|
For the past few years I've always wanted to get into the demo scene. The only problem is I can't program for the life of me. In the meantime I'll just futz around with renderable effects.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2010 23:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
Makes sense it is a programming demo. I saw some cool DirectX demos a little like this back in the day. Isn't this what visualization plugins like "milkdrop" are? Particles are something I don't have a huge amount of experience with but I need to master them in Houdini. Looking forward to this weekend's workshop at SideFX.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 00:29
|
|
|
ceebee posted:For the past few years I've always wanted to get into the demo scene. The only problem is I can't program for the life of me. In the meantime I'll just futz around with renderable effects. find some loving programmers while you're still in school dude, I regret never getting around to making one with my graphics programmer friend  Totally cool demo. What's the place to go to for demos nowadays? We used to stream demoscene.tv on the projector in the lab back in school when we were bored.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 03:46
|
|
|
scene.org will always be around, but pouet.net is much better for browsing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 04:19
|
|
Sigma-X posted:find some loving programmers while you're still in school dude, I regret never getting around to making one with my graphics programmer friend Nobody at Gnomon knows how to program mang. It's basically a strictly artist school. It's pretty lame but whatever.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 04:58
|
|
|
Wow, some of the stuff on pouet is really cool, I had no idea there was a scene for this stuff - makes sense I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 05:11
|
|
|
I've been doing some of that too, quite some time ago  And wayfinder, who's also on SA, did the music for another demo that got released at Breakpoint.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 10:55
|
|
|
Why must my laptop not support Cuda, whyyy, WHY! Fun stuff tho, I've been looking a lot into this stuff lately, but the way I want to implement it requires GPU acceleration, so no go yet, that and Houdini's SDK is annoying as hell when it comes to threading, boo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2010 11:02
|
|
|
I need some advice on creating a smooth glass lens, as I seem to run into the same problem only in different spots, no matter how I go about it. The meshes always have some areas where there are too many lines running into a vertex, creating refraction artefacts and weird specular highlights, when subdividing the mesh to make it smoother. Here's a picture of two ways I have attempted this. The arrows show the problem areas.  Click here for the full 1009x456 image.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 13:39
|
|
|
Have you tried running another loop or two around the thin edge and meshsmoothing it? Can you post an image of the artifacts? I've never had an issue with those parts of glass before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 14:32
|
|
|
cubicle gangster posted:Can you post an image of the artifacts? I've never had an issue with those parts of glass before. Here's a top view of the middle of the subdivided mesh of lens B (not Lens A  ): And here's a render of the middle, where the artifacts occur:  When I switch refractions of, they go away. I tried increasing the refraction ray depth, but it didn't do anything. cubicle gangster posted:Have you tried running another loop or two around the thin edge and meshsmoothing it? Das MicroKorg fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Apr 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 14:47
|
|
|
Have you tried modeling one like this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 15:16
|
|
|
I suggest people buy Naiad, it is sweet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 16:10
|
|
|
cubicle gangster posted:Have you tried modeling one like this? This is a cool idea. I tried it just now, but it's difficult to get a perfectly round shape, and the top/bottom surface of the lens is a little wobbly. I did play around with it though until I reached the following shape:  Now, this is just a low-poly cylinder but strangely it works. I think the problem was, that the base mesh I had before (Lens B, see above) had too many polygons already and the smoothing screwed it up in the middle. Here's a comparison:  Click here for the full 1000x500 image.  ?EDIT: This is what I'm working on by the way. Criticism is very welcome  
Das MicroKorg fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Apr 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 17:02
|
|
|
do you need to subdivide that lens? Also you could try a geosphere - tris don't usually smooth nicely but IIRC a geosphere subdivided doesn't have any pole-pinching.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 17:14
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:do you need to subdivide that lens? Well, all I need is a lens with a smooth surface and sharper edges. A high-poly Geosphere would probably work too, but I didn't find a primitive like that in Cinema 4D.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 17:27
|
|
|
FLX posted:
Pretty sweet. I think the date indicator and chronograph buttons are way too small. They need to have a nice size to them esp. the buttons. You don't wanna have to wonder if you pressed them or not because they're so tiny. Usually there's a "made in wherever" at the bottom below where you put the calendar. Overall the design is solid but lacks something to make it stand out. Is it a real watch? It looks like a regular quartz mechanism divers watch inspired watch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 19:32
|
|
|
Hellbeard posted:Pretty sweet. I think the date indicator and chronograph buttons are way too small. They need to have a nice size to them esp. the buttons. You don't wanna have to wonder if you pressed them or not because they're so tiny. Usually there's a "made in wherever" at the bottom below where you put the calendar. Overall the design is solid but lacks something to make it stand out. Is it a real watch? It looks like a regular quartz mechanism divers watch inspired watch. Thanks for the comments The watch is just something I sketched out last week as a project to learn how to create realistic looking materials. It definitely needs some more details to make it more interesting. "Hand-made in Paris" will be written on the underside of the watch, because it is obviously a 3,000+ dollar watch where these things don't belong on the face side 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 20:56
|
|
|
Ratmann posted:I suggest people buy Naiad, it is sweet. What is it? never mind, two more minutes of google: http://www.exoticmatter.com/overview/
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2010 21:27
|
|
|
All this super high-poly stuff is fascinating in how it's so different to how I work, but it does make me want to go back to building game objects again. Took a week off on this one, then went from about 60% finished to this in like two days.   Still a bunch of finishing tweaks to do but I should have a proper render out in the next few days. GeeCee fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Apr 10, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 03:07
|
|
|
My portfolio has a definite lack of models so I decided to model a butterfly knife today. Went a lot faster than I thought it would. 
le capitan fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Apr 10, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2010 03:30
|
|
|
Better renders, re-did the grips, added some more AO, re-coloured the paintjob on the patterned version....all in all I'm happy with how it turned out. I'll probably model some bullets or maybe an aimpoint micro to go on there as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2010 00:40
|
|
|
Applebee123 posted:So I watched Clash of the Titans in 3D and I was wondering how do you go about turning a 2D film into 3D in post production? If you record with two cameras in 3D from the start thats fine, but how do they turn a pre-recorded flat 2D image of live action into 3D after it has been filmed? As was mentioned already there are a couple way to do it. A lot of times it depends on the company who is doing the conversion. the first way to do it is to basically roto, or cut out the parts you want and re arrange them on the Z plane as cards and paint fill everything between them. With "Clash" it was a bit different. They actually used a technology where they can make depth mattes for the whole shot, map it onto those, and only roto where things need to pass behind / through other objects. In theory its a bit quicker and comes out looking a whole lot better. From what I heard the critics panned the 3D conversion in Clash saying it looked pretty bad, which isnt surprising cause nothing looks too great when converted. But you need to remember the conversion for Clash was done in less than 8 weeks, which is a pretty rush job for the 2500 or so shots they had to do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2010 01:44
|
|
|
FLX posted:This is a cool idea. I tried it just now, but it's difficult to get a perfectly round shape, and the top/bottom surface of the lens is a little wobbly. I did play around with it though until I reached the following shape: In layman's terms - if the mesh is not 4/4 (4 valence vertices, 4-sided faces), then portions of the mesh will not be C2 continuous. C2 continuous means you have smooth reflections. In other words, this is what creates hosed up specular highlights all over a model if you try to smooth a triangulated model with Catmull-Clark (for triangular models you use Loop subdivision, which has its own set of problems) The explanation behind it is a bunch of topological math involving subdivision kernels and other wacky poo poo. But more or less, if you make a model that's made of nothing but quads and 4-valence vertices, it's guaranteed to look very, very good when smoothed. If you can't get it down to that, it's best to hide the extraordinary ie. non-4-valence vertices in a part of the model you won't see very often.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2010 00:24
|
|
|
Render my girlfriend made that I thought was kinda nice, the scene was already done by her teacher though. http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/103/4/a/Int_jour_final_by_Azraele.jpg
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2010 03:19
|
|
|
Goreld posted:No, the problem is that every extraordinary vertex will only be C1 continuous using Catmull-Clark subdivision. Thanks, that's a good explanation
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2010 08:50
|
|
|
Had to post this because it's cool, it's 3d, and it won an academy award. g33kster: Heard that about Clash of the Titans. Wish they would stop with the 3d movies already. This is not a trend that will stop anytime soon however.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2010 10:34
|
|
|
The attention to detail in that is ridiculous. Planning where everything was going to go mustve been a bitch. I got some time to sit down with toxik today so dug in for one of the showreel shots. 2 hours later, job done. This kicks the crap out of combustion and it's a lot more enjoyable to use. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2010 13:03
|
|
|
--
SPACE CARBS fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Sep 2, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2010 20:38
|
|
|
Trying to learn Blender and facial topology... current wip, C&C very welcome. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2010 00:19
|
|
Seeing how far I can take this dude from memory/without any reference before I resort to it. A test to see how much anatomy I've remembered so far :P
ceebee fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Apr 15, 2010 |
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2010 02:54
|
|
|
ceebee posted:Seeing how far I can take this dude from memory/without any reference before I resort to it. A test to see how much anatomy I've remembered so far :P The waist and hips so far look to be too thin, that and the thumb-side of the forearm looks a little too thick. Other than that, keep going! I've been meaning to do one of my own for ages and now I have an opportunity to learn Mudbox I probably should.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2010 04:30
|
|
|
Here's a stopping point for this for the night, since I haven't posted in a while. Click here for the full 1663x980 image.  Click here for the full 1663x980 image.  Click here for the full 1663x980 image. This has problems (horrible seams that'll be fixed last, some lazy wood damage, scratches on the right side need work) but it's getting there. Edit: Oh yeah, the gun can be reloaded.  Click here for the full 1663x980 image. ThreeHams fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Apr 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2010 08:20
|
|
|
ThreeHams posted:Here's a stopping point for this for the night, since I haven't posted in a while. I don't know much about guns or gun models but I think this is gorgeous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2010 09:42
|
|
|
Oxygencult posted:Trying to learn Blender and facial topology... Why? http://www.nevercenter.com/ Your welcome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2010 09:47
|
|
|
brian encino man posted:I don't know much about guns or gun models but I think this is gorgeous. Seconding this. I wanna make stuff like that
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2010 09:54
|
|
|
A couple months ago I rigged and modeled this robot model and put it online for free. Recently had some free time so I finally got to animate it and here is the result: http://vimeo.com/10891886 Working on another short anim with this guy now 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2010 23:38
|
|
keyframe posted:A couple months ago I rigged and modeled this robot model and put it online for free. Recently had some free time so I finally got to animate it and here is the result: Woah, I think two of the students at my school used your model, or a modified version of it and won Best of Term: http://www.gnomonschool.com/student_work/BoT/ ...is it your model? If so that is loving lame of them to use it for our best of term entries.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2010 02:31
|
|
|
ceebee posted:Woah, I think two of the students at my school used your model, or a modified version of it and won Best of Term: http://www.gnomonschool.com/student_work/BoT/ Yup that my model.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2010 02:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
keyframe posted:A couple months ago I rigged and modeled this robot model and put it online for free. Recently had some free time so I finally got to animate it and here is the result: That's got some great character to it! It reminds me of the ghost in the shell stand alone complex robots, but your guy has more personality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2010 16:38
|
|
