[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: dunwich resize.png (2.12 MB, 889x500)
2.12 MB
2.12 MB PNG
Looking for any constructive feedback, especially from any folk with 3D experience, especially in Max. I made height maps for each texture, but they didn't show up very well, so I need to convert them to normal maps I guess.
>>
File: dunwich 2 resize.png (1.88 MB, 889x500)
1.88 MB
1.88 MB PNG
2nd view
>>
ignore the uv seam lines on the foundation, oversight on my part
>>
Exposure and gamma settings.
>>
>>620278
what about them?
>>
>>620280
Open your pictures in GIMP. Select Colors -> Levels. Look at the histogram.
>>
>>620284
i use photoshop, but, yeah, i know about the levels, what are you trying to say?
>>
>>620286
He's just saying to make the image brighter so you can see the details better.
>>
>>620286
I said look at the histogram.
>>
>>620287
Not just brightness, also the mid tones.
>>
>>620269
The scene is really dark, in the thumbnail I could barely make out that it was a house. I recommend using an HDR image for lighting and not having that weird bright white background.

I have no sense of where this house is, it's just randomly placed on a random empty mountain. What is that ramp thing on the right side of the house? Look at pictures of old houses... just from memory I know tall foundations are seen on almost all of them. Pic related.

I like the composition of the second shot more. If you're going for an overgrown/deteriorating look I would add dying ivy crawling up the sides of the house, and crusty trees surrounding it. Right now your house looks like weirdly "clean". Like you just have some scratches and boarded windows but not any actual surface deterioration. Once again, look at references. Shingles peeling, boards bedning, windows dusty and broken. I can't even tell if you have windows right now. I would also make the roof pieces individual pieces as it looks completely flat, and is.

I like the porch details, try to carry the same amount of detail to the outside walls of the house. Add furniture inside, if youre lazy just fog/dirt up the windows with overlays.

As much that I have critiqued, you're doing fantastic. Projects like these take a long time and youve gotten very far. Keep studying tutorials and looking at references, cheers
>>
>>620345
>HDR
If you can bother with HDR it can be nice but for the most part you just need to check the histogram for coverage. Especially if you're a mac user because by default your pictures will appear darker on real computers.
>that weird bright white background
If you open the picture in GIMP you can see that's not white, it's alpha.
>>
>>620269
Which renderer ?
>>
>>620495
OpenGL, lol.
>>
Architect here. Hahaha. Ahahahahaha
>>
>>620269
It's too dark, I can't really see anything but a blob of darkness
>>
>>623454
You are just an asshole.
>>
>>620269

Ok anon, you've asked for serious feedback so here is some. Like 99% of all stuff that gets posted here, you've not thought about the reality/causality behind such a scene in the real world. You've also not looked at enough references and again, as is the case for 99% of all stuff posted here - you have not thought about proportion and scale nearly enough.
So here ya go:

Do we really think a building like this would've had windows larger than the doors? Why would you situate a huge, floor-to-ceiling feature-window that was just going to look out at the underside of a ramp?! Pretty sure having such enormous windows on building as rudimentary as this would've caused a few problems keeping it warm, no?
Why are there half-moon shaped shingles halfway down the walls under the apex? That would still be cladding there. Why are the shingles on the walls (that shouldn't be there) round in shape, but the shingles on the roof are rectangular? I think there would probably be just the one place to get building materials like shingles from in this town, and they'd all be the same, don't you?
Why, on the two barn doors on the upper level, is the framework for the door on the *outside* of the building?
The planks on the ramp that lead to the upper doors appear to be made of a lumber that would be about 4 or 5 inches thick. You sure that's right?
There's also very little in the way of convincing framework holding this ramp up - just two vertical beams? Not too concerned about lateral strength then, I guess...
Would it have a brick-built chimney stack rising through the centre of the structure? Serious question - I don't know. I would've thought a building like that would have a chimney-breast built onto the exterior.
Think about the landscape around this building - would you put your building right there? Right at the base of what appears to be a geographical feature that will a) block light, b) direct rainwater straight to the foundation, c) be really hard to build on.
>>
File: zb2hd1.jpg (26 KB, 400x320)
26 KB
26 KB JPG
>>620269
>>623483
ctd.

The simplest thing to do to check scale and proportion when doing a scene with man-made structures like this is just to make sure you get a couple of things right at the start then use those things as a comparison for everything else:

Pic related; bring in the default 'super-average-man' model from Zbrush if you have it (you'll be able to download him from anywhere online if you look, I'm sure) and scale him up so he's around 190cm tall.
Position him near your doors, windows etc and ask yourself - 'do the proportions here feel correct?' A normal door in the UK is generally 93cm wide, and 210cm high. Check what the standard is for door sizes in the era/country that you're trying to depict and go from there; door size is the first thing I look at to see if someone's thought about proportion and it's a dead giveaway if they haven't.
If the door handle is around his knees - it's wrong. If the door is so wide he can almost get through it with his arms outstretched - it's wrong. If a window comes down to his ankles - it's probably wrong. If a set of stairs looks almost vertical in front of him - they're probably wrong. If he stands as high as 20 rows of wood-panelling on the wall - they're wrong.

So look again at your ramp, for example - getting down it looks easy enough... but would you want to carry or push something heavy *up* that ramp? No - because it's way too steep, and so it wouldn't have been built like that.

Also when picking sizes for things - use the rule of 12. A lot building materials are produced in measurements of numbers that are multiples of 12 or numbers that divide evenly into 12:

2/3/4/6/12/24

If you make sure all the measurements you use through your scene are multiples of these numbers, there will be a good consistency throughout.

When blocking out a building you need to think a bit more logically, like an architect or engineer. When the blocking is done and the proportions are sound, then you become an artist.
>>
>>623454
>>623476
And an """architect""".
>>
God damnit people. If you don't like it when somebody opens a new thread just to show one render, then don't give them so much feedback. I post in WIPs works that took me weeks and barely get any replies (like a lot of other people), to the point that I feel nobody cares and then I struggle finishing anything. Meanwhile, somebody opens their own thread and posts a simple house or an animation they worked on for a few hours and get showered with attention. I just might start opening a general for myself then...
>>
>>623508
The thing about these kinds of threads is that on boards as slow as /3/ they remain in the catalog forever. Occasionally they'll get bumped by some bored anon browsing the catalog, and that few very specific people that love to write out entire theses on a single image now see it on the first page, so they decide to go ham.
>>
http://www.sweethome3d.com/

You can thank me later
>>
>>623508
No one is stopping you - or anyone else who frequents this board - from doing precisely what they want.
If people want to post their own thread, they can. If people want to reply, they can. If people want to confine stuff to certain threads, they can.
What is unlikely to start happening though, is for anyone to alter their behaviour or even to give much of a fuck about something because you, or anyone else, says they should.
It's like you're standing in the middle of a garbage dump screaming about how untidy the place is.

If people get more attention when they start their own thread - then they're gonna start their own threads.
What exactly is so bad about that btw?
>>
>>623520
>What exactly is so bad about that btw?
It's just distasteful as we have /wip/ for these kinds of things. People don't really have an explicit problem with those that do start their own threads, it's usually an innocent error and the threads tend to fall off into the catalog really quick. But there have been some cases where OPs of these kinds of threads have just been arrogant and generally unlikable (check: that furfag that posted his fox thing a week back). All in all, while there is inherently nothing wrong in doing so, it's just board culture to post all your work in /wip/ or any other suitable threads, rather than make your own to parade your own work. Y'know, no one likes a showoff, that kind of thing.
>>
>>623526
A bunch of people replied. It's clearly not that big a deal to others. Like anything else that happens on here, its really not worth worrying or complaining about. No one else cares about it enough.

Do as thou wilt etc. etc.




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.