apr MMC - Character - Dragn // Work in Progress
Post by Dragneye // May 5, 2008, 8:39pm
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
Alright ... since I didn't get a reply, and time is a wastin', I start from the beginning, and here's my entry WIP |
Post by Dragneye // May 5, 2008, 8:41pm
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
I've started with the trusty box modeling technique. This is the body. |
Post by Délé // May 5, 2008, 10:42pm
|
Délé
Total Posts: 1374
|
Good start Dragoneye. :) Not a whole lot to comment on yet. My only advice, as you've probably heard before, is to try to keep quads and smooth even edge flow as you go along.
Looking forward to seeing this progress. :) |
Post by Dragneye // May 8, 2008, 9:08am
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
Dele, I do tend to not worry abt every edge flow working at this stage; fix when I get down to the nitty gritty of perfecting shape. Sloppiness I guess, taking care of it later, with rework, or an sds layer. Though I always try to insure the quads exist to avoid headaches later.
Que: why do we usually work with quads and not triangles? Is there a specific reason? Never tried to create with triangles, and notice the best modelers doin the same. And for curves, I notice that a triangle might be better. Am I right, or missing something?
And thank you for the view and interest :-) |
Post by jayr // May 8, 2008, 12:32pm
|
jayr
Total Posts: 1074
|
You use a Quad because the render engine knows exactly what way the quad is facing, it's not so clear somtimes with a triangle. Also, animations and deformations work better with Quads, a square is a more felxable shape than a triangle in real life, don't know if this is the reason in 3d though.
Some programs react really badly to having tri's in a model some are ok. best to avoid them thought just incase.
One thing i've learned lately with modelling is to try and get your basic shape right first, i.e. all your poly flow right and that, before you start to add detail, it just seems to make life easier for me. |
Post by Délé // May 9, 2008, 3:53am
|
Délé
Total Posts: 1374
|
Quads are good for organic models because they smooth better. SDS can be unpredictable with tris or N-gons (especially with a combination of different polygons) and you can get unwanted pinching or creasing.
Below is an image that shows how tS applies SDS to different polygons. You can see that the quad polygon divides in a much more predictable manner. It divides vertically and horizontally to create 4 quads out of the original 1. Tris and especially N-gons are not as predictable. Notice that all of the polygons divided into quads. If you start with a quad, it is easier to divide into quads. So quads with good clean edge flow following the topology of the mesh will produce cleaner, more predictable smoothing and avoid undesired pinching or creasing.
12346 |
Post by Ambrose // May 9, 2008, 6:30am
|
Ambrose
Total Posts: 261
|
Allways quads and only lines were needed, if you just have a streight line no need for more lines, only if you plan to make adjustments with those then it has to be there.
And flow, most important a good model nice flow, you should be proud afterwards how the lines flow in a natural manner ;)
Good example was this thread, these models very simple with nice flow therefor the nice result.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C9-bjeF8gw
thought I posted a thread or someone else, maybe just a thought ;)
Anyway keep up the good work and keep pushing!
SeYa/Ambrose... |
Post by butterpaw // May 9, 2008, 6:54am
|
butterpaw
Total Posts: 831
|
Thank you guys .. this helps me too! ^_^
@ Dragneye - I look forward to seeing this one develop.
^_^ |
Post by RAYMAN // May 9, 2008, 7:57am
|
RAYMAN
Total Posts: 1496
|
Most render engines break down quads and ngons into triangles so its
only realy a problem for sds and flexing !:rolleyes:
Peter |
Post by Nez // May 13, 2008, 10:26pm
|
Nez
Total Posts: 1102
|
Dele/Jayr - thanks for the useful comments on subdivision/quads etc, helps it all make a bit more sense to me too...
This is still an area I'm struggling with a bit and am slowly trying to improve; from Dragneye's comments I expect we may share a commonality in approach whereby we're perhaps more used to creating objects based on sweeps and primitives and are both trying to adapt better to a slightly different approach for subdiv. (no offence intended if I got that wrong!)
Just as a reminder, as per the MMC thread, deadline has been extended to give the few entries so far some time to get somewhere, plus a chance for a few more entries... |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 13, 2008, 11:05pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
I wouldn't consider tris and n-gons to be less predictable, it's just that they produce poles (vertices with 3 or 5 edges as demonstraited in the image Dele posted) and thus changes in face loop flow at that point and can be pinch points in the SDS mesh during animation. Poles are very important for loop modeling since that is how the flows are defined. |
Post by Dragneye // May 16, 2008, 8:09pm
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
I am VERY sorry for this delayed reply; non artwork got be goin nuts and just came back to my 'real' world.
@ jayr - I agree abt getting the basic shape right. That's the main action I do after the boxes are added. - Interesting abt some render engines not figuring out a tri as opposed to a quad face; The way I see it, tri has 1 less line, and should be Easier for it to figure out.
@ Dele - Thanx for that example. Interesting how many extra faces are created. I am very minimalist when it comes to face count; doesn't always work, but try my hardest to create smoothness with less faces. Something I like to do (but generally hate to add ANY sds) is add 1 layer of sds and then clean up the problem spots. It creates beautiful smoothness, the puter doing the work for me, and I just have to only rework a few areas.
@ Ambrose - if one looks closely at the models from the link, you notice that some of the actual FACES are curved. Now, thats either cheating by him (he deleted a few lines that make up the curve), or, there is a program I don't know abt that draws a 'curved' individual line. ...Anyone?
@ Butterpaw - gettin to some of it now :-)
@ RAYMAN - that's what I think, which made me ask the specific question, cuz I don't know abt many, or most render engines.
@ Nez - Yes, I do mostly use box modeling cuz though I love NURBS, when reverted to regular polys, it adds a ton of extra lines, which I then have to go back and clean out. When it's a complex shape/curve, it becomes daunting. -- As for the contest, thanx for the extension. Will have to go check out when it is, but even if I don't do this in time, I have many things I wish to do with this dragon, so will finish this one way or another.
@ Jack - I am trying to make this model right with animation in mind, so please elaborate on 'face loop flow', and 'loop modeling'. |
Post by Dragneye // May 16, 2008, 9:01pm
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
here's a lil progress. The 1st pic shows how beautifully sds works with just a rough version of a model. That trouble spot on his back was only created when I left the top line off, easily fixed, and a ton of eye-breaking work avoided with 1 sds layer. |
Post by Ambrose // May 16, 2008, 10:00pm
|
Ambrose
Total Posts: 261
|
Dragneye your making good progress and the model is comming along nicely.
Only thing is it doesn't have the flow that is importent when modeling.
Try to sit down one hour and only concentrate on the flow that is making the lines flow nicely and streight not like now where they go in different directions.
Do this until you think it looks beutiful then you know your done!
Now it will also be so much easier to continue your modeling since you see and know how the lines should flow ;)
Keep up the good work!
SeYa/Ambrose... |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 17, 2008, 1:10am
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
About the loop modeling, you'll want to refer to the thread on poles that I linked in this thread here:
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?t=5275
Here's a quick example though:
12400
The red dots are 5-poles, where 5 edges come to a single vertex, and the blue dots are 3-poles, where 3 edges come to a single vertex. You can see right away that the direction of the blue face loop changes every time in encounters a 5 pole. And that is the trick: 5-poles are what control mesh flow.
I also talk about it in chapter 4.7 of the new Organics Modeling course.
For your dragon, if you think about where the muscle groups are and have the flow of your geometry follow those muscle groups, that will give you a more impressive looking model that will animate better.
I wouldn't over think it though. It looks like you're on a roll right now, so it's mainly just stuff to keep in mind while working. Once you are aware of how the face loop flows affect the shape of your mesh, you'll find it becomes much easier to create any organic shape and to add details to it. |
Post by Dragneye // May 17, 2008, 6:32am
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
@ Ambrose - the variance in a line is many times on purpose (sometimes a point being higher or lower than the surrounding one); I use it to define the 'organic' look ie: muscle groups in this case.
I tend to worry abt the final product rather than esthetics in modeling, but notice many others much better than me worry abt the 'look' of the mesh. Dunno... maybe I missing something. Any input?
@ Jack Edwards - you're great man. Thank you for the efforts. Will check out your new course.
QUE: are you saying that 5-poles are good mainly at creases, for animation? - Are 5-poles ok in general? I tend to think they should be avoided. |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 17, 2008, 1:51pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
Nah, most people say that you should put the 5-poles in areas that don't deform much. The thing to watch out for is that the more edges you have going into a vertex the more weight it is given during SDS. 6-poles are very bad and should be completely avoided. 3-poles can be useful to ease direction flow changes but shouldn't be placed along straight edge flows because they don't hold their position and bump outward. 5-poles should be placed where direction changes in a mesh flow are needed, so yes they OK and are important to use. It's just important to be aware of their effect on the mesh and to use them at a tool in your mesh creation toolbox. ;)
BTW, using poles themselves to create creasing in your model isn't a good approach. If you're looking to create creases for detail, then use the poles to define the direction of your edge flows then add extra loops to define the crease detail.
Hmm... sorry if that's confusing. :o
Addressing the point that Ambrose is making, your mesh flow should define the muscle shapes. Especially if you plan on animating. It's not that a particular vertex should be in a particular position in space, but rather that poles are place to allow the edges to follow and define the structure of the feature being described. Once the topology is correctly defined, it becomes easy to sculpt the volumes for the shapes you need. |
Post by W!ZARD // May 17, 2008, 4:49pm
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
Hi Dragneye - Interesting work so far.
FWIW I struggled to get my head around the whole idea of edge flow for a while because I was making static models and concentrating on still images. It was only when I started trying to animate my older meshes that I finally figured out the importance of getting the edges to flow so the mesh deforms smoothly.
Hope this helps |
Post by Dragneye // May 17, 2008, 6:35pm
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
Hi ya W!ZARD - nice to have your input in here. Yes, animating a model adds a whole other level for the modeler. I have tried to make all my recent models with animation in mind, just in case :-)
Jack, thanx again for that free tutorial. Went through some of it and am starting to get the idea. "Be smooth baby, be smooth" :-)
So here's a pic of the front part of the thigh, and back edge of the winglet.
Can you all please point out exactly where one should best place a 5-pole? The numbers are one area, and the letters the other. |
Post by Dragneye // May 17, 2008, 6:43pm
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
alrighty then... here's the pic
btw - don't worry abt the edges there. It's incomplete. Just wondering where 5-poles are best in these two situations. |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 17, 2008, 7:23pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
Ach. Gave me a bit of a tangle there to work with, but this should get you going in the right direction:
12407
The brown lines show the desired flows. The blue lines are changes or added edges. The red scribbles are edges to remove. The red dots are the suggested 5 poles, and the purple dots the 3 poles.
Notice how once the geometry flows are correct, adding detail is just a matter of putting in a new loop along the existing one. That's why topology has to come first before detailing.
Hope that helps! :) |
Post by jamesmc // May 17, 2008, 7:53pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Here's some additional graphic references.
Let me know if I can be of further assistance.:cool: |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 17, 2008, 9:16pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
LOL James! :p |
Post by Dragneye // May 18, 2008, 3:04am
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
You are the MAN Jack! :D - Actually, this was made extra messy and posted to help us all get a better understanding, since these areas of transformations (ie: wings, thighs, hands, feet, etc) are what every modeler will face the moment they consider making an organic model with bending parts. I had started a similar thread back when, but didn't get much of a reply so thought I'd revisit these issues here in hopes that all get replies, just like yours.
You have risen to the occasion in your Usual Wondrously Helpful way. I salute you!
Now gonna go study :-) |
Post by Dragneye // May 18, 2008, 3:09am
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
Oh... ummm... what's this? Ummmm... James, have you been drinkin? Ok, umm, does 5 follow 2, and can you please make the red line clearer, so your efforts in helping all of those watching learn somtin get it better? |
Post by butterpaw // May 18, 2008, 3:21am
|
butterpaw
Total Posts: 831
|
ROFL*WTIME, James, my sides ache... :D
*With Tears In My Eyes |
Post by Dragneye // May 18, 2008, 12:08pm
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
Ok wait... he was kidding? James? Ohhhhh c'mon!! I spent 3 hrs trying to follow the red line, starting at the green line, and got no where, just back at the green line. And I thought I had the.... Oh skip it
:D |
Post by Nez // May 18, 2008, 10:17pm
|
Nez
Total Posts: 1102
|
You are the MAN Jack! :D - Actually, this was made extra messy and posted to help us all get a better understanding, since these areas of transformations (ie: wings, thighs, hands, feet, etc) are what every modeler will face the moment they consider making an organic model with bending parts. I had started a similar thread back when, but didn't get much of a reply so thought I'd revisit these issues here in hopes that all get replies, just like yours.
You have risen to the occasion in your Usual Wondrously Helpful way. I salute you!
Now gonna go study :-)
Dragneye - totally agree, this is a really common type of scenario for organic type modelling that I generally haven't seen explained very well so far, so it's really useful to start to see some useful pointers on how to deal with this stuff. I'm still struggling to get to grips with the various types of loops and how best to get flow, particurly as TS5 lacks the new Workspace tools for adding loops and the like...
James - your image pretty much sums up how I usually feel (my brain at least) when trying to follow examples of how to create lopos etc for organic modelling - it's a testament to Jack in particular that I don't find his explainations that convoluted! |
Post by kena // May 19, 2008, 1:19pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
And check out the free modeling organics course available this month.
Can't remember who did it, but....
:D |
Post by Dragneye // May 21, 2008, 10:35am
|
Dragneye
Total Posts: 602
|
Kena, TY. I did take a quick ride thru Jack's tut and found it well made, and helpful. Picked up a few pointers.
Jack, good work, so much so that I started a whole new model with a technique I wanted to try. My time is so limited lately that I went back to what I had started.
Anyway, here's a few shots of where I'm at now. I tried to follow Jack's guide, but got lost in the process, forgetting what I moved, changed, added or deleted lol, so I just went on. I usually block in parts of the model, then rework them before I add any more. That may not be the most effective way, but i am refining my technique as I go. The goal is to find the quickest way to get the desired result, and I also tend to finish off lines as soon as possible. That creates the problem of not a totally clean-lined object, but my ultimate goal usually is to minimize poly count.
The last one shows how I worked the previous area we were talking abt. I've tried to add 5-poles away from highly bending areas. |
|
