Eat3d Public Sketchbook!

187 replies [Last post]
Goodtime's picture
Posts: 73

Thanks, man! Laughing out loud

bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

Awesome stuff, surface detail reads great!

Goodtime's picture
Posts: 73

Appreciated Smiling

bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

I purchased the Zbrush 3.5 intro and Zbrush 4 DVDs so I could finally start to learn Zbrush.

Zbrush is awesome and the DVDs are perfect for getting started with the program. There's one question I have regarding brushes, perhaps it's in the dvds and I'm just missing it?

Basically, when I use a brush with the DragRect method and paint an alpha onto the mesh, it's not layering up, it's just stamping it on the different heights of the mesh. When I go into projection master and use the single layer brush, I get the layer effect I want but I can't rotate what it paints.

Is there a specific brush/settings that will allow me to sculpt on the mesh and achieve the projection master results?

zbrush1.jpg zbrush2.jpg
JBaldwin's picture
Posts: 2162

 

Hm... So what you are looking for is a mode/brush that is a "Set height" effect? I believe this can only be achieved inside projection master atm. Did you try switching from your draw to your rotate tool?

You can also get an effect like the one in the image below.

I used a simple Layer Contrast brush with a drag rect. and an arrow alpha. This allowed the arrows to contour and conform to the surface. 

 

-Jeremy-

layercontrast.jpg
bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

My goal is to try and recreate the decorative detail from the statue references I posted earlier using a combination of alphas along with some manual sculpting.

I added UVs to the mesh so I could rotate in projection master, but it doesn't rotate from the center axis of the alpha so it's always facing the same way.

The layer const brush seems to be doing the trick though Smiling

bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

Probably the best I'll be able to get it with my current practice with this type of sculpting (and no direct alpha for use.) Some areas could use some cleaning up, really want to have a go at the angel though.

deco1.jpg deco2.jpg
Goodtime's picture
Posts: 73

Not bad, Troy.

But the leaves need some details I think. Like this for example:

Jonfer3D's picture
Posts: 104

I'm finally done with this projetc! It was rendered by passes wit vray and composed in photoshop.thanks

project_wire.jpg texturing02.jpg
metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

@Bunglo,

Thats not bad for no direct alpha use Smiling

@Jonfer3D,

Looks badass man!

Jonfer3D's picture
Posts: 104

Thank you!!

bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

Looks neat, Jonfer! Though I think the arms look a bit too large for him Sticking out tongue Still a really cool piece Smiling

I was working on the angel but decided to put the statue on hold to get more familiar with modular building creation. I would really like to return to it in the future though.

JBaldwin's picture
Posts: 2162

Had a bit of free time today. Decided to get some clay portfolio shots of the Vault Door. I will be doing the low poly and texturing it when I have the time to dedicate to it. Hope this is good enough for the moment Smiling

 

-Jeremy-

vault_door_front.jpg vault_door_isolated.jpg vault_door_open.jpg
Jonfer3D's picture
Posts: 104

thanks bunglo! I left the arms like that cause I wanted to make him to get a comic and serious looking at the same time =D. Jeremy, this door is extremely detailed!! love it

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Nice update Jeremy Smiling

What sort of tri count you going to shoot for?

JBaldwin's picture
Posts: 2162

Thanks Andy.

I am honestly not too sure yet. This piece consists of a ton of cylindrical shapes, and its more of a hero piece. So based off of that, probably 20k Smiling

 

-Jeremy-

bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

Looks killer, Jeremy. If you can retain most of that detail when it's all said and done, it'll look super awesome Laughing out loud

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Sounds cool!

Cant wait for more pics Laughing out loud

bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

I felt like going through the Damaged Pillar DVD again, did this over a period of 4 days. I'm not sure if I should move onto the Dozer DVD and hopefully join the comp or do an environment scene for my portfolio. Everything I seem to do is either uninteresting or too ambitious. Or I go about it the wrong way and waist a month of work. It's very disheartning, so at this point I'm not sure what would be the best choice.

pillar1.jpg pillar2.jpg pillar3.jpg pillar4.jpg pillar5.jpg
metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Nice pillar Smiling Getting some better lighting would help it a bunch, as currently everything is a little dark.

Can you post the flats?

 

About the dozer challenge...Pushing yourself into doing something that is extremely hard, is the only way that you improve as an artist. Its better to try and fail, than to not try. Smiling

bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

Here's the flats. The normals on the pillar came out terrible, at least on the non damaged parts, due to so many poles on the mesh and me giving it one smoothing group. I did try and fix it a bit in photoshop but decided to just use what was originally baked as I was already heavy into texturing and I was afraid I would need to move my uvs around too much.

Looking at the diffuse again, seems like the grunge layers aren't scaled down enough... a bit too blurry compared to the rest of the texture.

I didn't spend any time on the lighting as it's not going into a folio and I wanted to move onto something else. I might go back and set up the gloss properly with masks, if I do that I'll most likely do some proper lighting.

You're right about doing things that are difficult to improve so I started on the Dozer DVD, want to work on it consistently every day to finish it as soon as possible. Then hopefully join the dozer challenge. Got through the blockout and first highpoly piece yesterday.

diff.jpg spec.jpg normal.jpg dozer1.jpg dozer2.jpg
instg8r's picture
Posts: 109

@ Jeremy - The vault door is amazing! I'm especially loving the inside of the door itself, with all of the mechanical parts. Very cool.

@ Jonfer - Like the new take on R2 Smiling

Katie Sabin

www.4dgames.us

3D Artist | Raven Software

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

bunglo wrote:

Here's the flats. The normals on the pillar came out terrible, at least on the non damaged parts, due to so many poles on the mesh and me giving it one smoothing group. I did try and fix it a bit in photoshop but decided to just use what was originally baked as I was already heavy into texturing and I was afraid I would need to move my uvs around too much. Looking at the diffuse again, seems like the grunge layers aren't scaled down enough... a bit too blurry compared to the rest of the texture. I didn't spend any time on the lighting as it's not going into a folio and I wanted to move onto something else. I might go back and set up the gloss properly with masks, if I do that I'll most likely do some proper lighting. You're right about doing things that are difficult to improve so I started on the Dozer DVD, want to work on it consistently every day to finish it as soon as possible. Then hopefully join the dozer challenge. Got through the blockout and first highpoly piece yesterday.

The gradients are not errors. They are baked into the map to compensate  for the curvature of the LP surface in comparison to the HP. Smiling

The issues are showing because the tangent basis of the baker (max) doesnt match the viewport/engine you are using. The baker in previous versions of Max is broken in this way and doesnt match the viewport renderer, but the issue is fixed in 2012, iirc. Using the "quality Normals" mode in the 3 Point shader also stops this issue (in Max 2010+, i think), so it may be worth checking it out. (they have a free and paid version)

Basically, if the tangent basis of the application/engine 100% matches the tangent basis of the baker, then you should be able to use a single smoothing group.

If you are using smoothing groups, you should be splitting your UV's by 2 or 3 pixels wherever there is a hard edge in 3d space.

This is because it allows the normals to resolve correctly when baked as the verts no longer share the same location in UV space and thus a correct value is drawn on the normal map.

If this not done the verts in UV space are overlaid and an average value (colour) is written, which is incorrect in tangent space and causes a seam.

Spiting the verts in UV space doesn't cost any more because the vert is already created when the smoothing groups are assigned

 

Just to prove that there is no trickery, here is a test i did a few days back for the same issue Smiling

Top is HP, Bottom is LP

Hope that helps Smiling

tangent_space_blender.jpg
bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

I know they're not errors, the smoothing on the mesh (via 1 smooth group) was terrible without any maps applied to it. Applying smoothing groups per side of the pillar and breaking the UV seams did a good enough job, but I was already a good way into texturing and moving the UVs was proving to be a bit of a pain due to an area of broken concrete that went across two sides of the pillar.

That 3-point shader is pretty awesome, though the normals still come out the same. Well, they're much better in general but you can still see the normals aren't acting flat had I done the proper manipulation of edges to get better smoothing from the start.

In the end though, this was just a chance for me to go back through the Damaged Pillar DVD, so I didn't want to spend too much time on it.

smooth.jpg 3point.jpg
JBaldwin's picture
Posts: 2162

I would recommend spending a bit more time on it so you can fix the existing smoothing issues. That way, you have a solid piece Smiling

Another thing you can do to minimize or remove that smoothing error altogether is to add faces to those specific trouble areas. Those smoothing errors can sometimes be caused by enlongated trianlges that are reading too much into seperate angle sources. 

-Jeremy-

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

bunglo wrote:

I know they're not errors, the smoothing on the mesh (via 1 smooth group) was terrible without any maps applied to it. Applying smoothing groups per side of the pillar and breaking the UV seams did a good enough job, but I was already a good way into texturing and moving the UVs was proving to be a bit of a pain due to an area of broken concrete that went across two sides of the pillar. That 3-point shader is pretty awesome, though the normals still come out the same. Well, they're much better in general but you can still see the normals aren't acting flat had I done the proper manipulation of edges to get better smoothing from the start. In the end though, this was just a chance for me to go back through the Damaged Pillar DVD, so I didn't want to spend too much time on it.

Would you mind sending me a copy of your LP and HP meshes (in obj) please? Im interested in finding a solution for this because if everything is baked correctly, you definitely shouldn't be seeing those issues with the quality normals mode, regardless of the topology.

Was the normal map you applied with the 3 point shader the edited normal or the unedited bake? If it was the edited bake then that is the problem. When you edit normal maps it can break the smoothing as the edited map is no longer compensating for the topology that exists on the LP mesh.

 

PM me the files and i will take a look Smiling

3point_3psteaser.png
bunglo's picture
Posts: 104

@ Jeremy, I'm assuming it has to do with all the verts that have more than 4 edges connected to them. Those seem to be the worst offenders. I actually rebuilt the sides of the pillar after I decimated it because I wanted to cut the tri-count down but the smoothing took a nose dive.

@ Andy, looks like the unedited bake did the trick Smiling 99% of those errors are gone, there's one edge that's looks to be indented shown the screen grab but other than that, everything looks like it should.

Do you know of anyway that wouldn't require heavy modification of edges,smoothing, and or UVs in order for it to look correct in a game engine? In the future I'm just going to get the smoothing the way I want from the start instead of assuming I can fix it later.

3point1.jpg wire.jpg
metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

The smoothing is only going to work 100% if the tangent basis that you baked with, matches the tangent basis of the engine. If it doesn't then you are best assigning smoothing groups and then splitting the UV's by a few px, where the hard edges are in 3d space.

You should then get 90% of the correct look Smiling

afaziill's picture
Posts: 3

 

PAN

"I've had so many names. Old names that only the wind and the trees can pronounce. I am the mountain, the forest and the earth. I am... I am a faun. Your most humble servant"

 
Pan's Labyrinth

 

hi all Smiling

i started modelling characters 2 months back. very interested to learn more. this was purely a learning experience. took me about three weeks to finish as this is a first for me, in terms of creating a 3D image. basemesh modelled in mayazbrush for details, rendered using mental ray and photoshop to apply and paint textures. lemme know what you think, what i can do to improve and whatnot . hope you like it! thanks Laughing out loud

pan_a3sml.jpg
mrsdoublefire's picture
Posts: 77

I've been going through some of your free to view videos. They are very helpful. I decided that I would use some of your techniques on the industrial tire tutorial to make a high performance tire. The trick with this is that the V treads on this tire cover about 4 sections of tire arc and they are connected all the way around on the inside. I used 60 sections on my tire as opposed to the 48 in the tutorial based on the tire design. It's a Falken 452 tire. While the treads are still laid out flat and repeated several times, I use the slice plane from top down to create a tile of geometry(removed turbosmooth for this step with injection mold vent parts attached). The new piece is perfectly parallel and I re-layout the treads before "Bend"ing them around the cylinder. Weld the seems as you go and add an edit poly after the bend to weld the last seam before re-Turbosmoothing. Also, I only made one side of the tire so that I could mirror it to the other side and rotate half a tread to create the variation in water shoots as seen in most tires.

 

 

-Jason Keith

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

@afaziill,

Wow! amazing work Laughing out loud

 

mrsdoublefire,

Great job Smiling

Jonfer3D's picture
Posts: 104

very nice details man! =D

afaziill's picture
Posts: 3

thanks Laughing out loud

instg8r's picture
Posts: 109

<span word="metalliandy" data-scaytid="1">metalliandy</span> wrote:

The smoothing is only going to work 100% if the tangent basis that you baked with, matches the tangent basis of the engine. If it doesn't then you are best assigning smoothing groups and then splitting the UV's by a few px, where the hard edges are in 3d space.

You should then get 90% of the correct look Smiling

Hi metalliandy!

I was wondering if you could explain a little more about "splitting UVs"...I'm not familiar with this procedure.

Thanks!

Katie Sabin

www.4dgames.us

3D Artist | Raven Software

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Hi Katie,

Splitting UVs is when you break a UV island. In this case, the UV's should be split where ever a hard edge appears in 3d space, so that there is a gap of a few pixels between the UV islands.

Whenever you create a smoothing group, it creates new vertices that share the same space and if these vertices are not separated their values are averaged when the normal map is baked. By splitting the UVs, you are allowing a correct value to be written as the verts. no longer share the same location.

If we say that vert. 1 is yellow and vert. 2 is blue and they both share the same UV space, then the resulting value of the verts. when baked  would be green. If you split them in UV space then they would keep they original values and no mixing would occur.

This mixing is what causes the seam to appear as the colour that is created makes no sense in 3d space and thus shows as an error.

 

Check out the pics below.

 

Set 1 has smoothing groups assigned but the UVs remain as 1 island. Set 2 also has smoothing groups assigned but the UVs have been split where the 2 smoothing groups meet. (see the UV map below)

Notice that Set 1 has a dark seam that runs down the centre of the mesh and Set 2 doesn't Smiling

 

Hope that helps Smiling

 

Sorry for the long reply Sticking out tongue

no_split_uv.jpg split_uv.jpg sg_test_uvs.jpg
instg8r's picture
Posts: 109

Ah, I see! Thanks for the explanation, metalliandy Smiling Would this be something that you would do only for the normal bake, maybe in a separate channel and have the UVs for texturing in their own channel? Or would everything be all in the same?

 

Thanks again!

Katie Sabin

www.4dgames.us

3D Artist | Raven Software

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Generally you would only use a second set of UVs if you are making a modular model with various variations and want to have a unique AO bake for each mesh.

Its quite expensive to have a second set of UVs because it adds extra verts. Smiling

JBaldwin's picture
Posts: 2162

Did a 10 minute speed sculpt out of a cube in zbrush while waiting for some stuff to print out. Sticking out tongue

-Jeremy-

speedsculpt.jpg
metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Nice work mate Laughing out loud

Sean VanGorder's picture
Posts: 50

Quick model for a class project

high_presentation.jpg
metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Very nice Sean Laughing out loud

Sean VanGorder's picture
Posts: 50

Found an old tiling texture I did and re-rendered it in Marmoset.

EDIT: Hmmm, showing up really sharp on here, not sure why. *shrugs*

tiling_brick_texture.png
metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

Very nice, mate Smiling

metalliandy's picture
Posts: 3188

@Sean, its the reduction and sharpening algorithm that is used on the forum thumbnail images. It doesn't show if you click the image Smiling

 

http://cdn.eat3d.com/files/imagecache/forum/tiling_brick_texture.png

vs

http://cdn.eat3d.com/files/tiling_brick_texture.png

Sean VanGorder's picture
Posts: 50

Ahh, okay, gotcha. Glad it wasn't just me then Sticking out tongue

Didjitalus's picture
Posts: 167

and here's the finished pillar wich I had a lot of fun making this. It seems the jpeg compression threw a lot detail away Sad It almost looks cartoony. Maybe i just should focus on 1 pillar don't know what to do atm.

screenshot6_copy.jpg
Didjitalus's picture
Posts: 167

I think i've found 1 of the problems and probably the biggest. the lighting. I also saved this time as a png

nzezename.png
JBaldwin's picture
Posts: 2162

Really cool stuff bud. Have you thought about using Dot Product to fake an interior light? If not, I would suggest it Smiling Really adds to the realism of a light source within an object.

-Jeremy-

Didjitalus's picture
Posts: 167

hey ceribral, thx for your comment. Glad you like it but unfortunately I'm redoing the texturing part, i'm really not happy with the result:(. i'm familar with dot product but i have no idea how to use that in marmoset Sad.

JBaldwin's picture
Posts: 2162

Oh I thought you might be putting it into udk later. My bad.

-Jeremy-