[GALLERY] Nero's porno at its best

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRain

Do it right, not easy.

---

Uhm.. what? Its not wrong either. Please refrain from posting if you dont know what your talking about.

And the edges are pretty much fine imo, I like them as they are. There not meant to have to much curve to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nero

Uhm.. what? Its not wrong either. Please refrain from posting if you dont know what your talking about.

And the edges are pretty much fine imo, I like them as they are. There not meant to have to much curve to them.

---

yes they are wrong, at least if you were planning to actually use the highres mesh to bake from. (which i assume you are, since that's the only reason you'd use floaters)

floaters always(99%) project wrong, and they'll ruin any ambientocclusion you'll ever try to bake.
floaters were invented when normalmaps were a new thing, to save time.
they're alright to use for small flat things which protrude, PROTRUDE! if they recess into the surface, model them in,
like bolts, rivets, all that jazz, floaters are fine, if they dent in, like grooves, screw-holes, your detailthingies, model them in, because it makes for better baking, and better modelling in general.

if you can be arsed to paint out the junk it produces in ambient (which is a shit work to do, trust me) then be my guest, floaters are still bad practice though.

also, if you think your edges are fine, keep them that way, it's your model, your work. this is just crit thread, and i always repeat to people not to make their edges so tight, because it ends up not showing up in normalmaps, or coming out pixellated or in less-than-a-pixel edges.

tl;dr: use floaters if you want to, we dont care. fact remains, floaters are bad. always.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuro

yes they are wrong, at least if you were planning to actually use the highres mesh to bake from. (which i assume you are, since that's the only reason you'd use floaters)

floaters always(99%) project wrong, and they'll ruin any ambientocclusion you'll ever try to bake.
floaters were invented when normalmaps were a new thing, to save time.
they're alright to use for small flat things which protrude, PROTRUDE! if they recess into the surface, model them in,
like bolts, rivets, all that jazz, floaters are fine, if they dent in, like grooves, screw-holes, your detailthingies, model them in, because it makes for better baking, and better modelling in general.

if you can be arsed to paint out the junk it produces in ambient (which is a shit work to do, trust me) then be my guest, floaters are still bad practice though.

also, if you think your edges are fine, keep them that way, it's your model, your work. this is just crit thread, and i always repeat to people not to make their edges so tight, because it ends up not showing up in normalmaps, or coming out pixellated or in less-than-a-pixel edges.

tl;dr: use floaters if you want to, we dont care. fact remains, floaters are bad. always.

---

Truth is, I have major problems when I have to many things in one object. Basicly, when I turbosmooth it/make it high poly, it becomes a pain in the ass to put constraints. Some constraints ruin other parts of the model, and since everyone is telling me that I must use 4 sided polygons, I basicly screw up when its too complicated.

As far as being to tight, I never knew that. Thank you. I guess its to late for this model, but ill keep that in mind for the next. =)
(this is for halo ce btw, so bumps wont really be of any use in it.)

4 sided polys only is mroe of a guideline than a rule.

late to the party, but

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuro

if you copy something which is ugly, the copy will still be ugly.

---

...i agree. the halo games lost all sense of art direction over time, their assets went from actually looking really good to being the same bevel-and-extrude boxy pieces of fucking turd that literally every other sci-fi game has sunken to. it's like nobody in the sci-fi genre has a single creative brain cell in their entire head.

http://joshflighter.blogspot.com

Not advertising my blog.

New post shows my low poly. Also, high poly has some of the detail in the model now, (curved areas).
Sadly, I dont think this will be going anywhere from here, because it seems the teams UV'er isn't doing his job, and so on and so forth. I myself tried unwrapping, but im a horrible unwrapper, so its not happening. :P

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...ampconcept.png
More progress. I was going to post it in the quick crit thread, but since I will be updating it a lot, I will post here.
I really need help with idea's. The background is dull, and I dont know what to add. i was thinking of a structure, but I don't think that would be a great fit. Dunno.

I think it could benefit from a more dramatic angle and better composition. Right now it just seems like a collection of objects meant to fill up the space. Maybe you've got a better idea of the composition in your head but I'm just not seeing it right now. Something that would look great in the background is using the rain to show the depth layering of some low-lying clouds and terrain. I'm also not sure what's going on with your lighting.

I think the angle of the camera is fine, but the way the rain is coming in really ruins it. If you want your rain like that, you need to get closer to the ground.

Modelling a bike that I will be buying sometime this summer hopefully. (CBR250R Honda)

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...er/body2-1.jpg
http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...er/body3-1.jpg
http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...hter/body4.jpg
This is prob my first model that has so many curves in it. So this is a great challenge for me. Anyways, crit is always welcome. :)
New renders:
http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...hter/body5.jpg
http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...hter/body6.jpg

New update:
http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82362