Page 4 of 4

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 18:41
by VonGratz
A mini-sub submarine carrier for the Atlanteans

Image

and also a new fighter
Image

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 18:45
by Hoi
You're really using WAY MORE polies than you need to use in those 2 pictures, fix it please.

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 19:14
by VonGratz
Yes, I have a trouble here, particularly in the plane is very necessary to reduce half of the polygons without miss the shape.I think the texes will simplify the needs for forms also.

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 19:16
by Hoi
Mind uploading them? (just to me, I won't use them for anything), if you do I'll show you what I mean :wink:

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 19:38
by VonGratz
Yes!I will upload and will PM to you.
Thanks
vonGratz :wink:

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 19:43
by smoth
I think he is adding those extra edge loops because he is doing 3do texturing.

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 19:49
by VonGratz
No way Smoth :lol: , 3do texes never more !!!!! To texture a carrier with 3dos would be an insanity and also the distortion could kill the entirely work.
Im learning UVMapping....
Until this week the score was 10 UVMapping x 0 myself, but finally I made a goal :mrgreen:

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 22:04
by VonGratz
Hoi,
I think that I understood :-) Without loose any angle (one or two not necessary :lol: )
Better?
Image

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 18 May 2009, 22:36
by Neddie
An improvement!

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 19 May 2009, 01:28
by Pressure Line
remember that spring can shade even fairly blocky shapes smoothly (eg. octagonal wheels) so you can probably knock half of the subdivisions off the front of the carrier sub too :)

*edit* picture to demonstrate the polies I'm talking about!

Image

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 19 May 2009, 02:36
by VonGratz
Really I dont known it until now, but you answered my next question before I do it :lol: :lol: :lol: as Ive read something and have this doubt
This forum is amazing :wink:
Thanks

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 20 May 2009, 02:37
by VonGratz
A question:
Did the UVMapping texturization is good for large areas as the parts of the deck of this carrier for example?
Or it need to be subdivided?
Image

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 20 May 2009, 02:47
by Neddie
All depends on how you organize the UV map.

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 20 May 2009, 03:37
by VonGratz
neddiedrow wrote:All depends on how you organize the UV map.
Did it means good scale in that pieces ?

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 21 May 2009, 03:02
by rattle
You don't need any subdivisions, all you need is to do is to describe the shape with as little geometry as possible. If you set up the edge hardness properly, then you won't have any shading issues either.

You'd need additional edge loops to counteract distortion at the joints when using bone animations for example.

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 21 May 2009, 06:53
by SpikedHelmet
Polycount doesn't matter. Stop filling people with lies. For a large flat upward surface like a, aircraft carrier flight deck, texture efficiency is far far far more important than poly conservation.

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 21 May 2009, 13:43
by VonGratz
Thanks :wink:

Re: BattleFleet's WIP

Posted: 21 May 2009, 14:41
by rattle
SpikedHelmet wrote:Polycount doesn't matter. Stop filling people with lies. For a large flat upward surface like a, aircraft carrier flight deck, texture efficiency is far far far more important than poly conservation.
But subdivisions won't simplify the UV for space conversation. You can still add edges where you want to have your cuts.