Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - Standalone => The Babylon Project => Topic started by: Deepblue on September 28, 2004, 06:51:10 pm
-
Picked it up off the website I mentioned in the Screenshots thread (they do say people are free to use the models in noncommercial functions if the original developers are credited (Beamscreensavers)) Anyway I toyed with it a little, adding smoothing groups and details and this was the result.
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-Aurora.jpg)
It's got 2930 polygons (just right for HTL) but no textures (yet, I'm working on that right now). If the TBP team wants it give a holler and I'll send it over.
EDIT: I can't texture at all...
-
Huh, looks like the Thunderbolt with the short nose of the Aurora. Intersting. I like it. :)
-
Originally posted by Mezrein
Huh, looks like the Thunderbolt with the short nose of the Aurora. Intersting. I like it. :)
:wtf:
-
bigger pic
-
Now thats some real nice piece of Aurora I would say, somebody has spent his freetime on modelling again I see :D
-
Yup. And sorry about the JPG compression but I had to get it under 2mb for Uploadit. I'll take another shot when I get home with a fullscreen perspective view. But it is pretty detailed. All I can think of that could add more to this model is a nice 3d cockpit... but that might be too much.
-
Theres a thunderbolt and a Nial on that same site BTW that have all the knicknacks except, yet again, a cockpit. However none of these models have textures applied to them. They all come with a crappy 256^2 map but since all the objects are seperate and there are no mapping coordinates, these maps will not work. (there ugly anyway...)
-
More screenies just for you Bob.
(Note: these pics are just the original model with some smoothing, the previous pic included the little support girders that can be seen on the main thrusters on the front thrusters.
Numero uno:
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-Screen1.jpg)
Numero dos:
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-Screen2.jpg)
Numero tres:
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-Screen3.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Mezrein
Huh, looks like the Thunderbolt with the short nose of the Aurora. Intersting. I like it. :)
You must be smoking something fine :)
Doesn't look at all like a Thunderbolt...T-Bolt has wings on the engine pods, a much greater sweep to the wings, and above all a totally different midsection...
-
if you can cut the polys to 2000 I think it would be better, some of the modeled detail on the back seems unnesisary, I'm sure my card could handel it find, but the people out there with the mx440s are gona be crying.
looks good, get it textured and in game.
(see if you can get cockpit detail)
-
Impressive!
A shame that it's so much harder to hit anything in the "3rd spaceship view" :lol:
-
Originally posted by IceFire
You must be smoking something fine :)
Doesn't look at all like a Thunderbolt...T-Bolt has wings on the engine pods, a much greater sweep to the wings, and above all a totally different midsection...
This thing :p
(http://www.kramer-digital.de/kramer/babylon5/thunder-gros02.jpg)
-
Only in the sense that a Thunderbolt is pretty much an Aurora with a lengthened nose anyways.
-
Scrap that, the HTL mods out...
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Only in the sense that a Thunderbolt is pretty much an Aurora with a lengthened nose anyways.
Not exactly. The Thunderbolt is a two-man fighter capable of both atmospheric and vacuum flight and has more firepower than the Aurora.
-
'think he meant the basic shape
-
K, i'll get rid of some of the extraneous details, make the side thrusters the right shape, and add a cockpit if it doesnt add too many polies. The biggest problem is that the model is made out of a ton of parts and the polycount could expand a ton if I tried to perform a union on all the objects.
-
don't worry about that, it isn't as big a deal with the newer z buffer, just make sure they're all glued together.
and make sure you only use one texture.
-
Thats the problem. I'll have to UV map each piece indiviualy. Once I do that, I guess I can just bake the textures on (I think, I have never done this before) and hopefully produce a single map.
Heres a list of details that will probably go:
- The thrusters will not be beveled like they are.
- The little box details on the back of the gun ammo chamber thingies will go.
- The reactor detailing on the back looks cool, but some parts of it probably need to go.
-Gonna weld a bunch of vertices.
This probably wont get it down under 2000 polies, but it will help.
I want to add:
- A cockpit with semi-transparent glass. (need help with alpha transparency in the GIMP)
- More accurate side thrusters. (aka squeezed at the top)
-
BTW how do I glue them in max? Do I just use the "attach" feature?
-
Hey, Mezrein and Ratamacue! Welcome to HLP. :)
-
It is made. Used AURORA-01a and AURORA-02a textures. You should credited developers (Beamscreensavers
) if will use their model publicly.
Deepblue, the model contains defective parts which cause a mistake at converting in PCS. Just in case I speak.
StarFury (http://den5.hotbox.ru/starfury.zip)
screen1 (http://den5.hotbox.ru/starfury1.JPG)
screen2 (http://den5.hotbox.ru/starfury2.JPG)
screen3 (http://den5.hotbox.ru/starfury3.JPG)
-
if your going to use the max plugin talk to styxx about what you have to do to get a single object out of it. there has to be a way to merge all the objects into a single object in max, and you can always UV map it in lith.
-
oh, and this reminded me of something I did a long time ago hope I don't get in trouble for posting it
http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/blackwater/bobs_aurora.zip
-
I got the mesh textured with Mark Kanes starfury textures but not with a single map. I have so far not found a way to put all the texes into one map, and Styxx's plugin has not worked for me yet. The mesh looks ok though, and PCS did fail to convert it. If I could get Styxx's plugin to work, it would be extremely helpful.
-
use lith, if all the parts are UV mapped then it will just be a matter of moveing the parts
-
Max has a built in UV mapper that works as well if not better than Lithunwrap. The biggest problem I am having is not being able to convert my model with smoothgroups. Another is that I cant find any textures for a pilot model I made.
-
Nice Den5!!! I like the texes, but your right about PCS not converting properly.
EDIT: BTW Den5, would you mind texturing a modified model like the previous one if I posted it in max format? (would include cockpit details). I could try to post it in 3ds form too, but I have not been successful in making it keep its smooth groups thus far.
-
did you want any help with those textures?
if you can give it to me totaly unwrapped(I HATE unwrapping) then I can put some textures together for you, at least base ones.
dont worry, WHEN I get stuck with this dilgar mod in fs2 I will come knocking with a collection plate LOL
-
Styxx's 3dsmax plugin translates smoothgroups perfectly. What texture baking issues are you having?
The annoyances I first experienced involved a complete polygon breakdown. Triangles everywhere on the map. Complex models especially. I still haven't found a way to fullly controll how 3dsmax unwraps. The only advice I can give for that issue is to bump up the angle threshold, and bake only half the model since its symetrical. Then just mirror the sucker.
Why do you want the model to use only one map? Why not bake three? You'll a bit more control on the unwrapping process.
-
Forget everything. Everyone go and download Den5's aurora it looks PERFECT!
-
Here are some screens:
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-AuroraORIGINAL.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-AuroraLINE.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-AuroraOMEGA.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-AuroraESCORT.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-AuroraSINCLAIR.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-AuroraSHERIDAN.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-AuroraIVANOVA.jpg)
I personally believe this is highlight worthy material.
Now, lets do that Thunderbolt... ;7
-
Respond you fools!!!!1111222
:D
-
auto-facet, it looks over smoothed.
and it's textures should be merged into one (unless someone would consiter makeing the engines destroyable in wich case haveing them as a seperate texture would be acceptable)
there is a lot of waisted texture space for example the top wings it should not have the insignia as part of the texture but rather use the in game insignia code.
there is a lot of unneeded geometry, yet the wings could use more pollies
-
wayy to dark to see any detail
render it with 1.5 lighting
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
auto-facet, it looks over smoothed.
and it's textures should be merged into one (unless someone would consiter makeing the engines destroyable in wich case haveing them as a seperate texture would be acceptable)
there is a lot of waisted texture space for example the top wings it should not have the insignia as part of the texture but rather use the in game insignia code.
there is a lot of unneeded geometry, yet the wings could use more pollies
The insignia's are fine because there is a standard texture there anyway. Those added paint jobs are set up so you can use the texture replacement feature to use them. As far as auto-facet goes... I think they look nice with the slick smoothing. Though you could provide a link to the auto-facet build... Destroyable engines would be nice. As far as poly count is conerned, even my computer (Athlon 800 (900mhz), GeForce 2, 256mb RAM) can handle a large number without a noticeable slowdown despite the fact the model is as of yet without LODs.
-
Poof!
Here you go DemX:
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-DemXrequest1.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-DemXrequest2.jpg)
(http://server5.uploadit.org/files/DeepblueWA-DemXrequest3.jpg)
(turned off stencil shadows and pumped the gamma up to 1.5)
-
well the added detail just seems waisted, I reconvert with auto-faciting to show you what I'm talking about.
-
I dont think so, but I will wait for your version. BTW make sure the engine pods stay smooth.
-
(auto-faceting and IMO unnessisary detail are unrelated, auto-faceting actualy brings these out more so this isn't to prove that the detail is unneeded, just wanted to clarify that)
ok, here, I did toy around with it, then I had flashbacks from the last time I toyed with someone elses starfury model and decided just to convert it. I did make one change, I moved all the textures into one, and made an EXTREEMLY hastely put together glow map.
what this model needs:
1) rebuild much of the engine geometry, it's useing an 8 sided cylender replace these with at least 16 sided ones
2) a modled cockpit, in a fighter this small it's realy a lot more important, there is a pilot floating around
3) (or 2a I supose) the interior of the cockpit should be a seperate subobject (this is part of what you have to do to get transparency to work) and given a seperate _very small_ texture, wich would then be properly glow mapped.
4) texture optomiseation, about half the texture is totaly unused, or could be mapped to another part of the texture that looks identical (this is not limited to that insignia)
THIS IS IMPORTANT. THE UV SPACE IS REALY BAD ON THIS
do this after you have done everything else and keep in mind what stuff is going to be in the cockpit and what stuf is not, (if you make the engines destroyable, you can give them a seperate texture without incuring any additional penaltys)
-
Um, I tried it and truth be told did not like it. I think the 'fury looks much better with smoothing. Something like the Tbolt on the other hand should look angular and chunky.