Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

3DWhat Have I Been Up To? Learning Blender!

2»

Posts

  • Vortex5972Vortex5972272 Posts: 1,164Member
    You may have them or not already, but here's the Nemesis CGI model ortho's:
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f0/2d/af/f02daf9d0483e56f5b1e833fe6a41de5.jpg
    backsteptJES
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    No, I didn't have those. The contrast and resolution in that set is much better than what I have!

  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1803365 Posts: 10,568Member
    Just be mindful that there were a lot of changes to the design for Nemesis, including making the warp engines larger. So, it may not line up with what you're using.
  • count23count23357 Posts: 774Member
    2s6o45m7nqcx.jpg

    First contact studio model blueprint ^

    jadpuu8damdp.jpg

    Nemesis studio model blueprint ^

    IRML says that the CG model for nemesis was horribly inaccurate and shouldn't be used as a guide.

    Hopefully these blueprints help. I have a massive reference archive of the sovereign and galaxyic an share if so desired.
    evil_genius_180Bridger
    Formerly Nadesico.

    Current Projects:
    Ambassador Class
  • Vortex5972Vortex5972272 Posts: 1,164Member
    Nemesis didn't have a studio model, it was all CG aside from the saucer close up during the crash. The First Contact CG model is inaccurate and shouldn't be used as a guide, however. It was only meant for quick effects shots and not hero shots.
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    Just be mindful that there were a lot of changes to the design for Nemesis, including making the warp engines larger. So, it may not line up with what you're using.

    I'm well aware of this, which is why I'm trying to use the Nemesis version as a template. I'm also aware that making the Mk-I First Contact model would take more effort than just taking off the additional torpedo launchers, such as changing the length of the engineering hull, and the length of the nacelles.
    count23 wrote: »
    2s6o45m7nqcx.jpg

    First contact studio model blueprint ^

    jadpuu8damdp.jpg

    Nemesis studio model blueprint ^

    IRML says that the CG model for nemesis was horribly inaccurate and shouldn't be used as a guide.

    Hopefully these blueprints help. I have a massive reference archive of the sovereign and galaxyic an share if so desired.

    Those might be useful if I decide to try to make the Mk-I variant (which would be useful for any renderings set before the refit era). Unfortunately, the bottom one is not only the Mk-I, but due to the wrinkles in the paper, would be terribly unfun to model on top of.

    Did IRLM ever say which orthos would be best to use as a reference? The problem is that they need to have enough of a resolution in order to replicate.

    I've already started over on the Sovereign, because the proportions of Michael Wiley's model is slightly different from the Nemesis CG model. I've also noticed some inconsistencies (such as the location of the nav light) on the dorsal and side views, but plan to compensate with Wiley's orthos, which are more uniform. Starting over is just easier than nudging vertices to match the new reference.
    evil_genius_180
  • count23count23357 Posts: 774Member
    JES wrote: »
    Did IRLM ever say which orthos would be best to use as a reference? The problem is that they need to have enough of a resolution in order to replicate.

    I've already started over on the Sovereign, because the proportions of Michael Wiley's model is slightly different from the Nemesis CG model. I've also noticed some inconsistencies (such as the location of the nav light) on the dorsal and side views, but plan to compensate with Wiley's orthos, which are more uniform. Starting over is just easier than nudging vertices to match the new reference.

    Send up the bat signal and ask him. @IRML your aid is requested ;)

    regarding the blueprints. I'd use the mark 1's myself. The main body and saucer did not change, not did the nacelle shape, the only thing you'd have to adjust would be the pylon arc, but that's easily done. the detailing is just additions on top of the existing shape, not redefining it. So that may be your best option.

    Formerly Nadesico.

    Current Projects:
    Ambassador Class
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    count23 wrote: »
    JES wrote: »
    Did IRLM ever say which orthos would be best to use as a reference? The problem is that they need to have enough of a resolution in order to replicate.

    I've already started over on the Sovereign, because the proportions of Michael Wiley's model is slightly different from the Nemesis CG model. I've also noticed some inconsistencies (such as the location of the nav light) on the dorsal and side views, but plan to compensate with Wiley's orthos, which are more uniform. Starting over is just easier than nudging vertices to match the new reference.

    Send up the bat signal and ask him. @IRML your aid is requested ;)

    regarding the blueprints. I'd use the mark 1's myself. The main body and saucer did not change, not did the nacelle shape, the only thing you'd have to adjust would be the pylon arc, but that's easily done. the detailing is just additions on top of the existing shape, not redefining it. So that may be your best option.

    I thought that the secondary hull was also lengthened a bit, IIRC. That said, hopefully IRML will be able to help, because I've just discovered that the orthos I am using do not line up quite perfectly. My guess is that the model renders were not taken at exact angles. Might have to start over again, depending on the orthos that I find (or what IRML suggests).

    Oh well, just more chances to for practice!
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1803365 Posts: 10,568Member
    JES wrote: »
    I'm well aware of this, which is why I'm trying to use the Nemesis version as a template. I'm also aware that making the Mk-I First Contact model would take more effort than just taking off the additional torpedo launchers, such as changing the length of the engineering hull, and the length of the nacelles.

    Sweet. I actually like the Nemesis version best, with the beefed up engineering section and nacelles. Plus, the heavier paneling is also to my liking. It's not that I don't like the First Contact version, but I like the Nemesis version better.
    JESscifieric
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    JES wrote: »
    I'm well aware of this, which is why I'm trying to use the Nemesis version as a template. I'm also aware that making the Mk-I First Contact model would take more effort than just taking off the additional torpedo launchers, such as changing the length of the engineering hull, and the length of the nacelles.

    Sweet. I actually like the Nemesis version best, with the beefed up engineering section and nacelles. Plus, the heavier paneling is also to my liking. It's not that I don't like the First Contact version, but I like the Nemesis version better.

    Same. Plus, I see the Mk-I as only existing throughout a certain number of years, with the Mk-II existing throughout most of the class's service. So I can use it more over a longer period of time.
  • publiusrpubliusr462 Posts: 1,638Member
    edited April 10 #42
    count23 wrote: »
    Hopefully these blueprints help. I have a massive reference archive of the sovereign and galaxyic an share if so desired.

    I can almost see an aerowing under/towards the shuttlebay…

    Post edited by publiusr on
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    publiusr wrote: »
    count23 wrote: »
    Hopefully these blueprints help. I have a massive reference archive of the sovereign and galaxyic an share if so desired.

    I can almost see an aerowing under/towards the shuttlebay…

    I've thought about that, actually. The place that the captain's yacht is deployed is just not practical. But I'm not sure that I want to make any major changes to the design.
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    Update!
    2t5kwhqv7xgg.png

    The first week was trying to reconcile the incongruities of the Nemesis orthos, which turned into practice trying to redo the saucer. Got bored of that, and went back to finishing the saucer that I was working on using Admiral Horton's orthos. No word from @IRML, but then, I've gotten this far with (mostly) no help, so I figured that was the best decision I could make, rather than fighting with a set of inconsistent orthos.

    Also been working on knocking out the approximate shape of the nacelles and wings.
    u6m9cvcwhgs5.png

    I've been using this wireframe from NightFever as a reference on how to wire mine, but the underside isn't quite right. That's going to bother me, and I'm likely going to have to rewire that to make the shape of the slope+sides smoother later.
    yr80n0onert1.jpg

    I've been trying to close up the shapes, because otherwise, they have deformities and such. All that is left is the separation cavity for the saucer, and the battle bridge for the engineering hull, then the detailing and refinements can take place.

    9zthdu7gsc1a.png

    Except now I'm starting to understand that aside from one or two mid-detailed game models, nobody has modeled the battle bridge: there are no good references to work on, aside from the concept art by John Eaves!
    zqb83l1k278r.jpg
    4pv83jpr2l2m.jpg
    naoapbi2vo8a.jpg

    I liked the second idea better, with the smoother battle bridge section, and so that is what I decided to try to base it on. And then I found myself scratching my head, wondering how the battle bridge can fit inside the primary hull, AND separate, WITHOUT altering the exterior of either sections, AND without making it so that the auxiliary thruster hits the primary impulse drive while sliding out!!!

    I thought that I had an epiphany while at work, thinking that the auxiliary impulse drives for the engineering hull must have a grove that fits into the saucer section while docked, like a glove, and slides out while separating. In fact, the whole leading edge of the battle bridge section can fit in this way. It would basically exist on a deck above the escape pods in front on the impulse deck, and as it just so happens, there should even be room! Unfortunately, the groove would have to lead all the way out of the primary impulse drive, which does not exist in the design, so if the aux impulse drive sticks out far enough to clear the separation lining, it blocks primary impulse drive, and both hulls can't separate! So much for that idea!

    As of right now, I have two choices, which is to assume that the impulse drives don't need clear line of sight towards the aft, because they just generate a subspace field, and the red parts are just radiators, or alter the design. In order to side out, they just can't stick out any further than the width of where the hulls slide apart.

    Now, as for the second choice: Now that I've thought about it further, I assume that when John Eaves was drafting the SOTL calendar art above, he pictured the impulse drives as closer to the secondary hull (even hugging the sides), as opposed to how it has appeared in the films, and that when the saucer section lifts off the secondary hull, it reveals the secondary impulse drives. You can even see how the First Contact model has the thrusters a little bit close like this, but not to the same degree as the in the above artwork in my opinion.
    6kbmgk3jwipy.jpg
    ux8y8m2s5icx.jpg
    In Nemesis, the separation between the secondary hull and impulse drives doesn't quite have the same shape. But it explains the gap between the impulse drive and the edge of the separation lining perfectly.

    This is my first attempt at making the secondary impulse drive, and my first quick and dirty attempt to create details in the form of very quick and dirty impulse panels. No measuring or shit like that means it took about half an hour or so to finish, but I figure that copying and pasting details is something I'll need to master if I'm to finish projects faster.
    ex4ibaoql2sk.png

    Playing around with different shapes for the business end. I could also copy and alter the geometry of the hulls to conform better to Eaves's design for the separation (basically make two different version, and might or might not go with both. Probably should split the two into two different files, to avoid a huge tri count). Of course, altering the geometry AND having it come out looking like it was designed to look that way in the first place will be a time consuming endeavour!

    Either way, I have a lot of work to do before this model even reaches its first stage!







    StarCruiserevil_genius_180Lizzy777
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1803365 Posts: 10,568Member
    Your model is looking really nice so far.

    Also, nobody said the Battle bridge had to be in that part of the ship where it separates. In fact, the Enterprise-E was designed more for combat than the Enterprise-D, so it would make sense to have the battle bridge down deeper into the secondary hull. That makes it less of an easy target.
    scifieric
  • publiusrpubliusr462 Posts: 1,638Member
    Anyone ever try a Sovie with the nacelles flipped upside down?
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    Your model is looking really nice so far.

    Also, nobody said the Battle bridge had to be in that part of the ship where it separates. In fact, the Enterprise-E was designed more for combat than the Enterprise-D, so it would make sense to have the battle bridge down deeper into the secondary hull. That makes it less of an easy target.

    The term "Battle Bridge" is a bit of a misnomer in this case, but shorter than "That Part of the Hull That is Revealed When the Saucer Separates". Maybe "Secondary Hull Bow".

    Much of yesterday was spend trying to nail down the final appearance of the secondary hull as a whole object.

    9nuda0gjspzu.png

    But I also wanted to try to model the design off of John Eaves's concept art.

    gtnpaasctwnr.png

    I did this as a separate object, serving as a test run, rather than risk ruining my work on the secondary hull.

    giadcs18qfeo.png

    My plan is for the impulse nozzle to look much like the primary impulse deck of the Primary Hull, with radiator panels, and the darker/lighter bands of color, but more triangular as you see here. This is so that the nozzle's arc clears the rim of the separation point.

    I've kind of cheated, and raised the point where the hull separates a deck higher to give the impulse nozzle clearance. I've also widened the secondary hull nose at the point where the impulse nozzle is located, just next to where the life pods are located, ahead of the primary impulse assembly. This will change the appearance of the separation hull lining a bit, but as far as I can tell, this is the only way to make the secondary impulse assembly practical.

    I'm also thinking of adding another impulse array above the already existing secondary impulse deck, but more oriented up, to fill in that blank space above. These would serve as a positive Z-axis maneuvering thrusters, with the possibility of yet another small impulse nozzle located below, right next to the life pods, providing -Z axis maneuverability as well.

    I know that this isn't in the concept art, but I'm already going to have to alter the design to make the separation concept art work.
    Lizzy777evil_genius_180StarCruiserscifieric
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    edited May 4 #48
    Practice at attempting to make multi-object components, using the Array tool I learned about while watching one of Scifieric's videos.

    us6dkz894tup.png
    djsssttr6diw.png
    First I made the basic object, using a cube, and scaling and pinching it.
    z4y0vvemljl2.png
    Then I made multiple subdivisions to cut in a grove. I assume that this is how the hot gasses from the impulse drive are siphoned off.

    Pinching vertices inwards to create the final shape of the groove.
    y0myjsjck7h5.png
    Grabbed and dragged the desired vertices down.
    0t1m5cddm8bf.png
    Then used the array tool to clone the objects.

    I still need to go back in and drag a scale a bunch of those nozzle grooves towards the center using the Slide Edge tool, and then use the Boolean tool to cut the shapes in order to fit them properly into the impulse nozzle. Didn't have time last night to get that far, and don't know if I'll have enough time tonight either.

    Oh, and this is only a practice run. I intend to refine this process and do it all over again for the final shape.
    Post edited by JES on
    StarCruiserevil_genius_180Lizzy777scifieric
  • scifiericscifieric1101 Posts: 1,477Member
    JES wrote: »
    Practice at attempting to make multi-object components, using the Array tool I learned about while watching one of Scifieric's videos.

    Excellent work!

    And scifieric? That bum didn't do anything this nice or complex!
    JES
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    scifieric wrote: »
    JES wrote: »
    Practice at attempting to make multi-object components, using the Array tool I learned about while watching one of Scifieric's videos.

    Excellent work!

    And scifieric? That bum didn't do anything this nice or complex!

    Thank you, but at the risk of sounding cloyingly humble, without "that bum", I don't think I'd be able to do anything this nice or complex! Your videos have a wealth of knowledge and techniques that I'm still learning. I'm merely extrapolating and expanding off of them! You have my confidence that you could do something this nice and complex, and probably in less time! Maybe if you had, I would have been able to get as far as I had with less trial and error!

    I've had the past three days off, so I redid the engineering hull. The shape still isn't what I could call perfect, but it's kind of starting to get there.

    p3jb0ggncv17.png
    u07bt8yaye2a.png
    pxrd23hk65z1.png
    usmf2p5d5zhl.png
    y4qz3f5b4nw3.png
    n7o9gcvy06a2.png
    5quwkgqcioj6.png
    ggckon9mmm7p.png
    tm0uxf58nqpz.png


    I have been putting off installing subdivisions on the corners for a while, and for good reason! Because every time that I do so, it interrupts the curves of the objects, and I end up having to fix something! It's been a constant thorn in my side, like playing whack-a-mole, but with vertices! Anyone else have this problem? How do you guys fix it?

    At this point, I've started making backup objects, and unless there is a quick way to clean up the subdivisions, or another way to fix this now complex mess, I'll likely go back to the less subdivided backup, and delete the progress you see here.


    e8s2qr6jnz55.png
    rlbzn26wo5zj.png
    6hd4witihwq9.png
    ham4wketq0vx.png
    b0vnx62fllm5.png
    75bddkkmqi09.png
    kzez7ryy4mua.png
    04t38ecqr1b9.png
    ubr55ebdmcsu.png
    k1xab598j4gg.png
    StarCruiserscifiericLizzy777
  • Vortex5972Vortex5972272 Posts: 1,164Member
    Check your order of modifiers. I believe they apply top down so you want mirror above sub-D. Long time since I've used blender so I may have that the wrong way around. You may have some pinching going on where too many lines are together.


    All in all, the overall shape is coming along nicely.
    scifiericJES
  • count23count23357 Posts: 774Member
    Mirror than subd yes.

    With your other issues, to be honest, it'd be faster and easier to help you on the SFM discord. Doing it via forum posts is a little hard.
    scifiericJES
    Formerly Nadesico.

    Current Projects:
    Ambassador Class
  • scifiericscifieric1101 Posts: 1,477Member
    JES wrote: »
    Thank you, but at the risk of sounding cloyingly humble, without "that bum", I don't think I'd be able to do anything this nice or complex! Your videos have a wealth of knowledge and techniques that I'm still learning. I'm merely extrapolating and expanding off of them! You have my confidence that you could do something this nice and complex, and probably in less time! Maybe if you had, I would have been able to get as far as I had with less trial and error!

    That's very kind of you. You are doing amazing work!
    JES
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    Vortex5972 wrote: »
    Check your order of modifiers. I believe they apply top down so you want mirror above sub-D. Long time since I've used blender so I may have that the wrong way around. You may have some pinching going on where too many lines are together.


    All in all, the overall shape is coming along nicely.

    I think that it is indeed being caused by subdivisions too close together. I might have to separate the primary and secondary hull into multiple objects (which comes with its own challenges).
    scifieric
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1803365 Posts: 10,568Member
    edited May 11 #55
    It's all about control loops with Sub-D. Those "hard" corners where you want it to be a smooth curve are from having put loop cuts too close to other edges before Sub-D. Sometimes, you'll need a hard corner in one spot, but a softer curve another spot where you've done a loop cut, so you need to select the vertices where you want the softer curve and move the line in that spot only so that it's not too close to other edges. (I hope that makes sense) Edge Slide and Vertex Slide are your very best friends in that case. I'll spend vast amounts of time sometimes just moving parts of edge loops to avoid issues like that when I'm doing a Sub-D object.

    0djykf753577.png

    The circled groups of edge loops are what I'm talking about. Those are bunched up there and the Sub-D modifier is interpreting that as a spot where you want a hard corner. I don't know how many edge loops you had there before the Sub-D (or if that's even before the Sub-D) but that geometry needs to be moved farther apart to get a smooth curve.
    Post edited by evil_genius_180 on
    scifiericJESStarCruiser
  • backsteptbackstept1238 Posts: 816Member
    edited May 11 #56
    Check out the LoopTools addon! It's included with blender but isn't enabled by default.

    In your case I would use the Space tool in areas where it's bunched up to evenly distribute verts along a line.
    Also handy is to use Bevel Weights and Crease. If you set your bevel modifier limit method from angle to weight you can bevel only those edges marked with a Bevel Weight. Crease controls how much the edge is affected by the subdivision modifier. For instance a subd cube with 0 crease will be nearly spherical, while 1.0 will still remain cubic but the faces will be subdivided. I use this a lot to keep hard edges on subdivided meshes without using control loops.

    The main hull of my Defiant has about 250 faces before subd and bevel are applied, and I made good use of LoopTools.
    do2zyvsz9qo1.png
    h5ad9ra2wd7i.png
    Post edited by backstept on
    StarCruiserJES
  • evil_genius_180evil_genius_1803365 Posts: 10,568Member
    backstept wrote: »
    Check out the LoopTools addon! It's included with blender but isn't enabled by default.

    I've never understood why they would include something like that but not have it enabled by default. It sounds very handy.
  • lennier1lennier1753 Posts: 1,248Member
    backstept wrote: »
    Check out the LoopTools addon! It's included with blender but isn't enabled by default.

    I've never understood why they would include something like that but not have it enabled by default. It sounds very handy.

    Same way they need a plugin to enable drag&dropping a file to parse the path to the open dialog.
  • JESJES288 Posts: 160Member
    edited May 12 #59
    Thanks for your advice all! The LoopTool has been activated, but I after considering breaking the saucer into many parts, consisting of the front, back raised section, those underside concentric rings, the triangle, and I think that's about it, I've decided that the subdivisions have become far too complicated, and it will be easier to just start over, using the magnet tool to use the above saucer section as a reference, and my reference images to get the correct form. This was after copying the saucer section, which I'm keeping just in case. I might even consider splitting side parts of the raised section into further parts from the bridge super-structure, but then again, they seem to be a pretty joined-at-the-hip couple.

    My hope is that this will also help cut down on the number of tris in the long run. Likely, there will be trial and error involved in this process.

    It will be far easier to do this with the engineering hull, which has a copy with very few subdivisions, and will be easier to work with.

    I've just started on the raised section, and the flat part of the saucer as a single object, because I want to get that smooth curve between the two parts, seen below.

    cynnba83u5gl.jpg
    3o7jnd9szttc.jpg

    The way that the saucer section gently curves upwards is one of my favorite parts of the design, and if I'm going to get any part of the ship accurate, it's going to be that transition.uoi0cey1siok.png

    Last night, I was able to get it to this point after about 2 and half hours. The forward part of the raised hull is done is a fashion similar to Scifieric's bridge for the Enterprise, with triangles rather than divided into squares, which will help keep it's almost semicircular shape, regardless of the number of subdivisions I give it. Now I have to spend who-knows-how-long to get the rest of the shape.

    Post edited by JES on
    backsteptLizzy777StarCruiserpubliusr
Sign In or Register to comment.