Taros Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 No comment... just incredible. The open source 3d package "blender" can handle 45 millions of polygons. Look yourself: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PalSan Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 great work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 17, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Not bad!. You'll notice when he moves the camera that the model drops down to a lower subdivision level in order to keep camera movement relatively smooth. ZBrush does the same thing too. I wonder if Andrew could make 3D Coat create a low detail mesh along side the main mesh. This way 3D Coat could switch to the lower detail mesh when panning the camera. Although this could slow down other functions as two meshes would need to be created and maintained. On the plus side - the low detail mesh wouldn't need to be created every time there's a minor change. By the time we reach a high detail level we're only making superficial changes. So it might be possible to have the low detail mesh be updated very occasionally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member polyxo Posted December 17, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Fwiw: I recently have reached 45 Mio. Polygons with 3DC too(I believe with 3.18)on a powerful machine - but I could not do anything useful at this state any more. The Computer froze after Quadrangulation while Normal-Map-Creation/ Occlusion-Baking... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member cnob Posted December 17, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 I think it must be a newer version of the blender alpha 0. Cause I really wonder how he's doing that, with his graphicscard. Also there are some buttons on the multires-modifyer tab, Im missing in my version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member VolumesculptR Posted December 17, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Sure. It's blender 2.5. Haven't you notice the 'brand-new interface' (layout, colors, as well as modifiers)? Still alpha0, thou great perspectives coming... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted December 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 If someone is interested: He is using a GeForce 8600GT graphicscard and working on a Core2Quad 2.95ghz. The OS is 64bit with 8 GBytes of ram. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member G-Rom84 Posted December 17, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 For my taste sculpt looks too lagy to work with, anyway overall facecounter is quite impressive on that type of hardware configuration(similar to mine except video card, i have a bit better ). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted December 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 He wrote, with 20 millions polys the work is as smooth as butter... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member cnob Posted December 18, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Sure. It's blender 2.5. Haven't you notice the 'brand-new interface' (layout, colors, as well as modifiers)? Still alpha0, thou great perspectives coming... Sure I noticed that, Im using it too. But the thing is, that my blender 2.5 Alpha 0 crashes after 7-10 million polys and my PC is a little stronger than the one he's using. That's why I guess that he's maybe using a newer build of the 2.5 alpha 0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 That's a more powerful CPU than I have and more RAM too. I think 3DC could come close to that at least on the same computer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 20, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 That's a more powerful CPU than I have and more RAM too. I think 3DC could come close to that at least on the same computer. 3D Coat currently can't drop to a lower detail level when panning the camera, so at 40 million polygons it would probably be unusable on a card similar to the one above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member kay_Eva Posted December 21, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Wow. The performance is astounding. I was just sculpting at 30 million at the same speed of 3dCoat's 8million in surface mode. Now I'm seriously considering adopting a 3dCoat Voxels --> Retopo for sculpt mesh --> Blender Sculpt --> Import Big Mesh to 3d-Coat --> Retopo for Realtime --> 3dCoat Bake + Paint --> Export to blender for Rigging and animation This is actually quite cool as I began 3d in blender and I've been looking for an excuse to use it again. Haven't really been using blender all year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 The question is, do you really need 40+ million? I've done work in 3DC that was 25-30 million and noticed 2 things. I couldn't imagine needing any detail finer than that. And will your normal map that you eventually bake to even support that much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member kay_Eva Posted December 21, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 The question is, do you really need 40+ million? I've done work in 3DC that was 25-30 million and noticed 2 things. I couldn't imagine needing any detail finer than that. And will your normal map that you eventually bake to even support that much? Yeah but it's faster. The pinch tool in particular gives very nice creases very smoothly. It's like working with jelly. Just a month or so ago blender didn't have this ability. In a month or so 3d-Coat will have abilities it doesn't have today. At the moment, in my opinion, 3d-Coat excels at beginning (volume) and end (paint) + retopo of course. While the middle (detailing) is a bit clunky due to the fact that it uses emerging technology. I think for now blender will be in the middle portion for me primarily because I enjoy the experience of using blender and now it's sculpting is amazing. Of course I'm mindful of greebles awesomeness and all that I still have to figure this out. Different models call for different process Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 21, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 The question is, do you really need 40+ million? I've done work in 3DC that was 25-30 million and noticed 2 things. I couldn't imagine needing any detail finer than that. And will your normal map that you eventually bake to even support that much? You're right, there's lots of other issues that come into play. For example I created a dense mesh just for test purposes and then ran out of memory when I went to quadrangulate the bugger.. We don't NEED 40 million polygons, but then somebody could argue that we don't need 3 million polygons. It's all just question of convenience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Actually no I'd say you do need 3 million or more in order to get a decent shape in order to send it to the painting room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 21, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Actually no I'd say you do need 3 million or more in order to get a decent shape in order to send it to the painting room. Well I was talking about modeling in general. You could create a very nice model from 10000 polys using more conventional modeling methods and then paint in the details using bumpmaps/normal maps. But no, we like the convenience of being able to sculpt the general shape and the details all with the same tool set. So 100 million polys in 3D Coat would be very convenient for me, but for technical reasons it's just not practical. So for now we don't have much choice but to create our models in bits and pieces. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 So for now we don't have much choice but to create our models in bits and pieces. I don't understand that. I just finished the sculpting aspect of my current character (see Armitage in the WIPs area) and I did the entire model there, not bits and pieces, plus I had plenty of polys to spare. That entire sculpture is just a little over 23 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 21, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 I don't understand that. I just finished the sculpting aspect of my current character (see Armitage in the WIPs area) and I did the entire model there, not bits and pieces, plus I had plenty of polys to spare. That entire sculpture is just a little over 23 million. Well your model proves my point. It's made from lots of bits and pieces in the earlier screenshots. If/when you tried merging all those components (straps, pants etc) into a single model then you'd no longer have the sharp edges that you clearly have in the earlier stages, not unless you bumped up the detail level to something like 30+ million polys. But we'll see, I'm currently making a full figure myself (fully posed, no T pose) and so I'll report back to let you know if I manage to complete him as a single figure. I had the head at six million polys (hey, he's old and wrinkly!) and realized 3D Coat wasn't going to be happy if I carried on with the rest of the body at that detail level, so I've had to drop the detail down a level. I'll see how it goes... Watch this space!! btw - I'm on a similar system to yours. 8800 GTX, Quad core.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Oh you're talking about working with Layers. What's wrong with that? You don't see Mudbox or Zbrush users working entirely with one resolution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 22, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 Oh you're talking about working with Layers. What's wrong with that? You don't see Mudbox or Zbrush users working entirely with one resolution. One resolution? I take it you mean "one mesh"?. If a Mudbox or ZBrush user makes a model from seperate parts it's usually for reasons other than avoiding poor performance. To get back on track - my point is that 3D Coat can't comfortably display detailed models in the same way that subdivision based modelers can. This is because those programs can drop down to a lower detail level whenever things start to get a little slow, for example - when panning the camera. So the only way to work with the same level of detail in 3D Coat is to divide your model into several parts. I'm sure Andrew will be able to come up with something eventually. There's gotta be a way around the problem. But right now my solution is to create a model from several parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member G-Rom84 Posted December 27, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 The question is, do you really need 40+ million? I've done work in 3DC that was 25-30 million and noticed 2 things. I couldn't imagine needing any detail finer than that. And will your normal map that you eventually bake to even support that much? I wouldn`t refuse to have as much poly as possible. Why should I limit myself in anything? To get back on track - my point is that 3D Coat can't comfortably display detailed models in the same way that subdivision based modelers can. +1 what a pity((( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 I agree I certainly wouldn't be opposed to 500 million polys or whatever high amount if it was already in place, but why go through the extra effort of making it when I don't think it's needed? Just like I was saying to someone yesterday about getting a mac computer. If someone gave me one I wouldn't turn it down, but I'm not going to spend tons of money buying one when I already have a PC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member G-Rom84 Posted December 27, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 If someone gave me one I wouldn't turn it down, but I'm not going to spend tons of money buying one when I already have a PC. hehe it`s something new to me, I`ve heard some fairy-tales that Mac computers are cheaper than PC analog in US, the thing wich designed almost for dummies and for other people who don`t want to mess with stuff under the hood, but I see that those were just hearings, and situation with prices is pretty the same as here in place where I live. And of cource I agree that in general cases 8-12mln. poly for humanoidal char would be enough even for pore details, wrinkles, and other final touches. but charecter modeling is an "one brunch of a big tree" of possibilities and purposes 3d modeling software designed for, there may be a large grotesque, stylized buildings with columns, bas-reliefs or some high-tech stuff with many small detailed pieces, and it`s good thing, when you are allowed to see the whole picture. and it`s become very boring when you aproaching the moments when machine becomes slow and it`s time to cleanup/optimize/retopologize the scene, especialy when yo`ve just started to push somthing interesting and want to push it further now, but not to do any cleanups at this moment, to avoid missing an idea and waste time. I don`t know if I clearly described the situation, haven`t practiced in english from school Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 27, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 And of cource I agree that in general cases 8-12mln. poly for humanoidal char would be enough even for pore details, wrinkles, and other final touches. I'm sorry to say that this isn't the case. I've just made a 16 million poly character and the detail level wasn't enough to create wrinkles. 16 million is okay for skin pores, but you definitely can't get wrinkles. Obviously 16 million would be fine in subdivision modelers because you have edge flow and can therefore pinch the polygons together to create really fine wrinkles. Also, as predicted I found that other issues came into play when working with high poly objects in 3D Coat. For example - I had major problems trying to getting my character out of 3D Coat. Quadrangulate runs out of memory (4 gig of ram). Export crashes when trying to export a detailed object. It's also very questionable whether retopo mode could display a 16 million poly model with a retopo mesh overlayed over it. Frame rates are always much slower in retopo mode because of the overlayed mesh. To cut a long story short - I eventually ended up having to degrade my character to 4 million polys before things became workable. So my advice is to always make a rough mesh in voxel mode and then do the details in paint mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member G-Rom84 Posted December 27, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Obviously 16 million would be fine in subdivision modelers because you have edge flow and can therefore pinch the polygons together to create really fine wrinkles. but you could make more dense topo at the begining, while modeling your basemesh in those areas, where you need in future finer wrinkles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted December 27, 2009 Advanced Member Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 but you could make more dense topo at the begining, while modeling your basemesh in those areas, where you need in future finer wrinkles. yep, that's another advantage of poly modelers in that you can add more polygons in areas where detail is necessary. This is another reason why they can display models that seem incredibly detailed. It's not that they're more dense than a voxel model, it's just that the details are in crucial areas like the face, yet the rest of the body is quite low detail. Although in some ways the high/low detail mesh advantage is often lost on ZBrush because polypainting tends to require a mesh with an even density. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member G-Rom84 Posted December 27, 2009 Member Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 I`m not fond of polypainting too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.