Darkwing Posted January 12, 2010 Posted January 12, 2010 I had an offer early last week to build this model, but unfortunately things did not work out. I am looking for someone who could model the Spitfire: It would be preferred if the modeling could be completed in the next 2-3 weeks. Some requirements about the model is that a .obj export will be required as it will be utilized in both AM and 3DS Max. This essentially means that a denser mesh is needed, all normals facing out and the model be exported in parts as each part will have to be reassembled in 3DS Max. If you are uncertain as to how to do the export, then I can do it, just it will be needed that the whole model be built with a denser mesh, especially around curved areas and that all normals face out. I can break the model into sections afterwards. If there are any takers, either post here or send an e-mail to: cosmic_camera(at)yahoo(dot)ca Oh, it should be noted this is for the free project Earth Link: Zero, and being free, no one is getting payed. However, once content is made, we will be looking into selling things like T-shirts, and if that works, then money can be sent in the direction of contributors. Quote
Darkwing Posted January 12, 2010 Author Posted January 12, 2010 oops, wrong section, should be in calloborative projects Quote
Darkwing Posted January 13, 2010 Author Posted January 13, 2010 i can hear internet crickets.... Quote
pixelplucker Posted January 16, 2010 Posted January 16, 2010 Are you going to use it as a prop in AM? As a prop it can be a high resolution poly model which I can easily make in my Amapi Pro. If you intend on doing more than just a prop in AM then it should be modeled in AM. Not that tough just takes a bit more time. Exporting the model from AM into a poly or nurbs conversion will take some clean-up most likely. Not sure how Max likes obj files but in the past it used to be horrible with shared uv's and loved to flip normals. Quote
Darkwing Posted January 16, 2010 Author Posted January 16, 2010 well, it's the main ship, so expect there to be a lot of screen time, both up close and far away. Using V13, which didn't have the .obj option, only the .3ds option, it came out all right, if normals were facing the correct direction in AM, they came out right in 3ds max. The thing is having a denser mesh for curvier objects, so that the smoothing plugins can do a better job Quote
pixelplucker Posted January 17, 2010 Posted January 17, 2010 Last I used 3ds Max was version 3.0 so I'm glad they fixed the obj importer for it. If you want I can give it a shot so the real question is what do you plan on doing the renders of the ship in primarily? Quote
Darkwing Posted January 17, 2010 Author Posted January 17, 2010 what do you mean exactly. The storyboard isn't fully drawn out yet, so we don't know what angles and things will be needed, we just need the model for the animation for the rest of the series. Quote
pixelplucker Posted January 17, 2010 Posted January 17, 2010 If you were rendering mostly in max for the ship it would be easier to make a poly model or nurb model converted to poly for max specifically. Poly based models can only be imported into AM as props and parts on them can't be animated or moved. Exporting models from AM out to poly based such as obj and 3ds have some issues primarily with hooks so modeling has some limitations and often need clean-up and repairs. I ran into an small snag with a fairly complex model done in AM that I needed to bring into another program and my work around was to export out a dxf to preserve the quads but the dxf quads were separate faces. I had to weld by distance to stick them back together again to create the full meshes. I think there maybe some snags trying to have one model for both types of programs where they are pretty different. I can try some tests here and see if I can convert some AM patches into nurbs. Quote
pixelplucker Posted January 17, 2010 Posted January 17, 2010 Here is a model that is converted using no tesselation, tesselation by 16 and Variable on the obj export then brought into Amapi-Pro. I was unable to convert any of them into nurbs or reconstruct them because the brep surfaces came in as trimmed. This means that without the ability to rebuild the surface it would be faceted and look horrible. The base tesselation of 16 (AM's highest setting) worked the best. Attempts to convert the surfaces to sub-division was iffy at best. The standard Catmul Clark algorithm was the worst. Doo Sabian worked ok but not great. Quote
pixelplucker Posted January 17, 2010 Posted January 17, 2010 After a bunch of testing I think it would be best to model it in AM since there are worse things to worry about when importing geometry into AM from outside. Though using a poly model as a prop, in AM works and it renders pretty quick the over all appearance of the poly model seems to be washed out and textures seem to get washed out as well. Give me a couple days and I can toss a base model back. If you have any details or suggestions for details for the tiny parts such as the rail guns etc, just post them and let me know. Quote
Darkwing Posted January 18, 2010 Author Posted January 18, 2010 this just in, my colleague is going to attempt to purchase AM this weekend, so as far as I know, you can model in AM for AM Quote
Tralfaz Posted January 18, 2010 Posted January 18, 2010 this just in, my colleague is going to attempt to purchase AM this weekend, so as far as I know, you can model in AM for AM Excellent news! Once your colleague gets the hang of splines versus polys, he will never look back! Al Quote
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.