New to modelling - need some advice on my model

[Bnae 1431]

That is one high quality barrel you're making. I suggest you remove all the excess vertices from the plat surfacess. Also you could use normal map for some of the shapes, mainly for the rounded parts > HP to LP.

Unwrapping looks like it should although the top and bottom part are bigger than the actual cylinder of the barrel. So the side will be a little bit lower quality than else.

You can delete and add verts to existing surfaces even after unwrapping.

 

Something like 1k verts should be closer to reality in basic game models. For comparison weapons should be <20k verts

 

Didn't read the whole topic so pardon if i'm repeating someone.

[[evo] dan 79]

That is one high quality barrel you're making. I suggest you remove all the excess vertices from the plat surfacess. Also you could use normal map for some of the shapes, mainly for the rounded parts > HP to LP.

Unwrapping looks like it should although the top and bottom part are bigger than the actual cylinder of the barrel. So the side will be a little bit lower quality than else.

You can delete and add verts to existing surfaces even after unwrapping.

 

Something like 1k verts should be closer to reality in basic game models. For comparison weapons should be <20k verts

 

Didn't read the whole topic so pardon if i'm repeating someone.

So, just to get this into my head. I should use the existing hp model and bake it onto a plain cylinder (maybe use a higher poly version of my geo lod?) and that will save all the polys or should I just reduce the number of polys in the model by reducing the number of sides?

[Bnae 1431]

 

That will explain most of it. It's all optional, it's not too harmfull to create some details to the model, but eventually you (also me) need to learn to bake most to Normal maps. What i do, i make the HP mesh and in the end if the polycount is too high, i'll start either removing details or baking the details to normal map.

[[evo] dan 79]

:Snip: vid

 

That will explain most of it. It's all optional, it's not too harmfull to create some details to the model, but eventually you (also me) need to learn to bake most to Normal maps. What i do, i make the HP mesh and in the end if the polycount is too high, i'll start either removing details or baking the details to normal map.

Thanks for that video! The guy makes it seem really easy to do which is nice. I've got a Blender book (I think its Blender by Example by some French guy) at home but haven't managed to get as far as the baking section. I'll assume these normals need no converting for use in Arma or do they need to be brought into .paa format?

 

I'm away from my home PC all week (with work, as usual) but i'm having a go on my laptop. I've got it working on a cube so i'll probably try and have a bit more of a go throughout the week and see what I end up with come the weekend when I'm back at home on my own PC. Then maybe I can have a go at trying to make some textures for the things!

[x3kj 1247]

rule 1 of low poly modelling: all edges/ vertices that do not contribute to the shape of the model should be eliminated (unless UVs, smoothing or mesh deformation require them). Your barrel has alot of pointless edges and vertices.

[Kydoimos 916]

rule 1 of low poly modelling: all edges/ vertices that do not contribute to the shape of the model should be eliminated (unless UVs, smoothing or mesh deformation require them). Your barrel has alot of pointless edges and vertices.

Hiya, [evo]dan! The barrel's looking good - well done, mate! Of course, as x3kj's pointed out, there are a few edges and vertices which you could lose. You'd be surprised how good a model will look, even with a rougher circle, containing less vertices in its circumference. On the other hand, I personally feel that poly-economisation will come with experience - though it is best to focus on it early. The most important thing, I think, at this stage, is not to lose any confidence. Maybe texture the model, get it working in-game, and enjoy the creation process :) On your next model, see what you can get away with, using the least number of vertices possible. Sure, if you fancied editing the existing barrel model - go for it! But my point is, it might be too detailed - but it will work and will still look great in-game.

Keep at it! This community needs good modellers! And you're doing the best thing, posting questions and pictures on the forum. It's a great way of getting help, criticism, and feedback. Fastest way of learning ;)

[[evo] dan 79]

Thanks guys for the feedback!

What ill do is ill include it in the model at first just to give it a try. I'll also bake it onto a low poly version too which I can use for the second lod. Then I can ditch the first lod if needed.

I'll do some texturing the weekend when I'm back at home as I forgot to take the blend file with me whilst I'm away.

[Macser 776]

It's well made. The unwrap looks good too. The only part that would raise an eyebrow for me would be around the filling hole. 

 

The top section could be reduced without messing with the overall look. It doesn't need to be contiguous. The cap/filling hole could be separated from the flat section. Which could help with any shading errors around that area, if there's any present.

 

The ridges along the main cylindrical section could be done without too. But that's debatable, as unlike the top section they do contribute to the silhouette.

 

I think it's a personal choice for you more than anything else. You could certainly go with something a lot less detailed. And I think most would for something that adds to a scene, rather than acts as a focal point. As was suggested, baking might offset some loss of detail. 

:)

[[evo] dan 79]

Baking it is then

[[evo] dan 79]

Done some more work today on it.

 

http://imgur.com/a/0rX6o

 

I've got another question. Do I unwrap and texture the HP and use that for the texture for everything else or do I just use it for the normal map and then forget about the HP model?

[Macser 776]

The high detail version of your models don't need any materials or uv assignments. All you really want from them are the normals. The low detail version is the one you bake all the information to. So it will require materials/uvs.

 

Unless you actually want those sharp edges then you should make sure both models are set to smooth shading. The low poly should follow the contours of the high as closely as possible. For the caps I'm not seeing any faces. So I'll assume they're ngons. Although there's nothing wrong with ngons, there's certain situations where they don't work as well as you'd expect. Especially for game models. I'd break those caps down into tris for the low poly.

[[evo] dan 79]

The high detail version of your models don't need any materials or uv assignments. All you really want from them are the normals. The low detail version is the one you bake all the information to. So it will require materials/uvs.

 

Unless you actually want those sharp edges then you should make sure both models are set to smooth shading. The low poly should follow the contours of the high as closely as possible. For the caps I'm not seeing any faces. So I'll assume they're ngons. Although there's nothing wrong with ngons, there's certain situations where they don't work as well as you'd expect. Especially for game models. I'd break those caps down into tris for the low poly.

Are tri's ok then? I've been trying to get them into quads as that's what the book i'm using suggested.

[Macser 776]

Where quads are preferrable is during the construction stage. So always keep a source model in quad form. They're easier to manage for edits. They're also well suited to characters. But that's another discussion in of itself.

 

Tris and ngons are fine most of the time within the application you're using. Particulary for hard surface models ,where you have open areas without any changes in angle from one loop to another.

 

Games are slightly different. It's better to have the model fully triangulated for the finished p3d. Although it's not a requirement. The main reason being, that you don't know in advance how the engine will turn the edges once it triangulates the faces. Before rendering in game all models are triangulated anyway. Regardless of how you've constructed it.

 

Here's a quick bake down, from a sub surfed model to a simple low poly. distance at 0, bias at 0.1. Both models are smooth shaded with autosmooth on and set to 180 degrees. The low poly doesn't need to be super detailed to look decent.

 

When ever it's possible put your seams in places you might expect to see a break or some sharpness in the real thing. Getting rid of seams can be a pain in the neck where normal maps are concerned. The less work you have to do with them, the better.

 

[[evo] dan 79]

Nice information. I'll keep having a go through the week on my works laptop. I've made the geo/fire lod something simple with a 8 sided tube.

[Macser 776]

Yeah. Keep collision meshes (geo) as simple as you can. Fire geos can be a little more specific. But don't waste your time making them conform to the res lods. Simple closed shapes are best. The way they look is irrelevant, as you'll never see them. Simpler shapes give an engine less to keep track of.

 

If you look at Bnae's video on the last page you can see he's using Cycles as opposed to Blender internal. At a base level the output would be pretty much the same. Although Cycles tends to be slightly more accurate. But to be honest, not in a massive way. Not in relation to baking at least. But the one advantage it does have is the ability to use a cage to control the rays. It's not as good as xnormal. Few applications are, seeing as that's what it was specifically designed for. But nonetheless it does work, and depending on the model it can produce comparable results.

[[evo] dan 79]

Yeah. Keep collision meshes (geo) as simple as you can. Fire geos can be a little more specific. But don't waste your time making them conform to the res lods. Simple closed shapes are best. The way they look is irrelevant, as you'll never see them. Simpler shapes give an engine less to keep track of.

 

If you look at Bnae's video on the last page you can see he's using Cycles as opposed to Blender internal. At a base level the output would be pretty much the same. Although Cycles tends to be slightly more accurate. But to be honest, not in a massive way. Not in relation to baking at least. But the one advantage it does have is the ability to use a cage to control the rays. It's not as good as xnormal. Few applications are, seeing as that's what it was specifically designed for. But nonetheless it does work, and depending on the model it can produce comparable results.

I've been sticking to that video for baking now. I'll have a bit more of a push depending on how the work pans out work wise.

[[evo] dan 79]

For some reason, I cannot get the second texture to show up on a new model. I've defined it in the configs and created the selection in the p3d file. Could anybody help me with this as I've spent the last couple of hours trying to figure out what it is as I've copied what I did for the other model.

 

I even tried putting the wrong path in and it showed an error saying it cant find the texture so it must be changing something but I cannot figure what since the whole object is defined as the "CAMO_All" selection.

 

Heres my folder:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xih0qincdfstlb7/Dan_Oil_Barrels.rar?dl=0

[UK_Apollo 476]

Change your model.cfg.

The classname in CfgModels{} must be the same as your .p3d.

 

line 10

class dan_barrel_type1 {

change to

class Type1_Barrel {

[[evo] dan 79]

Yeah that worked. Thanks for that.

[[evo] dan 79]

Anyone got some good advice on making my textures look nicer as they look a bit plain at the moment.

 

See the image below:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xo2gekrt6tp1t35/Jerry_Can_Session2UVTake3.png?dl=0

[six_ten 208]

1 hour ago, [evo] dan said:

Anyone got some good advice on making my textures look nicer as they look a bit plain at the moment.

 

See the image below:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xo2gekrt6tp1t35/Jerry_Can_Session2UVTake3.png?dl=0

 

Think about what the barrel is made of.  The factory paint is green, but the barrel itself is steel -- steel here can be grey, but also a bit rusty.  Draw "wear" on your texture:  find the parts that stick up and get abraded.  Paint a bit of grey steel, some rust on that, then overall a bit of dirt, grunge, scratches in the smooth fresh green paint.  shiny unworn steel exposed where the paint is worn recently, duller steel and rust in the areas that were worn off a longer time ago.  Then do similar for the paint above it:  fresh looking shiny green paint in areas that don't get rubbed, duller, scratched paint where there's some abrasion commonly, and so on.  When you get some experience and really want to make it pop, try a multimaterial shader for it -- mask the steel, the paint, whatever materials the object is made of.  For now you can do just the simple shader, simple texture, and get some practice.

 

 

This might give you some insight:  http://www.cgsociety.org/index.php/cgsfeatures/cgsfeaturespecial/the_top_ten_tips_of_texturing

[[evo] dan 79]

Can anyone explain why i'm getting this with the handles in Arma but in Blender they show up perfectly fine?

 

http://imgur.com/kAucZ5q

 

Is it an Arma thing or do I just need to flip those normals?

[lennard 447]

12 minutes ago, [evo] dan said:

Can anyone explain why i'm getting this with the handles in Arma but in Blender they show up perfectly fine?

 

http://imgur.com/kAucZ5q

 

Is it an Arma thing or do I just need to flip those normals?

 

Looks like the face on the handle are inverted. Open the model in O2, select those strange looking faces, press W.

 

That should fix it.

[[evo] dan 79]

22 minutes ago, lennard said:

 

Looks like the face on the handle are inverted. Open the model in O2, select those strange looking faces, press W.

 

That should fix it.

I'll give that a try, its just a bit weird that it got broken between Blender and O2.

[Swan-UK 2]

Hello

Not sure if I am too late or what but there is an awesome site you can get a number of textures from.. it's free but you will only be allowed to get lower res.. to get higher res you need a payed subscription but it's www.textures.com (formerly CG Textures), absolutely great for environment maps, seamless textures.. just about everything really :)