A few folks have asked to see some wireframes for the low polygon version of some of my CG models. Your wish is my command. Click HERE for a little album of graphics.
HERE’s another album containing some shots of the spaceship with no textures, with and without bump maps for comparison, for those of you who like the technical stuff. Here you can see the color blocking I use early in the texturing process, and hopefully you can see the difference the bump maps and normal maps make to the surface of the model. There is a lot of geometry only hinted at in the bump maps, but without them, the surface of the model would be pretty empty.
Very well done models, IMO. Thank you very much for showing the wires!
Glad you enjoyed ‘em. I’ll get you ones for the Moon Shark soon, too.
Hey,
I haven’t been online for about a week and a half,
lots of stuff to look through, here and elsewhere.
I like the wireframes,
it’s nice to see how things have been done.
I wonder though, are you more careful about keeping things all quads with character models than a model like this which is more static?
Thing is I noticed some triangles, around where the main hull is connected to the cockpit viewport.
I have a lot of trouble myself sometimes when modelling, keeping things in quads and it often takes me a long time to work things out to remove tris.
Anyway, what I especially like is the bump vs. no-bump shots, and then comparing those to the fully textures shots.
It shows a lot better how big a difference the bump really does.
Heya, Sardtok
Yup, tris are tricky. I avoid ‘em when I can, even on static models like this. A poorly-placed tri does not smooth well when surrounded by quads, but sooner or later, you have to deal with tris and pents, because they resolve quad intersections like the area around the cockpit.
Rather than try to completely avoid them, I try to limit them, and put them in places that are less likely to be problematic. For instance, on the cruiser, they occur along a difference in smoothing and materials, so it’s not as noticeable as it would be right smack in the middle of a nice, smooth batch of quads.
Same thing with a character – I’d never try to resolve a tri or a pent in the middle of a smooth area like a cheek, but I will often do it on the interior of a finger crease, where not only is it less noticeable, it can actually help the model deform well.
Glad you like it, and it’s nice to hear from you again! Don’t be a stranger…
I like your works!
Thanks, Marco. I’m glad you like it!
I came over from SF Signal. I like what I see so far. I’ll be checking back and I’m looking foward to the first episode.
Hey, Mike! Great to have the SFSignal folks over. I’m glad you like what you saw, and I hope you come back often.
Thanks for the note!
You should be working on professional animations. The work you do is on. You should apply yourself to a project you create which is able to be distributed well independently, or should should work on a project that is distributed through a well established company…Either way, your talent should go beyond this…
Thanks, Mitch. I’ve been saying that for years…