3D WEAPON MODELING...post your creations here
Comments
-
[GM]Saidin wrote: »I'm curious to see what a wireframe of these looks like. That scope came together really fast! The renders look good, I'm assuming the material settings are what put the text in place etc.
Are these exportable as obj's?
The text is a separate mesh
yes anim8or allows me to export in obj and 3ds,in kerkythea i export them in .obj
sry for the low resolution the program dosent have wireframe rendering so i had to screenshot -
The text is a separate mesh
yes anim8or allows me to export in obj and 3ds,in kerkythea i export them in .obj
sry for the low resolution the program dosent have wireframe rendering so i had to screenshot
Screenshots of wireframes are often better than rendered wireframes!
Great stuff, though it would export a pretty messy obj. I can get a sense of how that program works! -
The text is a separate mesh
yes anim8or allows me to export in obj and 3ds,in kerkythea i export them in .obj
sry for the low resolution the program dosent have wireframe rendering so i had to screenshot
Thats quite alot of unnecessary polygons, but it still looks good. ^..^ Keep it up, looks nice. -
The text is a separate mesh
3D text is cool for detailed close ups. But it would probably be better for render time if it was a texture, and if you wanted them to be 3d just add depth with some bump settings. But idk how that program renders so... -
Here's a couple of little things I did since you guys requested. All this talk of 3d makes me want to start getting back in to it. It's been a while, both of these 2 models were done probably 6-8 months ago.
So for reference, these are high poly models done in 3d studio. Using SubD modeling. They would be intended for normal mapping to lower-res models for game engines.
A Security Camera
I included a wireframe of the sub-d in action for those that might not be aware of what this type of modeling is. Default materials and just basic lighting.
And a Scope (sorry for the low light on this one, the render settings got messed up and I'm not sure what I did since the model/file/setup is old!)
-
in the past i dident used other programs for rendering and anim8or texture maping is horrible so i had to improviseand somehow to get the text on models,now i got used to this techniqueMax_Skillz wrote: »3D text is cool for detailed close ups. But it would probably be better for render time if it was a texture, and if you wanted them to be 3d just add depth with some bump settings. But idk how that program renders so... -
in the past i dident used other programs for rendering and anim8or texture maping is horrible so i had to improviseand somehow to get the text on models,now i got used to this technique
There's certainly nothing wrong with using 3d models as text.
It's all in what the final result is for. If your looking to make a cool picture of a weapon you created, and the text as a model is the fastest, easiest and looks the best then go ahead!
If your result is to translate the model into a game-res type deal then the text will no doubt be placed on the texture or material for the model.
It's all in what you want the final result to be used for! There's no right or wrong way in 3d. -
-
[GM]Saidin wrote: »There's certainly nothing wrong with using 3d models as text.
It's all in what the final result is for. If your looking to make a cool picture of a weapon you created, and the text as a model is the fastest, easiest and looks the best then go ahead!
If your result is to translate the model into a game-res type deal then the text will no doubt be placed on the texture or material for the model.
It's all in what you want the final result to be used for! There's no right or wrong way in 3d.
qft[MOD]Kelathe wrote: »SubD's are usually unneeded if you can get a good low polygon with great maps on it, you wouldn't know the difference. ;p
I never understood why people think more polys = better.
True especially if your rendering for movies or gaming, you want the least poly's possible to speed rendering. But with subD it actually takes less modeled polygons cause it's smoothed and added for you instead of having to get highly detailed with your design. -
Nice.They both look nice,espacely the scope:D[GM]Saidin wrote: »Here's a couple of little things I did since you guys requested. All this talk of 3d makes me want to start getting back in to it. It's been a while, both of these 2 models were done probably 6-8 months ago. -
Max_Skillz wrote: »True especially if your rendering for movies or gaming, you want the least poly's possible to speed rendering. But with subD it actually takes less modeled polygons cause it's smoothed and added for you instead of having to get highly detailed with your design.
We could be discussing some of this stuff for hours.
When it comes to modern game art there is a high res model and a low res model. The high res model rarely gives a crap about how many polygons are in it. As long as you get the result you're looking for when its normal mapped to the low res.
Engines render X number of polygons on the screen at any given time which affects the performance of the game. So you have to model the low res within the limits of the engine that's rendering it.
For the basics of it anyways. -
[GM]Saidin wrote: »We could be discussing some of this stuff for hours.
When it comes to modern game art there is a high res model and a low res model. The high res model rarely gives a crap about how many polygons are in it. As long as you get the result you're looking for when its normal mapped to the low res.
Engines render X number of polygons on the screen at any given time which affects the performance of the game. So you have to model the low res within the limits of the engine that's rendering it.
For the basics of it anyways.
Yeah that makes sense, and you know I just realized I was thinking of "sub patching" when we started talking "subD" lol. My bad, but both are slightly similar in purpose I guess. I tend to go for sub patching over subD though. Depends on the shape and purpose of the model. -
I'm assuming your talking about NURBS? I have no idea how to work those so good on you for being able to work with those patches! It's a powerful tool in max for sure!Max_Skillz wrote: »Yeah that makes sense, and you know I just realized I was thinking of "sub patching" when we started talking "subD" lol. My bad, but both are slightly similar in purpose I guess. I tend to go for sub patching over subD though. Depends on the shape and purpose of the model.
I'm trying to learn zbrush, but the interface scares me. I prefer mudbox instead. -
So i started workin on the AWM,still got much work to do.
But i finished the scope...so here it is
Also, if I can comment on this scope, you're missing a bit of space on it. Between the two focus and angle adjusters there isn't enough space to put a second mount.
Almost all scopes will have two rail mounts for the gun. This looks like there isn't enough room for them. Would make for an awfully inaccurate scope!
here is a couple references.
http://sfw.org.ua/uploads/posts/2008-02/1204317983_d100_4438_img_2.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/19uyxt.jpg -
[GM]Saidin wrote: »I'm assuming your talking about NURBS? I have no idea how to work those so good on you for being able to work with those patches! It's a powerful tool in max for sure!
I'm trying to learn zbrush, but the interface scares me. I prefer mudbox instead.
Yeah, in lightwave they're called SubPatches, and I love working with them. Down the road I'll be looking into 3dsmax and/or maya. But atm they're just to darn expensive for me. I was lucky to get Lightwave from a friend that sells the software. -
Thenx for the for the images.illl corect that when i'll make the mounts and assemble all together.The scope is still like in a prototype stage.[GM]Saidin wrote: »Also, if I can comment on this scope, you're missing a bit of space on it. Between the two focus and angle adjusters there isn't enough space to put a second mount.
Almost all scopes will have two rail mounts for the gun. This looks like there isn't enough room for them. Would make for an awfully inaccurate scope!
here is a couple references.
http://sfw.org.ua/uploads/posts/2008-02/1204317983_d100_4438_img_2.jpg
http://i54.tinypic.com/19uyxt.jpg -
My favourite tool atm, is boole. Idk if you have it on lightwave or if it's called something different, but it's amazing.Max_Skillz wrote: »Yeah, in lightwave they're called SubPatches, and I love working with them. Down the road I'll be looking into 3dsmax and/or maya. But atm they're just to darn expensive for me. I was lucky to get Lightwave from a friend that sells the software.
And also, 3Ds Max is so hard to learn/get use to. I gave up on it, the only thing I know is how to make chracter animations, like I could make a CSS GSGG9 do the birdwalk. The lighting on 3Ds Max is awkward also, either that or I seriously have terrible lighting skills. -
My favourite tool atm, is boole. Idk if you have it on lightwave or if it's called something different, but it's amazing.
And also, 3Ds Max is so hard to learn/get use to. I gave up on it, the only thing I know is how to make chracter animations, like I could make a CSS GSGG9 do the birdwalk. The lighting on 3Ds Max is awkward also, either that or I seriously have terrible lighting skills.
There is a tool "boolean" for cutting shapes with other shapes. Awesome feature for creating unique shapes quickly and easily. idk if that's what you're referring to.
Do you use 3dsmax? -
Ye, a boolean. On Cinema 4D it's jsut shortened to boole, I used it on my AWM so that you are able to look through the scope and put the holes in for your fingers, I thinking about putting one on the barrel, lol.
And to the 3Ds Max part, not much, I tried it a few times, never put any of the work onto youtube or anything cuz it looked like poop, but I would fool around with it a bit, and got some plugins for it, and the plugins you can get for 3Ds Max are awesome. They make objects do the craziest effects ever. But still, it's a very complicated program, which is probably why it is a 3.5k dollar program and Cinema 4D is only a few hundred, lol. -
Ye, a boolean. On Cinema 4D it's jsut shortened to boole, I used it on my AWM so that you are able to look through the scope and put the holes in for your fingers, I thinking about putting one on the barrel, lol.
And to the 3Ds Max part, not much, I tried it a few times, never put any of the work onto youtube or anything cuz it looked like poop, but I would fool around with it a bit, and got some plugins for it, and the plugins you can get for 3Ds Max are awesome. They make objects do the craziest effects ever. But still, it's a very complicated program, which is probably why it is a 3.5k dollar program and Cinema 4D is only a few hundred, lol.
Boolean, extender plus, bevel, stretch and size are the main tools I use. Boolean is great because using layers I can take any shape I create and use it as a guide to cutting and shaping other shapes, which in turn can cut other shapes lolz.
My favorite features in Lightwave are subpatches and the fiberFX. FiberFX can be used anywhere from hair styling to putting leaves on trees and can even have dynamics applied to them.
http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/bb425/Max_Skillz/Giraffe3.png
http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/bb425/Max_Skillz/Giraffe5.png
But to stay on topic here's my latest render of the Winchester and anaconda, I'll try to finish modeling my m4a1 and post that one later.
I'm not going for super detailed accuracy because of the nature of the video they're for, but I like them. :] -
My favourite tool atm, is boole. Idk if you have it on lightwave or if it's called something different, but it's amazing.
And also, 3Ds Max is so hard to learn/get use to. I gave up on it, the only thing I know is how to make chracter animations, like I could make a CSS GSGG9 do the birdwalk. The lighting on 3Ds Max is awkward also, either that or I seriously have terrible lighting skills.
EWWWWWW don't boolean. It demolishes meshes.
And lighting in max is actually pretty easy it just takes a little practice. There are thousand-page books to do realistic lightning rigs (ala tinapalms stuff) but you don't need to do that.
For example, the security camera that I have lit pretty decently is just playing with a standard 3 point light source and a raytrace material.
Of course as mentioned you could spend 25 years setting up something realistic. But my stuff is to be imported to a video game and lit by an engine, so I'm not really worried about making things look like they are actually realistic materials in Max. -
Max_Skillz wrote: »True, but I still like to use it with simple base models. ;P
Yeah its all in the modeling style. If I'm going to boolean it would be for cutting shapes, but if I ever had to sub-d those shapes the mesh would be so broken I might as well have modeled the "hole" in the first place.
With a grid system and the right cuts down a face you can pretty much get any shape you need! -
I found a tutorial on how you can export actual ingame models from the CS program files, and import them into 3Ds Max.Max_Skillz wrote: »Cool, did you make that from scratch, or was it a model you downloaded and posed?
So I only posed it.
I wish I could do the same with CF files ._.
Even though the CF characters models aren't listed in the program files
Unless I'm jsut stupid and can't find them.
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 15 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 2K CrossFire
- 590 CrossFire Announcements
- 592 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 159 Community
- 12 Modes
- 280 Suggestions
- 16 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 38 CF Competitive Forum
- CFCL
- 14 Looking for a Team?
- 541 CrossFire Support
- 64 Suggestion
- 12 CrossFire Guides
- 33 CrossFire Off Topic