Hard Light Productions Forums
Hosted Projects - Standalone => Diaspora => Topic started by: KewlToyZ on March 02, 2011, 11:47:50 am
-
I was playing around with the old BtRL MOD.
The forum is mothballed and refers me back here since this is most of the crew from it.
Not trying to upset anyone posting here about it.
I was just curious about its use with the newer versions of the fred2_open_3_6_x.exe's
I noticed the contrail effects don't work anymore and many of the missions develop serious bugs making them unable to complete.
Which debugger would let me load up these missions and troubleshoot them?
-
I was wondering if I could use Visual Studio with this?
-
Well the first step would be to post exactly what errors you get.
-
Maybe so, though I really can't think of a reason why you'd even want to use newer builds with the old btrl demo..
-
Well the first step would be to post exactly what errors you get.
Mainly I was getting AI glitches in game. The raiders would freeze in position and do a warpout cycle fading in and out. I couldn't shoot them either.
The only thing that worked was missiles. When they did the warpout odd bitmaps would show up that were more like symbols than anything else showing up as squares cycling.
-
Maybe so, though I really can't think of a reason why you'd even want to use newer builds with the old btrl demo..
Again I got curious and some of the effects would show up nicely while others were not working so hot or break completely.
I'll just take it back to the old .9.exe
-
Hopefully it won't be too long before you can play around with something a bit more recent :P
-
I'm drooling just thinking about it Newman :D
-
BtRL was only designed to be stable on the special 3.6.9 build it was released with. The plan was to patch it in the 3rd patch and make it compatible with 3.6.10 but the team split before that could happen.
It's not impossible to make it work with modern builds but it's unlikely to be easy to do as 3.6.9 and 3.6.12 are fairly different. Since the Diaspora team are busy with our own upgrade for the BtRL models we do own, we're not interested in doing it ourselves and delaying Diaspora. So that means it would have to be someone unconnected with the team who did it.
You're welcome to try of course as far as I'm concerned. No one here is upset about the existence of the BtRL Demo. I tend to think of it as a child I don't have custody of. :p
-
Thanks for the response Karajorma.
I wouldn't mind making the Stealthstar and setting up the contrails, weapons points, glow points etc...
I found some good images of it based upon a replica manufacturer who must have gotten better specs.
I have Max 10 and was reading over the collada and pcs forums about the max plug ins.
I used Rhino on my first model and still prefer it for some things.
If I get something working in the previous mod I'll let you folks know and take a look at it.
Right now I got an error in the base mod after some alterations it came up.
Now even when I put everything back it seems to come up in the demo campaign though.
If it is something simple offer some feedback, other than that I'll keep fiddling trying to find the problem myself.
I wouldn't want to take away from the time spent on Diaspora.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
The Stealthstar is a fighter I'd love to see for R2, so you're more than welcome to take a shot at it.
A few pointers based on how we've done our fighters:
Base textures should be rather high resolution. (2048x2048 at least)
There should be a separate nameplate texture where the serial numbers (and possibly squad logo) are on. This way we can use texture replace in FRED to give each fighter a custom serial number for a little more immersion.
Always save your .psds with all of their layers in case the final model and textures need minor tweaks.
-
Sure thing Ace. Although I use Paint Shop Pro for my textures instead of Photoshop.
-
So far the images I am finding best to use are from the model made by Bad Azz Models.
I keep looking at the footage though and it is hard to tell if it is my mind playing tricks on me or not.
The model has 3 engines, but the footage in "Hero" looks like 4 engines?
Check it out:
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
I don't see three engines on the model, it looks like two with some extra detail/greebles between them.
There seem to be four engines total, and they seem to have a vectored thrust setup.
-
That model was built using the show's model as a reference. The guys who did it somehow gained access to the show's meshes, all their bsg kits are accurate.
-
Pic 3 shows an engine exhaust below the main upper engine.
It has 4 intakes, so I think I'll work it down to one central lower engine to try and match the photo from Hero and the model.
Thanks for the input guys. I think it is just the camera angle throwing me off.
Most of the layout images I find online look a bit screwy, they dont match up in ortho projections.
I'll figure it out.
Love a challenge. Hopefully those cg models find their way to the web someday =)
-
This should cover it :P
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
slow moving but I'm getting the pcs together.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
It's a shame Hero only gave us brief shots of the Stealthstar and Valkyrie models, they both turned out to be quite pretty designs.
-
At least they rectified the valkyrie part in the plan..
-
I'm scratching my head wondering if this really is the cockpit from the set?
It has a MkVII in the screen view.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
The stealthstar used a redress of the mk7 one. The one on the pic has some panels removed, but they were on in the show. By the way, you do know we don't accept models only, right? It needs to be uvw mapped and textured well to qualify.
-
Yes Newman, Thanks. I gathered that from the previous posts.
I used Lithunwrap and Paint Shop Pro last time I made a ship.
Glow mapping I need to work on.
It's been awhile, but I still have the tools.
I used Deep Exploration for most of my conversions to COB then PCS2 for the final POF.
Units were a troubling issue I'll have to revisit.
2048x2048 is the current texture map quality size correct?
Not sure how in depth I am going to get with the cockpit though.
That MkVII you got is awesome.
-
The high detail cockpit seen from the player's perspective is a separate model. We have a low detail one embedded in a fighter model for viewing from the outside. Making a high detail one is an insane amount of work so if you're working on a fighter I'd suggest not doing the high detail cockpit as well before you're done. For all intents and purposes doing a cockpit is basically a separate project.
2048x2048 is a good resolution to be working in for this.
-
It's coming along, I think I'm a little bit fat, need to streamline it a bit more.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
There I got it on a diet.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Week 2, so many voids and negative return angles I have to guess then look at odd angles and remake lol!
But I'm plodding along with it still. I want it too look as close as possible.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Not bad. Keep in mind its the textures that will make or break it.
Remember to model the KEWS under the wings :) They look pretty similar to the standard MKVII ones.
-
Not bad.
Damn I hate saying this, but I have to disagree. All I can say is, Kewltoyz keep at it and practice.
-
Yep, it's not up to our standards.
But practice makes perfect.
-
Thanks guys.
I haven't started texturing yet. I'm just using some color materials as I go.
Doesn't pay to texture until the geometry is on the money.
So far, The top inlet still isn't right. Trying to follow the shadows ends up non planar.
I just reworked that again. Still not happy. Now I work strictly surfaces until I get the geometry.
Once everything matches up at the seams, I'll mesh it and UV it.
I still have the rear section, both bottom inlets and the entire undercarriage to work in yet.
Every image I have of it, the shadows throw me off where the geometry really goes as well as how they connect.
A lot of trial and error trying to figure it out.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Week 3 I've been reluctant. The fuselage between the engines and wings is nuts.
I look at images from the Hero epy and the model and things aren't adding up so I am winging it.
I finished the rear top center, refined the top 2 engines, did the nose fuse undercarriage.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Belly shows the guts missing, got some work to do, sorry to be laggin.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Belly and guts worked in.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Hey, that's getting there. The underside still looks to be a bit in want of refinement, but I do indeed think you can make a useable model out of this one. You're certainly at a higher level than myself in terms of the modeling craft, however.
:yes:
-
Thanks Thaeris, I haven't found another 3D model of it so I figured it was worth doing.
I agree, there are indeed some refinements I try to figure out yet in the 3D design.
Its tough with so few picture angles available and shadows playing tricks to narrow it down exactly.
I've remade entire sections 4 or 5 times after finding angles that didn't make me happy.
Like any art though, its never really finished, it just reaches a suitable amount of refinement :D
-
I'm not entirely sure if this has links to the raptor TOS mod or to BTRL, but I wanted to know:
Those missions in BTRl are quite atmospheric (the asteroid mission for example)... could they perhaps be imported in diaspora?
-
You most likely could replicate them fairly well in Diaspora, if only the asteroid miner and some big asteroids will be there.
-
While Diaspora's r1 civie fleet will have a relatively nice selection of ships, the mineral miner probably won't be present in R1. Simplest solution to the need to play those old btrl demo missions again is probably just running the btrl demo and doing it there - at least for the moment :)
-
Nice to know Newman, thanks. It will be a new game with new features and new missions. Thanks guys ;)
-
That's good to know! the asteroid field and miner certainly are assets necessary to diaspora in the long run. to know that they will be implemented someday is conforting...
-
Preliminary external shell.
Needs refinement in many areas, but I figured it would be interesting for this group to see.
I need to work in part seams for the wings, upper engines, a few key curved areas, upper intake.
Add KEW points, thruster ports, key shell seams, wings need some detailing as well.
I'm looking for some professional criticism from the Diaspora team and fans about the overall shape refinements.
This is by no means a final UV shell at all.
I'm getting a little tunnel vision with it and need some extra eyes to remark about the overall shape refinement.
This was just a 3DS export from Rhino 5 Beta. Triangulation is sloppy.
A general consensus of what points of the geometry is just plain wrong is what I need.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Any thoughts on this yet gents?
-
My words mean nothing, but here goes:
(a.) If you intend on creating normal maps for the model, this is an ideal starting point, as it's almost 20k polygons. Which is huge. That brings me to my next point...
(b.) I don't know what standards of individual ship detail Diaspora is going for, but I assume it's around the 4k to 6k polygon count per small craft. The shape is all there, but much of the detail unfortunately has to be done away with. And given the distance at which the player will see his/her ship in-game, this isn't a bad thing. The fighter is covered with all manner of small cylindrical shapes at the rear of the fuselage. You can get the same effect out of a rectangular shape, skip the boolean messes, and shave off thousands of polygons. You'll also make UV mapping this beast that much easier. Next, that canopy is gorgeous - you nailed the shape. But again, it's way overdone in terms of detail. At over 2k polygons, it's irrefutable that you've got too high a polycount for a project like Diaspora. You'll need to reduce the polycount for sure. And that's not the only place. There's way too many polygons on the forward decking of the fighter, right by the cut-out slits on top. You could probably get the same visual effect with just a few quads rather than what you've got now, and no one would know the difference.
I'll close with my feelings on the model: It's beautiful. You've done a great job on it, but it's too much to use in a program where you have a huge number of fighters flying around, along with everything else.
But, here's the good news: You've got the perfect template from which to create a useable, effective fighter. It just needs to be reduced in terms of polycount. And even better, you've already got a high-poly model from which to create normal maps. Whether or not that means that means the lighting on the model needs to be tweaked yet is beyond me, but the basis is there.
On a final note, what scaling factor are you using, x100? The model is almost a km long!
-
It's not so much the detail, for lack of a better word the mesh is messy. There's a lot of subdivision in areas that don't need it. It would be possible to create a mesh that looks just as detailed that has approximately 6k easily. As such I wouldn't use this one for normal map creation.
I'm not going to comment on accuracy because right now I'm not that big of an expert on the stealthstar. Thaeris right about 20k being way too much for a fighter - some of our civilian ships have less and are much larger than this.
-
My words mean nothing, but here goes:
Nonsense. I needed some feedback. Constructive criticism and reminders, it's been awhile since I worked with it.
Thank you for taking the time ;)
(a.) If you intend on creating normal maps for the model, this is an ideal starting point, as it's almost 20k polygons. Which is huge. That brings me to my next point...
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind with the UV mapping when I finish the cockpit, thruster ports, & KEW points.
(b.) I don't know what standards of individual ship detail Diaspora is going for, but I assume it's around the 4k to 6k polygon count per small craft. The shape is all there, but much of the detail unfortunately has to be done away with. And given the distance at which the player will see his/her ship in-game, this isn't a bad thing. The fighter is covered with all manner of small cylindrical shapes at the rear of the fuselage. You can get the same effect out of a rectangular shape, skip the boolean messes, and shave off thousands of polygons. You'll also make UV mapping this beast that much easier. Next, that canopy is gorgeous - you nailed the shape. But again, it's way overdone in terms of detail. At over 2k polygons, it's irrefutable that you've got too high a polycount for a project like Diaspora. You'll need to reduce the polycount for sure. And that's not the only place. There's way too many polygons on the forward decking of the fighter, right by the cut-out slits on top. You could probably get the same visual effect with just a few quads rather than what you've got now, and no one would know the difference.
I exported the 3ds file at the max poly count from Rhino 5 beta. I haven't made a model since 4.0 beta with it.
The export created the meshes. I'm using surfaces in the 3dm file instead of meshes to build the initial model for easier creation.
This is giving myself options to remake the meshes automatically rather than doubling my manual efforts.
When I begin UV mapping and building the final models; Detail0, Detail1, Detail2,etc...
I am going to be doing each section with different resolutions according to size and shape complexity, so I get minimal poly count and best visual effect.
Many areas are so obscure they simply do not need the attention I placed on them to begin with. Also, I will be able to match points in contours better manually in the meshes to prevent seam gaps like this model generated when I exported it as one part.
I'll close with my feelings on the model: It's beautiful. You've done a great job on it, but it's too much to use in a program where you have a huge number of fighters flying around, along with everything else.
Thank you Thaeris! I am trying to capture the beauty of their design. I do think it is a gorgeous ship design.
I just hope I captured that essence in overall shape so far before I refine the poly counts and details.
I really needed more eyes on it to see if there was anything that bothered people before going to the extra steps of detailing, UV mapping, and textures.
But, here's the good news: You've got the perfect template from which to create a useable, effective fighter. It just needs to be reduced in terms of polycount. And even better, you've already got a high-poly model from which to create normal maps. Whether or not that means that means the lighting on the model needs to be tweaked yet is beyond me, but the basis is there.
On a final note, what scaling factor are you using, x100? The model is almost a km long!
I find every 3D program handles scaling differently. After hearing what you see, I am inclined to think I should stick to millimeter units instead of meters.
Rhino must simply do a decimal shift in its design interface leading to enlarged scales. I recall running into that issue when making my cob files previously as well. Took me a week to get the scale right last time and drove me nuts lol!
It's not so much the detail, for lack of a better word the mesh is messy. There's a lot of subdivision in areas that don't need it.
It would be possible to create a mesh that looks just as detailed that has approximately 6k easily. As such I wouldn't use this one for normal map creation.
I'm not going to comment on accuracy because right now I'm not that big of an expert on the stealthstar.
Thaeris right about 20k being way too much for a fighter - some of our civilian ships have less and are much larger than this.
Thanks Newman! Yes I would definitely refine the meshes, they are god awful right now. As I said I exported the entire ship as one unit at one max resolution setting for simplicity in making a 3ds file. I figured it was the easiest format for others to view it and get feedback.
But I did need to hear it again so I have a goal on the poly count.
There are many areas that are obscured from view I simply do not have to use such high detail in. Also the seams came out horrid.
The wings need detailing yet, they don't even meet the hull right yet. I just wanted to see if anyone felt the overall shape was flawed.
So far, the two of you are giving me positive remarks in that regard. I appreciate your time gents :D
-
KewlToyZ, keep in mind that if you're going to reduce the mesh, it's probably best to do so manually. This will allow you to cut down on the overly complex parts while retaining the componets which are presently in proper form. I do have to say that I like the form of the forward fuselage, and retaining as much of that as possible would be a plan to keep in my book. I must note that the triangulation has a good probability of being a problem somewhere down the road, but manually omitting triangles into quads should solve that problem.
That said, can you use Rhino to manually clean up the mesh? Otherwise, you might need to find a different piece of software that can do the job in question.
-
Oh yeah Rhino is great with meshing, and the manual rework will be minimal.
I was never sure about quads and found them problematic when I made my last model.
I found triangulating all faces and normalizing led to the best conversions before.
I used Rhino, Deep Exploration, Lithunwrap, Paint Shop Pro 7 to do my modeling last time.
This link is the last pof I made messing with Btrl:
http://www.kewltoyz.com/downloads/VipMkV.zip
-
For game meshes of this type it's really better to work with polygons from the start. In the end it's much faster and more efficient than using nurbs or what have you, converting that to polygons, and ending up with a mess you need to clean up afterwards. Simply put, it's far from the best route here.
-
I did at first Newman, but I was stumbling with trying to figure out the shape in the obscure areas too much.
I started back over with surfaces because its so simple to generate meshes from them with Rhino.
Refining the meshes is easier than creating them from scratch with some of the tools in Rhino for me too.
I know it would have been faster, but I didn't know how I was doing the rear underside yet.
I wanted to get the shape right then worry about the modeling. Thanks for the input though! :cool:
-
Got it refined and down to 2900 polys.
I think I can add the cockpit, pilot, thrusters, KEW pods, & maybe more detail to the wings and still make the cut for poly count.
The canopy proved pretty difficult to get close. ;)
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
I've got to say, that's really an impressive model. You managed to get a lot of detail with only a fairly small quantity of surfaces/verts. :D The next thing that needs to be asked though is, "is the mesh suitable for a game?" To that question, I'm not sure. I see the 3DS file is broken up into A LOT of tiny sub-objects... I'm on the fence about wholly closed meshes, as I've seen some models that end up working just fine with some smaller details, such as canopies, modeled as only having enough surfaces to encompass the area that needs to be covered, and are open everywhere else. But, these are sub-models.
For larger, primary model elements, a closed mesh does seem to be in order, at least for FSO. Ultimately however, you need a more experienced rigger than myself to help in this issue, but I would suggest that you try to make a set of large, coherent submodels in your primary model rather than a gazillion small parts. I'm very confident in saying that the game won't like that. I'd also suggest right away that you make the greebled vents on the engines a single submodel, and those should only be seen on the LOD0. The forward hull should also definately be a single object. Anything more, and you really ought to ask the dev team what they think of making individual submodels for the engines... you know, for when you get one shot out... :)
-
Thanks again Thaeris!
Yeah I made one that worked in BtRL just fine before.
I need to change my part splits for the UV and image mapping yet.
It took some trial and error the last time to get it to work, but I'm confident it will work before I am done.
After I get the UV and maps, I'll work on the lower LOD's which are a bit of fiddling around to get a shape with minimal poly's.
Not sure what I want with the damage model yet.
I work with Rhino so I'm a minority in terms of most of the other modelers.
Deep Exploration 5.5 is what I use to set the hierarchy and convert to COB.
I'm just really happy with my poly results, I could work it down to 2500 possibly yet if I don't close the meshes and remove the hidden ones.
Still debating on doing that to try and create a more singular closed model yet.
Gonna try to get some HD pics of the ship in "Hero" for the logo's and warning labels yet.
I'm gonna put the Valkyrie brand on it for sure, I think it is near the cockpit.
I just can't quite make out the other labels yet, like the coat of arms on the nose.
I noticed lots of discrepancies between the show images and the Bad Azz model.
Not sure which artistic license direction I'll take with them yet.
-
Look at this image for example:
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
If you want to use it in a game then you don't want to include the markings (such as tail numbers, squadron logos, pilot names or what have you) in the main texture. What we do is we create a separate smaller nameplate map and apply it to polygons that should have the markings. Those polygons are welded into the main hull so the smoothing isn't off but they use a different material ID (2) and have UV's set for the separate smaller map. The maps need to be handled so it's all seamless and there's no ugly line separating the polygons that have the nameplate map from the rest of the ship. It's a bit of a hassle to set up right but you're left with a ship you can easily swap nameplates for later on, which is all kinds of useful when building missions.
-
Thanks Newman, I did notice that on some of the cap ships when I was fiddling around on other mods.
I'll give it a shot ;)
Although it looks like that describes a few different locations on this as far as the ID # on the Engines and labels near the cockpit.
-
Thanks Newman, I did notice that on some of the cap ships when I was fiddling around on other mods.
I'll give it a shot ;)
Although it looks like that describes a few different locations on this as far as the ID # on the Engines and labels near the cockpit.
Doesn't matter, you can still have it all in one id map. Just needs to be uvw mapped properly.
The next thing that needs to be asked though is, "is the mesh suitable for a game?" To that question, I'm not sure. I see the 3DS file is broken up into A LOT of tiny sub-objects... I'm on the fence about wholly closed meshes, as I've seen some models that end up working just fine with some smaller details, such as canopies, modeled as only having enough surfaces to encompass the area that needs to be covered, and are open everywhere else. But, these are sub-models.
Well, while it's good to make sure you don't have more subobjects than you need, there is definitely no need to have every mesh closed. Entire Diaspora will be evidence of this, as all of our ships are done this way and collisions work just fine thanks to FUBAR's efforts.
If you make it all closed you get several problems; higher polycount, potential smoothing issues to fix (as everything's welded together), and with subobjects there's an added perk; when you bake in occlusion the shadows of subobjects will be baked into the map on the hull below those subobjects. This makes for easier LODing as you can just delete subobjects on lower LODs, with the added benefit of those subobjects having left their shadows on the hull with the ao bake so they're still sort of visible from a distance.
Basically, totally closed meshes? No reason for it and totally not worth it.
-
Thank you for the information, Newman. I've worked for some projects where a fully closed mesh was the order of the day, and others where it was not so critical. Again, having a more skilled rigger available for advice, or otherwise a modeler more skilled with the needs of FSO is a good thing to have.
-
Thank you for the information, Newman. I've worked for some projects where a fully closed mesh was the order of the day, and others where it was not so critical. Again, having a more skilled rigger available for advice, or otherwise a modeler more skilled with the needs of FSO is a good thing to have.
Yep, fubar was pretty much instrumental in almost every phase of r1 development, especially ship conversion which is often a bottleneck.
-
Fubar helped me a lot when I made my first model. Dude rawks =)
I read many of his posts. Really easy to follow, he was well written.
-
I got as much detail as I am going to put in the model.
The rest will be texture based. Right around 4k polys.
I have 3 KEW points, I think it only has 2 but the model parts looked like it had 3?
Anyone care either way? 3 or 2 KEW points?
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
A few renders for those not looking at the models.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
good job! i like it :yes: :yes:
-
Does anyone know where I can find the BSG Viper/Fighter based text and warning labels they place on the hulls of these things?
Most pics I am finding are illegible, may end up doing something based on normal AF and Navy warnings just to get it over with =P
-
good job! i like it :yes: :yes:
Thanks Torc, got a ways to go yet but it's finally taking shape =)
-
I am the last person who qualifies for asking for a status update, but were you ever able to get the fighter UV'ed, etc?
-
Hey Thaeris,
Actually I was just in process of installing the programs to create the UV Mapping for it. Its insane, and not bull****, ya caught me inspired.
The hardest thing I have is trying to get it all on one page except the canopy & the decal maps for the VIN # and Pilot Names.
I know Newman just looks at this and shakes his head, its like a 4 yr old talking to grown up building a commercial building lol!
I have 3DS Max 2012, Lithunwrap, & PCS 2 but I never UV mapped with Max before.
I've only managed to UV map one ship for FS/Btrl using Lithunwrap, Deep Exploration 5, & PCS 2 and it was a lot easier to map than this model is with its angles. I'm just trying to remember how to even add UV coords to it with LithUnwrap when it says there is no UV mapping
But I really want to get it done, if nothing else to at least get the mapping done enough to improve the textures over time.
So far Max 2012 blows goats with intuitive interface design, they changed everything I can't even find the pick objects button anywhere and nothing matches any tutorials out there. I can't find the LithUnwrap tutorials that I learned to use from before either so I have no idea what I am doing.... grrr I want to fish but the pole I got has no string, handles, or hooks visible to even begin with lol
-
Ah finally found Lithunwrap tutorial to get going again: http://spinner.northern-studios.com/tuts/lu_tut1.htm
Max has changed their interface so much its insane I can't even find a pick objects button it keeps demanding let alone what it looks like in this version.
I'm just curious if there was any potential for it with the game?
I know I would never come close to the Modeling teams stuff in place, but possibly adding it in a mission would be neat for me.
About the only thing I can do is build(hack with limited knowledge) it into a VP file with the tbl file entries for BtRL once I get the mapping and texture done.
But if one of you gents want to take it over to bring it up to speed I have enough geometry in place to act as a framework to make one of your higher quality additions. I would never have a problem with you guys re-using it because the model was a major pain to figure out based on previous content available lol! I was just thrilled with your work and love taking stuff apart to play around with and explore.
Your MOD development ability and character for doing it in the first place are quite an inspiration.
One thing I wanted to ask for you guys opinion, should I include the centerline KEW or just remove it and only add the wing KEW's?
I know the landing gear isn't used in game to my knowledge so I placed the centerline KEW over the forward landing gear port.
It doesn't really sit very well with me there. An alternative was placing it partially hidden into the nose port above or below the nose sensor package. I think I will move it below the sensor package hidden underneath inside the nose port. I'll worry about it when I finish my initial UV map, I'm about halfway through the rough draft of that with LithUnwrap.
-
Blahhhhhhhhh =P
Ok I made a compressed version of the mapping so far, I need to change locations & scale of items for proper detail, hard to keep it all straight with LithUnwrap in one night. I am working on it, just bear with me =P
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Forget about third party UVW mapping apps, all they do is confuse you. Chuck them in the bin and go for 3ds max uvw mapping tutorials instead. This uvw layout simply won't work, you have lots and lots of overlapping surfaces, wasted space, etc. First thing to forget about is the myth that uvw-ing is complex or hard - it's neither, especially on a model that only has flat angled surfaces. If you can just use planar UVW maps and combine that with unwrap you can get a much better result in 20 minutes. Also, it's usually a good idea to not have the pilot in the same map as the fighter - as pilots are usually shared between various fighters, and having a pilot texture integrated into every fighter texture is quite wasteful.
-
Good morning Newman, thanks, Thats why I got the Max, I just can't figure out where tools are and the step progression in 2012. I'll see if I can find an up to date book for it so I can find out where the buttons are. I'm a bit more awake than I was last night and found this tutorial http://www.tutorialized.com/view/tutorial/How-To-Model-and-Texture-a-Boeing-727-Airline/73732
See if I can get up and running with it. If I don't need the pilot, I'll chuck it out, I saw the ones you folks did so I am in no hurry to try generating my own. I know the scaling of what I had above needed drastic adjustment with some pcs for the sake of detailing. I need to add the panels for the VIN #, Pilot name, & Squadron badge decals yet anyhow. I'll see if I can find the good walk throughs in the modding forum here too. I need to get hierarchy and naming conventions for cob-pof sorted out in my head again too.
-
You can also check these out:
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,62304
and
http://www.republicofcode.com/tutorials/3ds/unwrap_uvw_mapping/
and, while i'm at it, here's the list to a lots of tutorials, covering pretty much every aspect of modelling, uving, texturing and modding for FSO
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=70249.0
-
Thanks Angelus :D
-
Hey gents, UVW Mapping & UVW Unwrap, just a few questions...
When I map some objects, do I save a separate uvw for every part I map or do I assemble all of them into one map?
I'm not following the workflow of how I retain the mapping to the model so when I close the file I can come back to where I left off.
I hope I'm making this harder on myself than it really is. Also, I am trying to follow the scale to a 2048x2048 sheet, is that only the area it shows mapped when I set it to that size in the uvw space? In other words, I have to fit everything into the dark blue line square when scaling and placing it?
I'm just trying to follow how I show all of the objects I map at once? I keep selecting parts and mapping them but I don't see how I show the parts I previously mapped.
-
Hey gents, UVW Mapping & UVW Unwrap, just a few questions...
When I map some objects, do I save a separate uvw for every part I map or do I assemble all of them into one map?
I'm not following the workflow of how I retain the mapping to the model so when I close the file I can come back to where I left off.
I hope I'm making this harder on myself than it really is.
in Max, just save the file to a scene (.Max), it will preserve your progress.
The next time you fire up Max again, just open the uv editor.
what you could do is, move the parts away from each other, then attach all of them ( at least those, which are supposed to share a uv map). UV them, then detach them again once finished.
Newman can shed more light on this.
-
Ok, I switched over to use Max 2010, the interface makes more sense, 2012 seems obtusely foreign to me in procedure for its tools.
From what I am seeing UVW Map a part planar, then UVW Unwrap the part to get to the UVW Preview browse/edit interface is the work pattern I have been following. It just seems over complicated compared to other interfaces so it confuses me a bit instead of simply selecting planar and opening the UVW Preview straight away because the Preview/Edit option only shows up under the Unwrap and not the Map > Planar.
Can I separate the parts into exported single files then import all of them into one model once they are UV mapped and retain their UV mapping to create one large map from the assembly?
-
I got the UVW files done and created my image map. Now on to texture my image map....
I am surprised how much the 2010 version .max file & uvw's compressed with WinRar.
I don't know Max very well at all so its been like pulling teeth for me lol!
I setup everything to fit onto a 2048x2048 single sheet.
At least now I can move the canopy and the decals (for squad tags, ship tags, pilot nickname, & VIN ID) to separate sheets.
Now photo shopping the image files for the textures begins.
Then I have to make the LOD versions of the model, but with the ship poly counts so low, it should work pretty well in a game.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Hey gents, UVW Mapping & UVW Unwrap, just a few questions...
When I map some objects, do I save a separate uvw for every part I map or do I assemble all of them into one map?
I'm not following the workflow of how I retain the mapping to the model so when I close the file I can come back to where I left off.
I hope I'm making this harder on myself than it really is. Also, I am trying to follow the scale to a 2048x2048 sheet, is that only the area it shows mapped when I set it to that size in the uvw space? In other words, I have to fit everything into the dark blue line square when scaling and placing it?
I'm just trying to follow how I show all of the objects I map at once? I keep selecting parts and mapping them but I don't see how I show the parts I previously mapped.
Like Angelus said, max remembers uv mapping of each polygon. Everything outside of the blue square is simply that texture repeated again - so basically, it tiles in both axis. When not doing tile mapping it's best to keep everything inside the blue square, or it'll get tough making sure you don't have overlapping parts. What I sometimes do is apply a simple box modifier to everything before I even start, then move everything outside of the blue square. Then I start actually uvw mapping piece by piece and assembling it inside the blue square. When I'm done, if there's nothing out of the square I know I didn't miss anything. If there is, easy enough to select it through the uvw editor.
-
Making some progress, UVW mapped, need to adjust reflectivity and start detailing the cockpit... a lot lol!
I might remake a few of the decals to duplicate the coloring better and place on a separate map finally.
[attachment deleted by a ninja]
-
Picking this up again with a short break in work, trying to fix components with welding for smoothing appearances.
Began testing and think I found the right settings for *.cob conversions through my Rhino>Deep Exploration>PCS2.
Now going back to split up some of the geometry for better mapping. Also to make sure the cockpit dash looks right.
Painful but worthwhile.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
Since I got the poly count so low with it, I think I will add more geometry features to the cockpit to get it more authentic and map more effectively.
This just looks cruddy:
[attachment deleted by a ninja]
-
That is looking exceptionally well, Good Sir!
:D
-
Thanks Thaeris!
I really look up to the amazing work the good folks at Diaspora do and try to emulate it.
At times I feel I am doing it badly lol! But hopefully I can get this together to be reasonably worthwhile.
I love this model, Its an elegant and yet strange design.
I'm just flopping around with it and my own self criticisms vs. what will actually work in the game engine.
Hopefully it will amount to something people can enjoy.
-
How low exactly is that polycount? Because you really don't want to overdo it on fighters. And that cockpit is more than detailed enough for external view. You'd be better off spending polygons coming up with a missile bay (since it's a stealth craft, after all) than wasting it on cockpit detail.
-
I have 86 Objects
2,275 Vertices
2,945 Faces
You got me curious now with the Missile bays.
How do I implement them as animated opening doors? I didn't see anything like that in previous fighter models so I am not sure how I would generate the animation for the FS2O & Diaspora to use or the formatting of them. Are you guys implementing Landing gear too? Because things like that were in the back of my mind while building it but I figured not part of the game requisites. Thanks for the input Newman =)
I made some models for Microsoft CFS 1 & 2 using Abacus modeler and that made game modeling pretty easy as far as landing gear, prop, weapons, aileron, & rudder animations went. These tools make it a bit more involved for me to know what I am implementing. The missile bays got my creative juices flowing though on how to place them =)
-
Of course modeling how the missiles appear for it could include a trap door appearance to them I guess?
Or dropping the lower centerline fin assembly location just to carry them on top of the assembly would conceal them enough without having to generate an automation for it? The ship never clearly depicted these locations in film footage so artistic license can be pretty broad at this point.
Actually, I doubt we would even have to change the model much now as it sits. The missiles would be concealed plenty for stealth needs but open to launch from the top of the lower centerline fin assembly. I think that could hold enough of them too.
-
One thing on your textures your nameplates don't really match up with the look in the show. Take a good close look at how the pilot names are done, and labels like the eject/rescue/etc. Having that decal layer right adds an extra bit of verisimilitude for the ship.
-
Yep! Thanks Ace.
I know, there is a line of them outside the cockpit on either side with near as I can tell a fuel port and a squadron badge plate 1/4 way from the front on the fuselage missing too. Going to create them and a separate texture so they can be edited by users preferences.
I am remaking the plates completely, not happy with the geometry and look of them at all.
I still need to make my detail1 & detail2 components as well for the distance models.
Not sure if I need a damaged model or just a damaged texture either. Or some debris parts too?
I'm flipping it around eye balling things and scowling at mapping problems. Some came up after I welded sections too that are just completely scrambled. Still contemplating Newmans idea on missile bays too and may just add some subtle compartments under the lower scoops on either side.
I don't know of any tie ins to the weapons code for them to emerge as needed so I'm looking for a subtle means to include static locations without hampering the models aesthetics.
I did an original design before for the BtRL mod I called a MkV. http://www.kewltoyz.com/GameShots.shtm
I may go back and remake with some concepts more true to the BSG universe designs after I finish this one too. Art is never really done, it just reaches a point of reasonable satisfaction to the artist.
-
Any chance I could ask the font being used for the Diaspora labels and tags?
-
You can ask.. :P The labels on vipers and such don't use any font that's available online. I'd usually trace the letters and numbers in illustrator, then switch that over to photoshop. The closest available font would be "viper squadron solid", but frankly it's really not close enough.
-
Thanks Newman, I found a few that were passable too, but not perfect, some either the a's the t's the e's the r's or the k's are not right though.
I'll fiddle around with them still, currently my callsign is too large on the hull for sure. This pics was a wake up for me.
[attachment deleted by ninja]
-
This is the limit of tags I can find to put on it for authenticity
[attachment deleted by a ninja]
-
On the MK7 and Stealthstar all labels are white with the hull showing over in the negative spaces. So the black color for any font is incorrect.
-
Thanks Ace, I'll go white with the callsign then?
-
You might consider looking up a program called Font Forge, or something to that effect, on SourceForge.net. That should permit you to design a new font from the ground up. I think you also might be able to create fonts in Inkscape, if you're partial to open source software.
-
I've made fonts before for use in pattern making on a plotter cutter system I helped design for yacht manufacturing.
Tedious, not sure I would want to spend the time right now. I think I got enough work here with what I'm doing lol.
-
Making a full on font is overkill for a few writings on the hull, anyway. It's not a trivial amount of work.
-
Jaggies driving me nuts... got the missile bays on it. Squad and name tag Decals and welding for the model to work so frustrating... but its gonna get done dammit lol!
[attachment deleted by a ninja]
-
Can I get away with using transparency and self illumination effects with a TGA texture to make the decals work like this?
For ship, squadron, VIN Tail #'s, Pilot name etc...?
[attachment deleted by a ninja]
-
Not for the game you can't. But it doesn't matter, it's been good exercise but not really up to Diaspora standards, as snotty as that may sound :) I'd suggest approaching it however you see fit, you'll need plenty more practice before you can make one that works for us - and at that point you'd want to restart it from scratch anyway.
-
Thanks Newman, I'll just use it for my personal needs then. =)