Greetings!

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

3DStarTrek DS9

1111214161720

Posts

  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    al3d wrote: »
    at 4m polygones, i don't care if it looks insanly good, it need to loose at least 2.5 million to make sens mate.

    Thanks for stopping by Al. I need to clear up one word from you . . . do you mean "Scenes" or do you mean "Sense". Scene is one thing Sense is another and to me the Station makes sense it's . . . . sci_fi

    If the word you mean is scene, then I guess this would take up a lot of resources in a render, but the model can be stripped away or have certain versions of it done. low poly and so forth . . .

    There is "in my beginners opinion" no way you can get that much detail in a full blown DS9 for 2.5 million polys or less . . . . . That is out of the question, flat out . . . . . I was born at nigh, but not last night :D

    I would truely like to see that done. first off the amount of segmentation would be stagering. Hull plating would be non existent. . . you would have to result to image maps, which we all know will not stand up on close ups.

    As for the sensor pallet? dude . . . . those are gonna cost you big time . . :flippy: trust me, there isn't a waisted poly on my sensor pallets and they cost me 177,297 polys per section, with a total of 6 sections . . . .
    plus my sensor pallets are not as good as they should be . . . . lol
    they could use some more details . . . . .

    I will agree with you on one count, it is big and would be very very hard to put in a scene and render it with a bunch of other stuff, but it can be done.
    I remember reading a post you made where you did scenes with 12 million poly's or some such like that? . . . . so there ya go.

    2.5 million . . . . impossible :)
    gp
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    EBOLII wrote: »
    Ahem.....NO offense yeah?

    none taken . . . . I like point number #2 . . . :D
    that could be me . . . . D'oh!
    gp
  • WXMWXM331 Posts: 0Member
    gpdesigner wrote: »
    There is "in my beginners opinion" no way you can get that much detail in a full blown DS9 for 2.5 million polys or less . . . . . That is out of the question, flat out.

    2.5 million . . . . impossible :)
    gp
    Dude, not true! I myself made a mesh of DS9 (in one afternoon) that is easily as detailed as yours here -- no maps, pure geometry -- and it was only about fifty thousand polies (and that included a 100% accurate detailed Galaxy class docked to it). I was going to post a render of it here to show you but I can't seem to find it right now...but you can surely take my word for it, riiiiight? ;) :D

    Seriously though, good job on this and congrats for sticking it through till the end! Neat stuff! (And, no, I never did a DS9 -- that was a pure lie I'm afraid :o)
  • Ghostrider24Ghostrider240 Posts: 0Member
    Beg, beg, beg......

    Nice. Someone poses a single polite question as to the possibility of a model being released, and it's considered begging.

    Not even gonna waste my time. :lol:
  • Ghostrider24Ghostrider240 Posts: 0Member
    Anyways, as for the 4m poly count issue, I can see where alot of the polies are coming from. There is alot of "quasi-neccessary detail" along alot of the sections that logically speaking the human eye would miss.

    I pose a couple of questions, please do not take these as digs against your model which is quite good.

    1. Do you have the mesh subdivided into sections ( ie, weapons sail #1, #2, #3, upper / lower pylon #1, #2, #3, etc docking ring sections )? Go in and take a long hard look at what detail the human eye is most likely to see first, as well as the flow of detail, where it leads the eye to.

    2. When you start your texturing process, try to use a very minimalist hull plating pattern as this will augment the modeled detail you already have, possibly allowing you to remove a little of the excess, further reducing your poly count.

    With all luck that should bring you down into the 3,500,000 range.
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    Don't really know how to respond to the last couple of posts . . . Ummmmmm lets see,


    WXM, your just crazy . . . D'oh! . . . . . fifty thousand polys . . . .

    As far as Ghostrider asking for a release of the mesh and Andrew responding with the Begging comment, well lets say that that is a response that has been said before on a lot of other forums by a lot of other people who have a different view about first post members asking were they can download models . . . . . So Ghostrider no matter how good your intentions were, you kinda set yourself up for that, I am just sorry Andrew got to you first . . But I know other folks on other forums who would have been a lot more brutal.

    Ghostrider your comment about the quasi necessary detail . . . . well I guess this is largely a point of view kind-a-thing. . . . . . and this may work in with what AL3D was thinking.
    You both are thinking production value, How it will look in a scene with tons of other stuff. So all the micro detail you refer to as quasi necessary will not be seen.
    In my mind I am building this mesh for me, this is what I am going to render. When I render the Station it will be just as close as the test renders you see. The fact that you saw the quasi necassary detail means the human eye can it.

    To answer your point questions, the mesh is very much modular at this point. There is just one weapon sail. there are 3 section of habitat ring and only one section of the outer docking ring, and the pylons are not yet built but when finally make them, there will only be one.
    I don't plan on duplication or Radial arraying the station until all of the imaps are made and texturing is done. As far as clean-up, all of the detail have their own layers, so at any given time detail can be added or deleted.

    Your ideas about how to proceed with the texturing is good advice, I will give that a go when the time comes.

    gp

    P.S.
    I PM'ed you early this morning check your inbox.
  • JeffrySGJeffrySG321 Posts: 477Member
    ...been really busy lately but just wanted to send a "looking f-ing great GP" out your way! :D
  • ComcoComco317 Posts: 1,281Administrator
    I couldn't agree more. :)
  • biotechbiotech171 Posts: 0Member
    Its outstanding, and if you are making still images with this thing, then who cares how many polys it has, leave it rendering overnight if you have to, at least you'll have a beautiful pic in the morning.

    If you are planning animations you might run into trouble, but if all you want is the best CGI DS9 in exhistance, just keep going.
  • al3dal3d177 Posts: 0Member
    i'll bet you anything mate it can be done under 2.5m for sure. i don't see any thing in there that can justify that much polygones. send me a section of those 177 000 polygone, and i'm sure it can be drop a LOT, it's just a question of experience i guess. the CG version of the show was made under 1 million so no point having it over 4 milliion polygones realy. If you wanna see how it can be optimized, i'll be glad to show you mate.
  • biotechbiotech171 Posts: 0Member
    But then the one on the show had to use computers that were 9 years behind what we have now, and never had to render larger than a TV resolution, thats not even 800 x 600.

    Sure it can be done, but it dosnt mean it has to be done.
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    Thanks a lot Comco . . . . . :D
    biotech wrote: »
    If you are planning animations you might run into trouble, but if all you want is the best CGI DS9 in exhistance, just keep going.

    I agree with you 10,000%, no way would I want to animate all of those poly's, that would be core suicide.
    al3d wrote: »
    i'll bet you anything mate it can be done under 2.5m for sure.

    I am not saying a DS9 can't be built under 2.5 million, in fact you have half a dozen DS9's downloadable on the internet right now.
    I have seen 3 of them and 2 don't even come close to mine. The only one out of the 3 that I have seen that is cool looking was Psycho's. I haven't seen it up close or seen the mesh but it looks as close to the production version as can be.


    al3d wrote: »
    i don't see any thing in there that can justify that much polygones.

    look at the images below . . . every single edge on this station is beveled so you can get in this close or closer for shots.
    It's not perfectly assembeld but it looks smooth and little to no segmentation . . . .
    Dang AL3D I hate to brag about my work and you are just making me do it aren't you . . . . ?


    hatch.jpg
    weps.jpg
    neck.jpg


    al3d wrote: »
    send me a section of those 177 000 polygone, and i'm sure it can be drop a LOT, it's just a question of experience i guess.

    You know . . . I will send you one of my hero docks which are 147k, work you magic with them, without changing the design . . .
    do a render and repost it. Now keep in mind, I made some low poly docks that are 31k already, but that is extreme, I used the loss conversion to do it. I would like to have full detailed docks all the way around so show me some experience. However you need to do something other than removing segments in the conduit 'cause like I said 9 posts ago, I am going to go through all of the meshes again and optimize. The docks on the docking are 9 in total come out to about 630,000 poly's that is hero docks and low poly combined . . . . that's huge

    al3d wrote: »
    the CG version of the show was made under 1 million so no point having it over 4 milliion polygones realy. If you wanna see how it can be optimized, i'll be glad to show you mate.

    Sure . . show me I wanna see it, also where did you get this number from? I need to see this . . . . I need to dee a picture of the show's CG version and I need to see the polygon information you said. I am not saying they didn't do it . . I am saying that at 1 million Polys . . . I am sure it looks like it is 1 million poly's.

    gp
  • psychopsycho0 Posts: 0Member
    c'mon, let's not bitch about polycounts... i think under 1 million for the model used in the show sounds reasonable, but as it was already said, it only had to be rendered on tv resolution... also this model seems to be detailed enough to have extreme closeups of every single part, while i bet, for the show they used one model for standard shots and had other model of some sections for closeups... so you really can't compare this model to the one used in the show, this one definately isn't made for production standards, just for the fun of it...
    gpdesigner wrote: »
    The only one out of the 3 that I have seen that is cool looking was Psycho's. I haven't seen it up close or seen the mesh but it looks as close to the production version as can be.

    it was pretty close, but still very inaccurate in some parts... also it only had about 350 - 400k polies and most details were textured... ;)
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    good post Psycho,
    I know AL3d is trying to help out . . and thanks AL, he's got a lot of valid points . . for a model going into production, but this isn't, wasn't, and not made for that. It's all good . . . and if folks want to use it when I am done . . . that's all good as well . .
    gp
  • al3dal3d177 Posts: 0Member
    Ok, here we go, only made fixed a small section cause to be honnest, it's a bit of a mess. all double sided polygones, haft of wich are flipped the wrong size. all pipes are mostly unwelded. lots of polygones hiding behind other polygones. Extremely small pipes with 30 sided segments, then 24 divisions on a straight pipe. Also lots of twisted polygones that will give errors in renders.

    So, here's only a small section fixed, from 18 500 to 7435 polygone. and i could remove another 1500 polygone easily but time is short today.

    I think that when people say" OH..i'll clean it after" is a bit bogus answer, not offense Ralph, but what's the point of modeling like that!?...
    52957.jpg
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    most of that post is just a knock on my modeling technique . .
    as far as the rest . . . well usually when I say i will do somethign i do it . . .
    I don't know what type of people you know, but maybe you should change the people you hang with.

    That is a pretty far away shot you have there, I can't see ant of the detail. please send that file to me so I can see what you did and do a count for myself and do closer renders . . .
    gp
  • al3dal3d177 Posts: 0Member
    it's not about knoking anything, it's just facts i saw in your model mate, it's not a personnal attack in any form. What does this have to do with the people i hang out with!?

    FUnny...when people send praise, it's always "OK", when someone as a legitimite post for once, oh well, we can't have that do we!...
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]2 Posts: 3Member
    Hey GP, I know Alain, the kinda people he hangs with are called "pros".

    Try not to take it personal, he's giving you good advice.... he's right on the money I'll tell ya. It's hard when someone points out the bad, but it makes you a better skilled artist in the future. And he wasn't even rude about it, so there nothing to be offended or knocked by.

    Cheers!
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    dude, you didn't see the model, you saw a small percent of it, it was a part of the model that I actually needed to be fixed, that's why you got it . . .
    I am not saying the model is perfect never did, I am just saying send the part back to me so I can see what you did . . . you say you want to help, then help?
    gp
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    CAClark wrote: »
    Hey GP, I know Alain, the kinda people he hangs with are called "pros".

    Try not to take it personal, he's giving you good advice.... he's right on the money I'll tell ya. It's hard when someone points out the bad, but it makes you a better skilled artist in the future. And he wasn't even rude about it, so there nothing to be offended or knocked by.

    Cheers!

    CA, I am not taking it too personal, just a bit but I want to see what was done. I want to render a nice big fat image . . . what's wrong with that?
    gp
  • MartocticvsMartocticvs444 Posts: 524Member
    Nothing's wrong with that, obviously - though Al really is giving you some excellent advice there. I think really what he's saying boils down to don't optimise later - make it optimised in the first place. That way you save time for one thing, and you don't end up having to go back over what you've already done. Al knows his stuff ;) But obviously, this is a for-pleasure model, so you're not constrained by production limitations... Al was being positively polite there, though ;)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]2 Posts: 3Member
    "most of that post is just a knock on my modeling technique . .
    as far as the rest . . . well usually when I say i will do something i do it . . .
    I don't know what type of people you know, but maybe you should change the people you hang with."


    That was the bit that sounds like you took it personal ;):D

    gpdesigner wrote: »
    CA, I am not taking it too personal, just a bit but I want to see what was done. I want to render a nice big fat image . . . what's wrong with that?
    gp
  • psychopsycho0 Posts: 0Member
    al3d wrote: »
    from 18 500 to 7435 polygone. and i could remove another 1500 polygone easily but time is short today.

    ok, that's some serious optimization... didn't expect that!:thumb:
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    ok, that's some serious optimization... didn't expect that! :thumb:

    I have to go park planes now . . . .
    BTW . . still didn't get that file.
    gp
  • chronochrono0 Posts: 1Member
    Can I assume that the "Profession vs Hobbyist" BS is done? And can we get back to seeing more render of the model!!
  • al3dal3d177 Posts: 0Member
    chrono wrote: »
    Can I assume that the "Profession vs Hobbyist" BS is done? And can we get back to seeing more render of the model!!

    BS is post like yours mate. nothing to do with Pro's VS Hobbiest. a Mesh well model is not defined by if you're a pro or Not. But rather how it's made and if it's made using proper technics.
  • gpdesignergpdesigner203 MontrealPosts: 323Member
    AL, you are absolutely right, Also I want to thank you for taking the time to look at the mesh I sent to you. Still . . I would have liked to see what you did to it, but I will move on.
    Sure . . the station isn't perfect it's a learning process, and as I said in many previous posts, once the station is done I will go back in and optimize to see if I can make it smaller.

    feeling good right now, I just pushed my first 767 tonight so I am doing great . . . . :D
    gp
  • LonewriterLonewriter236 Posts: 1,078Member
    I can't believe I haven't been following this thread. This is the best DS9 mesh I have ever seen, keep up the good work, I can't wait to see if finished.:thumb:
  • JeffrySGJeffrySG321 Posts: 477Member
    al3d wrote: »
    Ok, here we go, only made fixed a small section cause to be honnest, it's a bit of a mess. all double sided polygones, haft of wich are flipped the wrong size. all pipes are mostly unwelded. lots of polygones hiding behind other polygones. Extremely small pipes with 30 sided segments, then 24 divisions on a straight pipe. Also lots of twisted polygones that will give errors in renders.

    So, here's only a small section fixed, from 18 500 to 7435 polygone. and i could remove another 1500 polygone easily but time is short today.

    I think that when people say" OH..i'll clean it after" is a bit bogus answer, not offense Ralph, but what's the point of modeling like that!?...

    While this topic is going on, and I feel that we have these discussions a lot on a few different boards... Can you post some wires of the before and after the clean up (with GP's permission, of course)? I know this is one of the areas I'd really like to brush up on and I think seeing the wires might help many of us get a better idea of clean / optimized models.
  • JeffrySGJeffrySG321 Posts: 477Member
    gpdesigner wrote: »
    ...I just pushed my first 767 tonight so I am doing great . . . . :D gp
    I knew the HULK was hiding up in Canada!
Sign In or Register to comment.