Welcome to! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

3DLego V-wing

maranmaran178 Posts: 39Member
edited July 2011 in Work in Progress #1
Inspired by Stonky's gorgeous looking Lego X-wing I decided to do some modelling myself.
Working 40+ hours a week in 3dsMax for the "Boss-man" does take it's toll on my motivation to do stuff at home, but this weekend was an extra long one so I decided do do some Lego modelling.
About a year ago I already made a start on an excavator (#7428) but looking back at it the quality was not really on par any more.

So, here's a little something on a V-wing model I found sitting on a bookshelf.
So far the only annoying part was the big round one with all the holes etc. in it.

I'm already looking forward to modelling the Clone Trooper helmet :(
Post edited by maran on


  • ArmondikovArmondikov0 Posts: 0Member
    So much Lego, it makes me feel 12 again! :D
  • stonkystonky350 Posts: 489Member
    You're too kind. :) The V-Wing is off to a great start, looking forward to seeing more! The best thing about the annoying parts is using them again...and again...and again...and only having to model them once. :)
  • maranmaran178 Posts: 39Member
    Another weekend, and some more work done.

    The "wings"are now finished and I started on the main hull of the ship.
    I decided to put the droid in there already, to give it that Star Warsy feel. :p

    Also did a little experimenting with DoF, but I've never done that before so it turned out a bit less like I hoped. I rendered out a depth-map and added the blur in Photoshop.

    If anyone knows how to get that damned Mental Ray DoF working....
    07.jpg 263.3K
  • stonkystonky350 Posts: 489Member
    Looking good!
  • ArmondikovArmondikov0 Posts: 0Member
    If DoF is turning out less like you hoped I suggest reading up on how it works in actual photography. Once you get f-numbers into your head it'll make sense.

    Also, from a very quick look around Google, it seems like Mental Ray produces quite dithered DoF effects compared to Digital Confusion. Could it be that you're using an f-stop that's too low (or too high) or not enough AA passes? Another tip seems to be to combine multiple effects to try and smooth out any issues. Particularly with simulated DoF from a depth map you can run into issues when you have high contrast objects separated by a large amount of depth space.
  • maranmaran178 Posts: 39Member

    Just a few more basic pieces and the canopy. After that I've gotta figure out how I'm gonna do his little Clone trooper helmet...
    11.jpg 181.3K
    12.jpg 211.7K
  • stonkystonky350 Posts: 489Member
    Very nice! It's true, the clone helmet will be a challenge, but all that more rewarding when you pull it off. :)
  • homerpalooza67homerpalooza67228 Posts: 1,891Member
    fantastic! :shiner:
  • ArmondikovArmondikov0 Posts: 0Member
    Looking good. I see you've even added the non-smooth edges for the sloped pieces! It's a nice touch.
  • maranmaran178 Posts: 39Member
    Another little update and a question for all the 3dsMax users out here:

    I'm trying to add those little holes on the bottom of the plate-bricks but whatever I try I can't get them right.
    It looks like the mesh-density of the displacement is too low; anyone knows how to fix this?
  • ArmondikovArmondikov0 Posts: 0Member
    Definitely your polygon density. If you use displacement, you need polygons to displace, and the more intricate your displacement the more you will need. Even so, you're still using a grid of square polygons and then trying to displace them in a circular fashion - so like any pixelated circle, you're going to need a lot of points to get the required smoothness. Imagine drawing a grid over your white circle and only the squares that are more than 50% covered will displace, then imagine how many grid lines you'd need to make the effect look smooth. Try drawing a circle in (a non Windows 7 version of) MS Paint to see, it's the same thing. So you need a lot of polygons for that to work as you want.

    Have you considered a bump map rather than displacement map? This would render at the resolution of your map, rather than the resolution of your geometry. Given that these are small details and you already have a map set up, it would be an easy route to take. You may have to do is amplify the bump level above the recommended 100% setting to get the illusion of the right depth, and depending on a few factors this can sometimes produce artefacts and poor results on rendering. But generally, if you don't want to model those indentations, I'd go for a bump map.

    Alternatively, if you really need/want to use displacement see if your program has some sort of adaptive sub-division setting that only subdivides extra polygons where they're needed. Different software will do this in different ways and I'm not familiar with all of them. You'd have to look it up.
  • L2KL2K0 Posts: 0Member
    what about bump mapping them ?
    these are really small details

    your mesh and your computer wil thank you for that.
  • stonkystonky350 Posts: 489Member
    Wait - are you using a texture map to actually deform the geometric points prior to rendering or are you displacing the geometry at rendertime?
  • maranmaran178 Posts: 39Member
    @ Armondikov & L2K
    I did try normal- and bumpmapping, but the end-result makes the holes look way too shallow.

    @ Stonky
    I displace them at rendertime. I don't want to know how many poly's it would be otherwise :p

    I did finally manage to get a decent result though; 3dsMax apparently doesn't like crisp textures for displacing stuff, so blurring them helped a lot. Also, a colleague of mine knew of some hidden away options to increase the detail.

    Almost everything on the ship is done now except for the canopy.
    I'll probably have to redo the materials because the ones I use now don't support ambient occlusion for some reason.

    Anyway, thanks for all the help guys, appreciate it!
    15.jpg 189.6K
  • ArmondikovArmondikov0 Posts: 0Member
    That would be because with a sharp image, the displacement is all or nothing, producing ugly effects when your polygon count is too low. At least with blurring it slightly you might be able to get a slightly more even result, although you'll definitely lose the sharpness.
  • stonkystonky350 Posts: 489Member
    Armondikov wrote: »
    That would be because with a sharp image, the displacement is all or nothing, producing ugly effects when your polygon count is too low. At least with blurring it slightly you might be able to get a slightly more even result, although you'll definitely lose the sharpness.

    Or switch renderers. ;)

    Very nice work, and the question everyone asks themselves is - when am I done? Do I bevel the edges? Do I change/improve the render settings? Is the renderer that I'm using going to give me what I'll ultimately be happy with?

    I think that you've done a great job so far - is it photoreal? Not yet (neither are mine), but maybe that's not your goal. How far are you going to go with it?
Sign In or Register to comment.