[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: IMG_20180426_035820_693.jpg (143 KB, 1095x573)
143 KB
143 KB JPG
Has anyone ever tried modeling their own cars for fun? Key word being fun, this one took about two hours modeling from a cube. Yours doesn't be serious or practical, I used wings 3d and bryce
>>
File: IMG_20180426_035539_148.jpg (126 KB, 1095x573)
126 KB
126 KB JPG
I call er "Venus"
>>
Using Bryce and Wings 3d in the year 2018.
Result looks exactly like what you would expect.
>>
Oh fun, I don't have big resources and honestly wings 3d is fun to use, it's interface isn't offensive.
Id be doing more complex stuff if I wasn't on a $150 Walmart laptop

There really isn't any other lightweight options that I prefer
>>
>>619090
Looks familiar...

I've always wanted to but I refuse to till I can model a mazda 3 gen 1 hatch. Fuckin impossible for me for some reason.
>>
Whoa! That's cool man pretty close pretty close to what I was cooking up yeah! Thanks for the reply, what Mazda?
>>
>>619131
Those panel stuffs you're better off doing in zbrush! Honestly! Its a tough workflow to get into but its quite amazing what hard surface panel loops can accomplish
>>
>>619102
At least it's not a noisy donut.
>>
File: Mazda_RX-8_-_029.jpg (156 KB, 1071x1600)
156 KB
156 KB JPG
Hey man, real critique: nice start! But watch your edge flow. On a highly reflective model lumpy edges or oddly spaced polygons can have wonky effects on your reflections - which is what you're getting here. Notice the utter smoothness and uniformity of the attached picture. You should strive to do that with your model. Wireframes would help people crit as well!
>>
Wouldnt it be better to use nurbs?
>>
>>619090
Uhh Bryce' renderer is ancient 90s tech
>>
>>619393
not necessarily. if you're using a traditional 3d modeling package (as opposed to cad), you wind up basically recreating quad modeling topology with nurbs patches anyway if you want your nurbs model to quadrangulate with proper topology. if you just lay down nurbs curves without essentially treating each patch as a quad, you get horrendous topology upon quadrangulation.

the thing that makes it not advantageous in any appreciable way is that you wind up still with a million control points to manage rather than having a million vertices to manage for a model with similar fidelity. the only advantage nurbs patches will bring you is that the curve lines have sort of infinite resolution while polylines/edges don't.

in reality, nurbs patch modeling winds up not really being any different from poly modeling with a smooth mesh preview
>>
>>619420
it's a different case entirely if you aren't working from the perspective of nurbs patches but that's kind of a different game entirely
>>
>>619092
I call 'er Lumpy cause there ain't a single smooth surface on that potato.
>>
>>619643
Aye, I get it I get it jeeze lol... I've been thinking a lot about how I'm gonna do my next bodywork, I am doing this for fun
When people ignore concept of an idea and instead talk about the kind of technical execution its missing the point really. It seems like the 3d scene has been really upright and anal, I'm a top tier 2d artist and I never piss on anyone's efforts, trying is the important part, so much salt in the 3d scene it's almost comical, it's okay guys you can let that fart out and enjoy things
>>
>>619422
what other perspective is there?
>>
>>619762
First, /3/ is not the "3d scene". Go to Polycount or another professional forum.

Second, it's hard to separate technical execution from concept in this case. But I mean, it looks cool. Neat start. You don't have doors and the glass bubble on top is very unrealistic, in so much as that it would not survive a rollover. Aesthetically I like what you're doing with the segmented forward body, but I'd like to see a better transition from the forward body into the rear, and I don't like the silhouette of the rear body panels as they transition into the wheel. Finally, your wheel rims are cutt to close to the wheels. The front ones won't be able to turn and the rear one will get gummed up with mud.
>>
>>619894
Wow thanks for the in depth reply more than ample feedback.

Yeah I probably should look into some forums to see what other efforts are going on, would be a real educational and inspiring perspective I'm sure.

I think I understand what you mean by it's difficult to separate idea from execution, for now these are for my own context projects not taking weeks, merely a few hours, 2-3 and eventually I will venture into the longer term project terroritory
Thanks again for insightful feedback




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.