Modeling large -detailed- starships (e.g. Star Trek)

nivao

Hi all,

It's been some time since I was last here, but I didn't stop modeling. However, more recently I decided to go back to modeling spaceships.

While modeling itself isn't the problem, what I generally see around here from people modeling different ships, most specifically Federation ships from Star Trek, I do get the feeling that I'm doing something wrong.

Right now, I'm working on the Sovereign-class ship for an animation short. While the general shape isn't the issue, there are many things of which I think I'm doing wrong, or not suitable for the smaller details.

So what I actually want to ask is, can anyone who has modelled a very detailed version of the Sovereign or any other Federation ship for that matter, explain how they got around doing that. Although I'll eventually have my own workflow, it would help a lot if someone could assist me in this. I would ask that he/she would explain it from the very beginning (setting up the base mesh) all the way to the finished model (including windows, panels and doors).

It may be a lot to ask, but it would help me to get a bearing at modeling such starships but also for general modeling techniques for large, detailed models and I learn far better if I look at how other people create something, then adapt to my own workflow and then I can do everything on my own. It is just that I have a hard time at this early stage to do everything on my own and there aren't any people I know who could help me.

Below is an example of the current stage of the Sovereign model, both smoothed as unsmoothed.

count23

Nivao. How did you build your model? did you use spline curves/cages, or did you start with basic shapes and mould them till you got the right way?

There is no real correct approach to modelling high detailed starships, in fact your approach looks good. What you've got here is a low quality shape mesh and what most high-detailed modellers would do is to move it further by subdividing the shape. This means that for each Tri or quad, the 3d program will extrapolate curves and create new polygons that provide a smoother edge as an intermediary between the polygons your current shape has. For instance, see how your saucer rim is a series of large squares that get closer to each other as they make the rim? a subdivision on would turn each square into 4 more smaller squares and align them along that shape to provide more smoothing. And if you find something that's been over smoothed, you simply introduce new edge loops, cuts or bevels on the area affected and re-execute your subdivision, this makes the curves tighter and keeps lines sharp will still adding more detail.

This is the general approach that higher detail models take overall, getting the shape in it's current detail level to where you want it, subdivide it then tweak the new polygons into a tighter shape. It's literally sculpting. Then once you're satisfied that breaking the shape up into more smaller ones will yield you no more results, you move on to detailing.

Unfortunately I can't go too far into depth on this right now. All I can really recommend is that you've got a very clean and good start right now, you should read up on sub division and test it out on your model then work from there.

Detailing is the last step once the shape is right (by that i mean windows, phasers, etc...) Bigger details like impulse engines, bussard collectors and whatnot should be molded into your mesh as you subdivide (You've already accomplished this in your base mesh)

So the basic flow is:

1. Create your basic shape in a low poly layout and tweak until you're satisfied.
2. Freeze the mesh and then subdivide it to get more polygons
3. tweak these new polygons until you're satisfied
4. rinse and repeat
5. add the smaller details like phasers, and "greebles" after your final shape is complete.

As for greebling and detailing, look up on how to use the boolean operations for Maya, these are how the pros cut shapes out for windows, sensor dishes (in the sovereign you're probably better of molding it with subdivision in advance then adding the dish at the end. etc...

IRML

what you've got now is pretty similar to mine before I froze and started adding details, so I think you're on the right track

one thing I would say is your reference images in those screenshots are questionable - that isn't a model used in the movies and isn't very accurate

nivao

Thanks for the confident responses.

I'm using 3ds Max for modeling and I know that there is no good or bad software as it depends on the user, but how would Maya be used to model the ships?

Also, does anyone have suitable sources for reference images on these ships? Plain Googling has yielded little results on the matter of high-res images which are accurate. I just found these and they look the closest to the movies. I do use references from the movies to modify most of the shape.

I also wonder which method is better to get harder edges? I tend to use edge loops, but they can cause other parts to also become harder where they shouldn't be, and moving the edges makes it harder to keep the curved shape. I also use chamfer in some areas, but I wonder when I should use which method.

Oh, and what about NURBS. I understand Max isn't really the best on NURBS but will it help?

Another question I stumbled upon: are triangles bad for smoothing/subdivision, since I don't experience problems (yet), while many people do state you need quads to use subdivision or smoothing.

count23

1. Maya and max are pretty much identical these days in regards to tools and workflow, so there's really no difference in switching unless you see something in Maya that you like which max doesnt have.

2. Plenty. The keywords for model references these days are "Star Trek" and "Christies". All the models were auctions off in the Christie's auctions a few years ago and every studio model was photographed very closely (except for the ones that werent on auction) at very very high resolution. Failing that, just look up the episode that your ship appeared in and grab the screencaps from trekcore (or blueprints if you want).

Some site references:
http://www.st-bilder.de/gallery/modelle.html
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans.htm

Ex Astris in their starship gallery has 5 point views of the officla CG studios models as rendered by Doug Drexler (Art director for TNG/DS9/Voy/Ent), ST Bilder is a german site that almost obsessively collects photos of the physical models. So they're two good starting points for you.

3. You'll have to adjust the positions of hte polys in your edge loops and push them further back from the edge. The rule of thumb with subds is the closer an edge loop is to an adjacent polygon, the sharper the edge is, so if you drag the parts of your edge loop away from your edges that are too sharp then run the subd operation, they'll become less sharp and by maintaining your loop it'll become a smooth transition from sharp to smooth.

4. NURBS are crap, that's the general opinion these days.

5. Triangles aren't crap, they just can't be subdivided as well as quads can and can occasionally cause artifacts in your workflow. The problem types are ngons (polygons with more then 4 sides), they cause smoothing errors, and most tools and operations can't be run on them. If you have an ngon, break it down to tris or quads.

nivao

So, well, I've made a new model according to schematics found on Ex Astris and references from First Contact, as I'm modeling the original model, not the modified one from Nemesis.

However, I've stumbled upon situations where triangles are the only way to make the model look the way It's supposed to, otherwise I will get harder edges where they aren't supposed to be and if I move these edges away, I can barely get the shape back I had, and in some cases, certain edges are too close together to move them away without having to adjust other edges which need to stay where they are.

The images below shows such a situation. Any comments would be appreciated.

- The first image shows the final render

- The second image shows the viewport with Meshmooth and without the Isoline display

- The third image shows the viewport with the low-poly mesh

- The other image shows how it looks on the original physical model from First Contact

PS: Can anyone who made such models show me their wireframes? Preferably both final as unsmoothed as well as explanations how certain areas like cutouts/indents were made (boolean or otherwise) and how they avoided artifacts/errors and how the final model was unwrapped/textured. Many topics in the WIP category don't go into detail how they were made, while others don't help as much.

MadKoiFish

I found there is no magic fix by using nurbs or some other method. Polys are polies and will work the same way after you freeze it and begin cutting in the detail work.

I suggest you look into subdivision and using smoothing groups to control your curves.

The situation you are dealing with atm is one you can solve with smoothing groups or break the mesh up into sections to allow those shapes to work then reconnect them later along a flat planar surface. THOUGH I use smoothing groups most to control smoothing and allow for drastic clean up (cutting a mess poly count by 2/3rds sometimes. Using smoothing groups will constrain the loops more as well and sharpen curves. This way you do not have to cram them so close together or stack them up in a attempt to get density of edges in a particular curve.

The idea of avoiding tris is that mess you get as a result across the surface. EXP with ships you want as many edges flowing where panel lines and the line reside. Like in a saucer you want those edges to loop evenly across the ship.

This is something that is hard to teach since you have to learn when and where to use tricks/methods (Hate to use the word method but eh) It is like when to know where to use a chamfer with edge loops or when to use just a sharp corner with loops.

Final tip much of what your demanding can be found by browsing the WIP. Such as build up of ships. I often post wires, and I am sure many here would in a wip if asked.

http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/showthread.php?77505-Balance-of-Terror-Project/page3
Current images start around post #140

#183 shows a cleaned up wire, it clearly shows how smoothing groups pushed all the curvature to a specific area. Of course I had to clean up some edges in the open area, but it was far less than if I did not use smoothing groups and I would have had to leave many more behind since the curve would occur across a lot of the surface.
http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/showthread.php?77505-Balance-of-Terror-Project&p=552181&viewfull=1#post552181

I do not have the time to hand hold but I can say everything I know I learned through fighting the software and from tutorials and the forums I lurk. Much of it was picked up here at SFM and MUCH of it was pinched from other package users such as LightWave Maya etc. (most of my poly clean up I learned off studying IRML's Voyager wireframes.)

Really the biggest step is to start thinking about cutting a mesh up and working bits at a time then bridging them together or welding them back up. Once you know where you can seam a model IE have a area it can break and allow subdiv edits it will speed up.

MKF-

IRML

don't fear triangles, you'll never completely avoid them on a complex mesh anyway

here's the wireframe of mine:

wire.jpg

and here I've highlighted some polys that I changed from quads to triangles because it was actually better this way:

wire_highlight.jpg

see they're not all bad

you're asking the sort of questions that you really have to learn through experience, no harm in asking of course, but you're better off just giving it a go and seeing what happens - you'll learn more that way

Coolhand

If it works, it works... the whole thing about tris, they can cause probs if you're using them to describe curved surfaces, but they're an even bigger problem (sometimes) for deformable models like models of people or creatures (but also useful for placing creases etc). When you're modelling inflexible surfaces like metal hulls its not so critical - it only has to exist in that one static state so as long as it looks ok its ok.

Basically don't listen to anything anyone says on the internet ever.;) I've seen people with no modelling exp whatsoever berating people for using tri's when there's no problem with it, also back in the day tris would do funny things like crash your sub'd and so on, but i've never had to deal with those problems personally.