Member pgson Posted October 1, 2013 Member Share Posted October 1, 2013 Hello, all. I'm trying some ambitious stuff and need some help. I'm in the process of trying to recreate models used years and years ago in a couple of FMVs for a game series called Legacy of Kain. Previously, I've only used 3D Coat for the texturing aspect on models from one of those games, to try and bump them up to 2K levels. But this is something beyond. I'm going for accuracy to these high rez, for the time, models, and I'm in need of some advice. My issue is this: in the Voxel room while sculpting, be it in voxel layers, or in surface mode, I'm finding it difficult to achieve small, tiny detailing. The crease brush looks alright, but only to a certain level and inverting the build up brush, or build, depending, works so far, but I get so much artifacting and unwanted beveling when just trying to make a crack, or wrinkle. The model's been uprezed to over 10 million polygons, and yet that doesn't appear to be enough. This is what I'm recreating: And here it is so far: A close up on the details of that model: And my close up, and my issues: Instead of getting the crisp creases I'm after, it's a bumpy, soft, artifacted in spots attempt. Am I missing something easy here? Is it best to continue at this level and then take the model into the paint room to continue detailing it in bump maps and such? Should I instead uprez it again for this level of detail to be possible? Any help is most appreciated. I plan on using this model and animating it, maybe even bringing into the UDK editor for a game recreation. I know for that I'm going to have to make a low poly version anyway, but I want as high as possible to start off with. This is also my first real modeling, besides an hour, or so, tinkering before in ZBrush, so I'm trying to learn heaps of stuff as quickly as possible. Thanks for your time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member stusutcliffe Posted October 1, 2013 Advanced Member Share Posted October 1, 2013 The way I do it is to block out in voxels, get the basic shapes sorted.Then go to surface mode for all the sharper creases .Make sure you have Artmans brush presets, I think they come preinstalled with the last few betas but they should also be downloadable from the resources section of the site.For actual skin surface textures like pores and light wrinkles ,I do this on the texture bump map after retopo-ing. The bigger the texture map the better the painted detail. I use 4k on heads usually,but I dont do game stuff so maybe that would be too large for you. I think 10 million polys is probably enough.I had about 6 million on the "scarecrow" ( see the gallery) and by the time I had retoped and painted my computer was chugging a bit. Decimating in surface mode works really well,so for suff thats not the centre of attention you can save a few resources. I learn something new every single day...then promptly forget half of it for the next time! I dont think there is a set way to do any of this stuff you just need to learn a series of tricks. I have just learned enough to do what I want to do, and I am sure there must be easier better ways still to discover. The head you posted looks ripe for going into surface mode! But beware I think if you go back and forth too much,3dcoat doesnt like it. Also I find it a good idea in surface mode to go to the voxel tab on the top line ( even though you are in surface mode?) and clean surface and memory options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted October 1, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 1, 2013 ^Basically what he said Shorter version: give up voxels, go surface and never leave. You may want to use decimate/reduce when going to surface first time to avoid getting a unecessary high res mesh which hold no details, and then add details with liveclay/surface+removestretching brushes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 1, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 1, 2013 Thanks for the replies I have been in surface mode using the builder and crease brush mostly. To varying degrees, the crease brush seems to be working, but now and then and especially here in the eyelid area it's just not doing what I need. making it smaller past a certain point seems to decrease its ability to make a deep line, no matter how far the depth is set up and it's got too smooth of a boarder, even though I don't have it set to smooth. It seems hard to get these brushes to make sharper edges, sharper without artifacts and other mess. I'll definitely look into the Artmans brush presets. I wanted to check out a later build of V4, as I'm still using 4B. I checked the thread with the beta releases and there's a list of past versions, but no links other than the 7B one, which people say they're having issues with. I noticed I didn't have the smoother brush and articulator? I think that was it -- when I was looking at the Pilgway tutorial on them. Also, didn't mean to confuse with the last post, but to clarify the head and body are one and that's the mesh that's 10+million polycount. The model has a bunch of parts, clothing, etc., otherwise, but it's not just the head and neck I showed: As for texturing, I'd love to go 4K on this, but unfortunately with the Education version here I'm limited to 2K. I didn't mind it when doing the retexturing of the older game models, but it is unfortunate to have that limitation here Also, yes I've seen that going back to voxel mode both will often bump up the polycount and will decrease whatever details you put in already, which is a pain. I soon learned to do most of the heavy shaping in that mode, even some detailing, then go into surface mode when ready and stay there, I guess. I don't want to go back to voxel mode now, for fear it will ruin what I've already detailed. It also appears to me that staying in any mode for so long decreases the brush potency, or something. I thought it was because I needed one more bump in resolution and that seemed to solve the issue, but now it's breaking down again. At least that's my perception. I might be just needing a better brush preset. And time to absorb everything more, maybe. The help is very much appreciated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member stusutcliffe Posted October 1, 2013 Advanced Member Share Posted October 1, 2013 Looking good! Definitely get Artmans set...http://3d-coat.com/download/3dcpack/file-list/?tx_neofileshare_pi4%5Bcat%5D=1 They may seem overwealming but I only actually use a few of them! Just go through them and pick your faves.I think they are just the normal brushes but tweaked by Artman. I used the Edu version for a whole year,and I know what you mean about the 2k limit.I tended to break models up and put more than one texture on,but I think that uses up more layers for painting and you only get 7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor Tony Nemo Posted October 1, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 1, 2013 If you break your model into seperate layers, you can achieve higher res on those parts needing it without wasting it where it is not really necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member moska Posted October 1, 2013 Advanced Member Share Posted October 1, 2013 Hi,are you by chance the piggyson from youtube? I'm only used to voxels,but you can give a try on live clay too! as for moving between surface and voxys,you can save different version and experiment without fear. also consider upgrade licence cause it worth the price. cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 1, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 1, 2013 Thanks for the helpful replies again No, I am not piggyson. I have a YouTube channel under this same name of pgson, but no artwork is on it (this above is my first ever real model, again other than an hour's, or so, dabbling in Zbrush; otherwise I've only done some retexturing on existing low poly models before). I upgraded to 7B so I could get Artman's presets. Just a preliminary trial and man, that sharp brush is what I'm talking about! I'll have to turn down the depth and increase the width a bit, but that is the kind of detailing brush I was after Thanks for that suggestion and for him for posting the brush presets. Do you mean subdivide it, Tony Nemo? I haven't split models into layers, so I'm just a little unclear. I wish I could afford such an upgrade. Perhaps, though, I can use ZBrush on this PC for texturing back and forth through Photoshop when the texturing process comes up, to use 4k on it. I looked into 3D Coat for more the texturing aspect originally, since ZBrush on my Macbook wasn't handling the back and forth through Zapp to Photoshop right and is just not as intuitive to work with in general for me. Upgraded to a PC, so perhaps the link works better this time. Oh, and great stuff on the Scarecrow, stusutcliffe Love all of the little details you were able to achieve there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor TimmyZDesign Posted October 2, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 2, 2013 My recommendation to you is that you get a good grasp on how to use the different SHIFT key options available in Surface mode. Above the viewport you will see a drop-down menu called "SHIFT action". Click on that drop down and you will see a lot of different options (powerful smoothing, relax, decimate, etc.). Basically when you hold down the SHIFT key and use a brush on your model, it will perform the action that you chose in this menu. To see what happens to your mesh when you use these options, make sure you are in wireframe mode (the option is available in the View menu, or press "w" on your keyboard), and then zoom in close to see the individual polygons of your mesh. Then choose different SHIFT actions and watch what happens when you brush on the mesh (while holding down the SHIFT key). You will see that you have an incredible amount of control over resolution density, and smoothing capability. In areas where you need a surface to be very smooth, you can use the "reduce" or "decimate" SHIFT actions first, then follow it up with the "powerful smoothing" action. This will help also to get rid of lumpiness in your mesh, and will help many of the surface mode brushes perform better. If you find brushes don't seem to be working well anymore, then probably you should reduce the density of your mesh in that area, and then try using the brush again. Be aware that the LC brushes tend to add a lot of resolution to the mesh when you use them, so it is a good idea to follow those up with the "decimate" SHIFT action to keep detail, but reduce resolution. Once you get a hold of these things, sculpting in 3D-Coat should become quite enjoyable! On the other hand, I still think using 3D-Coat TOGETHER with Zbrush is really the best way to work. If you get a lumpy mesh that you want to be smoother, you can always send it quickly to Zbrush, run Zremesher on it, then bring that back to 3D-Coat to continue sculpting. I also find working in Zbrush can be kind of tedious, and I prefer the logic of 3D-Coat, so I try to stay in 3D-Coat as much as possible, but Zbrush still does certain things better. Oh and great job on your model! It's looking good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted October 2, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 2, 2013 On the other , I still think using 3D-Coat TOGETHER with Zbrush is really the best way to work. If you get a lumpy mesh that you want to be smoother, you can always send it quickly to Zbrush, run Zremesher on it, then bring that back to 3D-Coat to continue sculpting. I also find working in Zbrush can be kind of tedious, and I prefer the logic of 3D-Coat, so I try to stay in 3D-Coat as much as possible, but Zbrush still does certain things better. Oh, now why would you want to do that, right AbnRanger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted October 2, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 2, 2013 I couldn't comment on this with more infos, now I can: DON'T ADD ARTMAN'S PACK. Simply download the latest beta, the pack is in it by default. If you install Artman's pack and then go to newest betas you'll risk getting corrupted presets. Besides the brush engine got so much polish that staying with older version is a crime (voxels are really the poor child of the band now) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 2, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 2, 2013 Thank again for all the help and the kind words toward the model. I already had downloaded the beta and installed Artman's presets, but all seems to be working well. The sharp present is amazing. That's what I was expecting out of the crease brush, even possibly too much at at times. I've turned some of it down in depth and such. Usng that with the builder brush invert action, smooth, has really done wonders in the short bit I've worked more on the model. I've also tried out some decimation smoothing after the fact (before I have only tried the powerful and tangent options). I think I should do that a lot, since now the only drawback is the tessellation is super duper high on the brush presets and my 10 million poly body model has jumped up over 17 million, with only doing a little work around the eyes so far. Yikes. I'll have to see about a compromise in somehow reducing things in areas. Other than that, though, this is finally feeling like modeling on clay, and even better in much of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 8, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 8, 2013 (edited) ^Basically what he said Shorter version: give up voxels, go surface and never leave. You may want to use decimate/reduce when going to surface first time to avoid getting a unecessary high res mesh which hold no details, and then add details with liveclay/surface+removestretching brushes. I definitely think that I should have, as now the model is very high and has some surface holes. The brushes are great, but the sharp brush sure can be quick to go a bit too far. I tried to decimate the mesh, as it's over 40 million triangles/poloy's and was causing the system to drop below 30 fps. However, I think because there are so many holes in the surface that I can't see, it simply hangs at 79% and locks up. I take it because the mesh is so high now that trying to close holes is also making it hang. It's been at it for three hours and I don't know if it will complete it. I tried manually closing the holes with the close tool, but that was taking a long time, so I thought I might as well let the program try and close them all at once. This is a problem right now. It's wasting a lot of time. Also what wasted time I think is trying to perfect the cracks and crevices in surface mode with the brushes. They're a great improvement, but I think stusutcliffe was correct in doing only light creasing here and finishing that in texturing, as it's proven hard to achieve the level of detail with just those brushes, has been way too time consuming, and now I have a mesh that I can't export, decimate, or close holes without causing the program to lock up... Here's the mesh thus far in detailing: Much if it is doing what I want, as he has a ton of cracks throughout his face and body, like almost a mixture of stone and metal for skin. However, I think I can further polish it when I get to the paint room in layers to what I really want. Problem is right now in the mesh. You can probably see the biggest problem areas are the portion between the brow and nose that's very crinkled and pinched, under the eyes, and stuff like the center of the body -- how to make sure the program is ok with this mesh's verticies and such when it decimates, or exports, or even trying to get the holes in the mesh that have formed to close. Bear in mind, I want as much hard cracking as possibly in the skin of the model where you see it. It's supposed to be there, just I also need the model's topology to work, especially for animation. (I know, that's the trick, isn't it?) I can't send it to Zbrush until I'm able to export it, and it's currently hanging at 79% just like the decimation option. Maybe if I can get it over there and have Zremesher retopo it, it will work again... But, I think nothing is going to work until those surface holes are closed. Also, the forums for me, and 3D-Coat's site have been down the past two days. I don't know if that's US region only, or what, but considering this is the only way to ask for help, that has sucked. I hope all is right again with the servers. Edited October 8, 2013 by pgson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member stusutcliffe Posted October 8, 2013 Advanced Member Share Posted October 8, 2013 The site was down for a bit for myself in the uk also. Back to your model...I cant solve your hole problem. Sculpting all those little creases would have been best done in bump/paint mode I feel. But the problem would be you would have to retopo before you do them,where as your way, you can finish off the whole thing and see it before you retopo. You takes your choice....See it all or see it half done....retopo...then finish off in paint. I suppose the way to do it is to think of the wrinkles as part of the paint process rather than the sculpt process. Maybe for your nose wrinkles perhaps try ctrl+shift Relax, it may "unknot" it all a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 8, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 8, 2013 Hi stusutcliffe, yes I'm entertaining the thought of going back to a previous stage and doing this again. Only the base relief of the wrinkles in the sculpt and then perfecting them in the paint room. I tried to find and close holes on that one, and there were only three, but even trying to close those 3D-Coat wound up in unresponsive limbo, so it looks like that function in particular really doesn't work all that well. Better to just use the close hole tool now and then, I guess, or I don't know. By the way, I tried to edit my post above, but it looks like you can't edit after it's been posted for a certain amount of time. I meant to say I've tried to downgrade visible volumes, and that hung at 79%, before I tried decimate, or export of the object, which both similarly hung up and would not complete. Without any of those options working, I have two choice, it seems. Go over that model for the next full day, because it will probably take that long, and close holes manually with the close tool option, or to use the previous model and have to adjust facial and body proportions again, along with a base relief of those cracks and wrinkles. I am not sure either will be faster, lol But, live and learn, I guess... Thanks for the reply again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member stusutcliffe Posted October 8, 2013 Advanced Member Share Posted October 8, 2013 "What doesn't kill you,makes you stronger" If I lose even 15 minutes because of a non-saved crash, my neck goes all red with anger.....but I always re-do it better! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 8, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 8, 2013 (edited) Heh, yeah I thought it was just my hangup that I can't seem to have few days' sessions without at least a few moments of aggravation-frustration-rage lol Hm, and I'm still a little confused as to why this is having such an issue. I'm looking over at BeatKitano's alien heads and especially the one he most detailed. If he's able to sculpt such sharp creases and pits on the sculpt without it, I assume, having issues I am talking about, then there's really no reason why the program shouldn't be able to handle what I've done on the Kain model here... I'll check out his live sculpt feed, if I can. Edited October 8, 2013 by pgson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 19, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 19, 2013 (edited) Well, it's been a while. I've been in modeling/re-proportioning limbo. 1 part 3D-Coat's limits in what can be sculpted, 1 part my learning of how to go about things, 1 part I'm just too picky about getting every inch of this model right... Etc. But, anyway, I think it's ready for retopology and then I can finally texture it. Not quite sure still how one goes about exporting a model with so many parts, while preserving them all as separate subobjects. I'm going to try and handle the retopology and texture painting in Zbrush, so I just need to know the best way to bring this in. Here's the final model. Proportions on a lot of things have changed since last I posted: Closer shows how much the detail ha been blurred during the decimation process a while back on the body: And I've done some semi-hard surface scupting for the various parts on the greaves model: Compared to the original models used in the cutscenes, using various images such as these: The model with some base shaders used just for color to differentiate things a bit: Based on the first image I posted from the Gamepro magazine and various angles and images able to be captured from the two FMV intros. So, images such as these: I get this puppy finally textured and I can move on with trying my hand at animating it. I plan on then doing a regression of this model from this evolved vampire form back to the previous forms seen in the series. So, his younger vampire self, and even back when he was originally human. And the two games within that had him in various armors with different weapons. I'll then do the same with the other protagonist from the series, Raziel. I think next time I'll try the base sculpt in 3D-Coat, then see if Zbrush's ability to detail and reform things, if needed, is quicker and more reliable. The one thing about having to reposition and arm, or part of the face -- whatever it is -- with the pose tool is that it's a great all-around tool, but neither it, nor any of the move options I've seen, can seem to handle doing anything to the mesh without distorting images, be the model cached or not. Also, modeling clothing is hard, getting surfaces shaped, smoothed, can be a real chore even though I've given the voxel extruded layer plenty of depth, and even gone in and built in more depth/clay afterward, just so the lumps stop... They don't anyway. I also tried my hand at the cloth simulator, modeling free-form for the cape. Lots of trial and error on that, but the end result is vastly superior than the original model of the cape I created. The problem with the cloth simulation is getting it to fold right without folding over itself, because then it's finalized and there are holes, tears, hard lumps, and all manner of nasty to deal with. I guess I just have to learn that nothing ever will be perfect with these programs. I have to try a faster way than this. The base form I posted originally only took, off and on, 3-5 days to sculpt. Now, it's been somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 weeks since, working all night a lot of the time, and I don't feel that's the best approach. That's not including the 4 days I didn't work on the model, not knowing why the detailing was causing the issues it was. And I would say a few days of that were wasted doing that detailing to that degree on my end, but the rest has been more time devoted than I expected. Hm, I guess I just have to figure out a proper workflow/pipeline that does the job I need with the least amount of frustration.. Good luck is probably the response, lol, but anyway. Sorry to gripe so much. Edited October 19, 2013 by pgson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted October 19, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 19, 2013 Don't give up on 3dcoat just yet, you made the beginner's mistake: think voxel was the way. It's not, not anymore. You started with it, and therefore inherited a high density mesh with terrible topology for the surface mode (where you really define your model, detail and crispiness included). Therefore you got problem with the surface mode tools being buggy, slow. Now I agree certain things are much easier done in zbrush than 3dcoat (handling of thin object such as clothes is easier to handle in zbrush for instance), but that doesn't mean you couldn't do most of the work in 3dcoat on this char. What you got is already pretty good (even more than good if it's your first go with the sculpting side of 3DC) but you could do much better, and that's where it pains me, IF you had started with surface from the beginning. Now I know that when you encounter those issues you're not sure you want to use the software much more on ambitious projects (been there quite a few times myself) but if you use surface, don't go crazy with the detailing from the start and iterate slowly you should be fine and be able to create highly detailed (and more importantly CRISP) models. Hard surface sculpting is perfectly doable (even better than zbrush dare I say if you just want to sculpt and not think "booleans" and more "organic" curvy stuff): The same can be said with creased and crips details: So you'll do what you want in the end, but I highly suggest you to try your next sculpt with very little work from voxel mode, like very basic blocking then proceed to surface mode (which I'll follow with attention as I really like LoK, as I did a kain myself years ago and would fancy doing a Raziel these days ^^) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor Tony Nemo Posted October 19, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 19, 2013 I prefer your version to the refernce images. You must have learned alot in it's creation. As you have arguably done more detail before using the Paint room than is easy for such a large model, you may find that your work will go faster when you use the whole program rather than trying to do it all in V/S/LC mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 20, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 20, 2013 (edited) BeatkKitano, very nice renders. I'm certain that 3D-Coat can achieve this and more. I would think the promotional images on the site and other people's work, like yourself, more than prove that. Sure, I know what the workflow should be now when sculpting surface mode, so that should help going forward. I do have saves from early in the sculpting phase on here and I have just tested exporting the very low resolution model of that and have merged it into the scene, clean surface, remove intersections, weld any vertices, smooth all -- the works :p. If I wanted to, I suppose that I could try taking that model now and, using the higher density one above as a guide, reshape this and sculpt it until it is the desired shape, then detail that up. I am thinking about it, since your post there is kind of making me want to personally challenge myself to get the desired results I was looking for in the sculpt room. I don't have a deadline on this project, other than the one in my own head, so it does give me that option. Meanwhile, I have the existing model in Zbrush and the remesher did do a decent job, after trial and error, on retopoing it, with some areas that will need a fix. My question would be is it paining you that I wasn't able to achieve the crispness of the details in the surface sculpt because doing so in the normal map would be less desirable? Or, was there another reason? I'm wondering if it's possible to apply the normal map's detail information back onto models, kind of the reverse of baking out the high rez info onto them in the first place for low poly models. But, I guess I'm asking for some clarification. If I'm able to achieve the detail fully by way of texturing, what's the difference in that, or what are the pros and cons in your view? Thanks, Tony I don't like fighting with programs, but that kind of feels like what I've been doing, even more than just the problems with the initial body sculpt's issues. I am learning as I go. Before this sculpting attempt, I only used 3D-Coat for repainting textures on existing, older models. I mentioned before that I set about retexturing the last game in this series, Defiance. Able to grab the old 2003 models, using 3D-Coat became ideal to do texturing. Trying to redo the 2D textures in Phtooshop only was never going to achieve what I wanted. Even though the only textures these models had back then (PS2/Xbox game) were the base color maps, so no bump, materials, specular -- none of that-- I was still able to achieve a lot, even to fool the eye a bit via the shape of the model (no mod program exists currently to reintegrate altered models, so only the textures could be swapped using Texmod), and to give the hint of depth, even when I couldn't paint with depth. For instance: Original: So, I know if I could achieve that much with just the color map, I definitely think I could make something really great with all the map options available, and a much better model to start off with. I know this is the age-old question, but yeah, what are the benefits and the pitfalls of doing such depth and detailing in the paint room, or sculpting them directly on to the model? Open question. I don't think I've seen a real definitely answer on this. I kind of would like to have the high quality sculpt preserved with all detailing, if the model otherwise is dependent on other maps to achieve almost the illusion of the depth. Then again, it's all computer software, so it's all an illusion in that respect. I guess the main benefit to sculpting is sending that sculpt off to be 3D printed. Unless my question of is it possible to actually apply the normal and displacement stuff back onto the model, as in within the mesh. My intent beyond creating an ingame asset to use for cutscenes and for, well, ingame stuff, is to have a preserved high quality model of this character simply for preservation reasons. it appears that the original GlyphX stuff might not even exist anymore, or if it does, is inaccessible. Square Enix, that bought out Eidos -- the original publisher -- doesn't even have access to it, and the FMVs exist on beta max tapes, only. That's a real shame. Recreating the model, even upping the quality, is top priority for simply an historical sense to me. lol, that's what happens when you're a crazy fan, I guess. Thanks for taking the time to read all of this, if you do. Edited October 20, 2013 by pgson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor Tony Nemo Posted October 20, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 20, 2013 (edited) If it is important that details be seen in edges or profiles, thay should have geometry as normals wont show where the polygon is seen edge on. There is a paralax image made with a normal map combined with a deformation map that shows this detail on edge but I am not familiar with where it is supported (like in game engines). The paint room (with Depth on) allows you to add detail to the normal maps generated from retopo. Edited October 20, 2013 by Tony Nemo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 22, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 22, 2013 Thanks. I was taking it from what I've read that those maps are basically faking the depth, and it makes sense. I just wanted to know if it's that preferable to have the model cut with actual depth, or to use them instead. I think it's somewhat a matter of opinion. But, I have this continuing issue, even after "knowing what to do" now. Basically, even using the lowest mesh I can without it being a block, this issue of tessellation equaling exponentially increasing polygon count is continuing. My mesh, which was from an early save, before doing much voxelizing, I've been reshaping to fit the high poly one from earlier. I decimated it even further to 130,000 polygons, so as low as I can think before it turns into blotchy nothing, and I've used all I can think of on it. I've cleaned the surface, gone over it to make sure there are no holes, no intersections, no starred verticies. The mesh is clean. Yet, using the crease brush as a minimal depth setting of 7% increases the polycount insanely in just one stroke. I've tried it on the 130,000 mesh. I've used the resample option, still in surface mode, to up it to 500,000 polygons and used the polish brush on it before applying the crease. Or smoothing it. Still with one stroke, the polycoutn goes over 1,300,000 polygons. Almost 2 million for the second stroke. Here are the pics of the mesh in wireframe mode. 130,000 (the back of the head is flattened, so I could shape the crown pieces, to explain the flatter polys back there: Resampled, using the Resample Option while still in surface mode, to 500,000 (which, trying smooth all on this will explode it, by the way): And with the subdivide brush, which ups it to 866,000: Now, ok. You might say well, there's still something wrong in my mesh. It somehow isn't optimized. I said ok, this might be it, too. I then went to a new layer and merged the basic primitive sphere. I didn't uprez it, just went straight to surface mode, went to clean mesh, and smooth all. It was at 86,000 polygons. I then used the crease brush in one, one stroke. The program hung and I didn't know if it had crashed, or what. But the stroke took (I've repeated this twice, and the same result), and it upped the mesh to over 1.5 million polygons ... just from that one stroke. See below: Ball mesh 86,000: One stroke of crease brush. upped to 1,500,000: ....So, what the hell is going on? I apologize, but this all isn't making one bit of sense to me and I'm a bit tired of dealing with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted October 22, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 22, 2013 The more you zoom, the more it add polys (the detail slider in the tool option panel is applied with a ratio taking into account the brush radius relative to viewport size). Play with the detail slider, find the reasonable zoom level to not add too much polys and you should be fine. Sounds complex but it's just a matter of habits. Also although I can't verify this: maybe your mesh scale (too small) is affecting the amount of detail going on (very small radius mandatory thus very quick polygon accumulation (not sure about this theory) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor TimmyZDesign Posted October 22, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 22, 2013 First, as I said in an earlier reply to you, the way to control mesh density in specific areas is with the SHIFT action options. Second, there are Tool Options for the various brushes. You can turn down the amount of tessellation with those options. Third, video game models are usually low poly models and use normal maps to create the illusion of a detailed high poly model. That is pretty much the main reason for the existence of normal maps. The game models need to be low poly because the game engine renders them in real time. High poly models are used in movies because they do not require real-time rendering for the models, and they can send render jobs to a render farm to be processed slowly overnight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 22, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 22, 2013 Thanks, BeatKitano. It's handling it a bit better. I believe I saw that earlier, but yes I forgot about the radius having so much potential to increase this. Dangerous stuff. TimmyZ, I think you misunderstood some points I was asking about. 1. I read about the shift options and replied already to you that I have been using them. This wasn't the issue at all here. 2. Yes, the presets have options to them. That doesn't mean that right out of the box they should act like this without any adjustment to them, frankly. BeatKitano had the answer to why the polygons were increasing so much. I hope it continues to be viable. 3. I didn't ask the definition for normal maps, nor how models are used in video games vs. film. I have seen all of that, yes. I asked, and this wasn't dependent on if people were sculpting for the final product to be used in film or video games, when they are sculpting their initial high quality model, why do some, like users on the last page, prefer to make most of their detailing on the normal and displacement map options later, vs, why do some like I believe BeatKitano, at least, prefer to sculpt them on the model first. Whether you do it either way, you can always bake out a normal map, so I was interested to hear the preference for both methods. Thanks, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor TimmyZDesign Posted October 22, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 22, 2013 Oh ok, thanks for the clarification. I just tried to give you the answers I thought you were looking for, but I guess I wasn't quite grasping what exact issues you were having. I hope you weren't offended, I was just trying to help. As far as adding detail goes, I personally think the very best way to put detail into a model is of course to sculpt all of it into the high poly version of your model (veins, skin pores, and everything), and then if you want to create a game model, then bake that sculpted detail into a normal map. Sculpting all of that detail is of course time-consuming, and if the poly count gets too high, due to computer hardware limitations, it might not be possible anymore to continue adding detail. Therefore there are workarounds (color maps, bump maps, etc.) which then can then be used to continue adding detail without adding any more poly count to the model. It is often much faster to create those maps instead of sculpting all of that detail by hand. In my experience in 3D-Coat, I can add a huge amount of detail to a bust (head and shoulders), but I cannot add that much detail to an entire character's body. It is not possible for me (on my machine) to add skin pores to an entire character body because the poly count will go too high. Therefore I add as much detail as I can (up to 10 million polys), and I also make sure that only the parts of my model that need detail have high poly counts, and the other smoother areas have lower poly counts (in other words the poly count is NOT evenly distributed across the mesh). That way the whole mesh is intelligently optimized as much as it can be. Then if I need more detail, I stop sculpting and finish adding detail by painting in the paint room. Maybe you have already figured all of this out, but I'm adding it in the hope that it helps you in some way! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member chingchong Posted October 22, 2013 Advanced Member Share Posted October 22, 2013 (edited) .... And with the subdivide brush, which ups it to 866,000: ... Just to understand, why would you need to subdivide your mesh? If youre using Liveclay, there is a dynamic tessalation only in the regions where needed. An overall subdivision is imho not necessary btw: Do you have Artmans presets? I guess they arent so hungry for Polygons, because i have no troubles with them. Really nice presets. Cheers Edited October 22, 2013 by chingchong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor BeatKitano Posted October 22, 2013 Contributor Share Posted October 22, 2013 I agree with chingchong on this tool, while it may be usefull when you need quad based local subdivision (cleaner for hard surface) but doing organics it's terrible in conjunction with LiveClay brushes. As for sculpting vs normal maps: it depends on the project. If you're sure you won't have to make revisions you can go with normal map painting, otherwise go sculpt: much quicker to make changes and rebake than redo the entire normal painting. I personally don't like normal painting other than defining more what's already there, beaide I realy enjoy sculpting And I must add: If you compare a "paintes normal" and a baked normal, baked always look more natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member pgson Posted October 22, 2013 Author Member Share Posted October 22, 2013 Oh ok, thanks for the clarification. I just tried to give you the answers I thought you were looking for, but I guess I wasn't quite grasping what exact issues you were having. I hope you weren't offended, I was just trying to help. No problem and I appreciate it I realize with the detail question, normal vs. sculpt, I wasn't as clear. The first time asking it, I thought tom myself just how do I word this. I wasn't as successful as the second post to clarrify Thank very much for your perspective on it. That was exactly what I was looking for and how I was leaning in my head on it. Just to understand, why would you need to subdivide your mesh? If youre using Liveclay, there is a dynamic tessalation only in the regions where needed. An overall subdivision is imho not necessary btw: Do you have Artmans presets? I guess they arent so hungry for Polygons, because i have no troubles with them. Really nice presets. Cheers I didn't commit to using any method. I was showing three different phases on the mesh with the same issue from the crease brush happening. One was the mesh without doing anything to it at 130,000, the next was trying to use the resample option in the menu (500,000), and the third was the subdivide brush (866,000). I'll clarify just why I even considered doing a resampling either way below. I have 7B which comes with Artman's presets. I agree with chingchong on this tool, while it may be usefull when you need quad based local subdivision (cleaner for hard surface) but doing organics it's terrible in conjunction with LiveClay brushes. As for sculpting vs normal maps: it depends on the project. If you're sure you won't have to make revisions you can go with normal map painting, otherwise go sculpt: much quicker to make changes and rebake than redo the entire normal painting. I personally don't like normal painting other than defining more what's already there, beaide I realy enjoy sculpting And I must add: If you compare a "paintes normal" and a baked normal, baked always look more natural. Ah, thanks. Along with TimmyZ, I agree that I think it's better to sculpt them on in first, which is why I decided to give the modeling another try on his head and body. Of course, that means a lot more work, but I think it will be worth it ... if I get these sculpting issues finally ironed out. Now, to clarify why I tried to resample both ways that I know of, resample menu option, or the subdivide brush, it's that these brushes when tried on a 130,000 mesh, or something lower like this, crinkle the mesh. It's not smooth to add a crease. In the face doing the smile line around the mouth, the entire nose can crinkle up and the mouth, along with an uneven, crumpled stroke, which is ugly. To smooth that all out and reshape it doesn't seem viable. So, that issue goes away when the mesh gets a bump up at least to 500,000, or more before I use the brush (it's harder to get that not to happen near edges on meshes, I've noticed). What would you suggest I do, if not to resample in some way, to stop this from happening? Polishing the area with the polish brush didn't work. The mesh was smoothed with smooth all and clean surface before starting, also. 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.