rusty Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Hi, The Battleship model needed to be 'special' and I’m not the best at creating neat space ships so the sketch below and model are loosely based on a ship I saw a while back in either Doom or Quake (great sources for that kind of thing). After the screen test I could see some of the texturing needed work but I wanted to get it out for comments. [attachmentid=18013] Concept sketch (scribble) Screen test. http://www.virtualmediastudios.com/battleship.avi The bridge could use more lighting – can’t see all the cool consoles. The patch count is enormous; this is 4 models assembled in the chor... something I learned from C-Wheeler (thanks!). Cheers, Rusty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMZ_TimeLord Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Rendering a single frame of the consoles, then the bridge just after leaving the window and finally an over all 3/4 view in larger resolution with multipass on would give a better sense of the texturing. Only thing that throws me off is the deck plates around the command chair. It seems they are either mirrored or are missing patches. I'm leaning toward mirrored and it's kind of distracting when you do the fly through like that. The exterior scale seems a bit small as well, like the bridge needs to be smaller in relation to the ship. It IS supposed to be a battleship after all. I would say that the exterior should be scaled up 1.5 to 2 times the size it is now. But that's just a design critique. Also, some of the exterior textures looked scaled to large, but I'm unsure without a higher res render with multipass on. Other than those comments I REALLY like the model Rusty! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddustin Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Rusty, The ship is huge! The camera motions were a little distracting to me, but I tend to like them quite smooth (when I can do it ). It looks like a monstrous project. Good job. David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viper GTX2.0 Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Rusty that is one awsome ship man. Hope to see more of it soon. GOOD LUCK, Viper GTX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaryin Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Wow, that ship is huge! I love the modeling. I agree about the compression though. It's really hard to tell about the textures. Maybe some stills? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viper GTX2.0 Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Wow, that ship is huge! I love the modeling. I agree about the compression though. It's really hard to tell about the textures. Maybe some stills? Ya stills would be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gschumsky Posted July 6, 2006 Share Posted July 6, 2006 Nice model Rusty. So did you plan on having the camera snap right to match the music? As far as the ship, only comment is BIGGER! As far as the camera work, if I were shooting Steadicam for this (though this could be a combination of a steadicam/crane shot), I'd start at the back smoothly coming down the aisle, passing the control panels. As you near the captains chair, continue on that same path, but pan left focused on the chair, not breaking the flow. Then through the window still focused on the chair, and once enough of the ship is revealed, slow arc out to the rear of the ship...think smooth sweeping view. No sudden camera jerks or moves. As you approcah the back of the ship (about 8/10ths of the way), I'd have the camera elevator up, continuing in the arc/sweep. Try and remember the key target, the captain's chair, so when you're dead center just above and behind the ship, you're looking down the length of it. Also, I'd end up a tad lower so the ship shows its size, revealing the cool nurnies. Not that I know anything about Stedicam work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 Thanks for the input and the kind words!! Rendering a single frame of the consoles, then the bridge just after leaving the window and finally an over all 3/4 view in larger resolution with multipass on would give a better sense of the texturing. Yes... I posted the smallest file... dho! Will get something larger up. Only thing that throws me off is the deck plates around the command chair. It seems they are either mirrored or are missing patches. I'm leaning toward mirrored and it's kind of distracting when you do the fly through like that. Yes! your right... mirrors.. don't know how that happened. The exterior scale seems a bit small as well, like the bridge needs to be smaller in relation to the ship. It IS supposed to be a battleship after all. I would say that the exterior should be scaled up 1.5 to 2 times the size it is now. But that's just a design critique. Hmmm, okay. BTW I model almost everything to scale. Do you really think the ship should be larger? You may be right -- like more the size of an air craft carrier which is what I want it to comepare with. [attachmentid=18028] Checking my specs, this needs to carry 56 of the fighters shown above plus 12 more 'Explorer' class ships which are 3 times larger then the fighter... darn, I think you are right! Bigger. I need to figure out where everything goes within it and work it that way. As far as the camera work... Oh gosh, of course your are right... I tossed the camera in without even thinking about proper camera work... just wanted to see the thing put together. BTW, each main section (front, middle, rear) had surpassed the A:M patch limit -- that is, that boundry between good response time and 20 minute waits for most modeling operations even on my system. A real drag. I've reported this to AM Reports... more people need to report this. It isn't right. Thanks! Rusty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viper GTX2.0 Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Dam Rusty you are doing such a good job. Do you work for someone or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMZ_TimeLord Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Yeah, the scale is a bit small in comparison to the fighters... Your original size is closer to a cruiser or destroyer class. Remember that in space you have to house everything below (inside) the hull. So 2 to 3 times it's size would actually be closer from looking at the image you posted. As to the patch counts, what are your counts for each section? (just curious, as I will be making some rather large ships/sets/objects in the near future too). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhar Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Ooooh, I like that ship. Unique design/style. I also like the open air bridge, no glass or pillars to hinder the captain's view Keep us posted. I'm a sci-fi fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 As to the patch counts, what are your counts for each section? (just curious, as I will be making some rather large ships/sets/objects in the near future too). Front Section: 20753 Middle Section: 22,800 Back Section: 12012 The back section (12,012) a paste of mesh takes about 15 seconds -- the other two sections take several minutes which is annoying. Other operations you see this on is deleting CPs, creating 5 point patches, adding CPs and other modeling operations. I first ran into this with a model that topped 62,000 patches (the Carrier Class ship you see on my SS site) then again on the Loud Ship (57000 patches). On these models a paste takes 20 to 30 friggin minutes which is unbearable! But I have a top end system so I do far better then most (see below). If you search the forum you will find various threads on this. 7,000 seems to be limit where many see slow downs. Someone talked to Martin about this and he told them to use the Duplicate wizard instead of copy. If I use this instead on my 62,000 patch model guess what... it completes instantly. But there is no work-around for the other operations except keep the patch count low or divide your models up. This suggests that Hash knows whats going on and that at least the copy it is fixable. But there must be more to the story or surely Hash would have fixed this by now. And I realize that this is perhaps getting into areas that should not be discussed on the forum so... bye bye. :-) Rusty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMZ_TimeLord Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Maytbe it's the undo level! (lightbulb goes on) Nope... nevermind... just tried turning off the undo buffer on the one section of my bridge that's over 7000 patches... undo buffer has no effect. Oh well... I guess we just have to start all filing the A:M Report on this ... sqeaky wheel and all that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 Dam Rusty you are doing such a good job. Do you work for someone or something? Thanks. No, just myself and my startup studio. No day job -- those days are past. I just animate all day. :-) 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.