Junkie - Unity Techdemo

[Bloomfalls]

-----------------------------------------

[Dr. Doom]

Interesting, never heard of this, but I'm not bashing your work at all, but couldn't you do something like this reasonably quick in for say, 3DS Max? It looks like a egg shape thats been pushed and pulled with the sculpture tool, I understand the eyes being hard fully, but I can't properly judge the work since I didn't download the stress test software, but it looks awesome, game quality design, you did good with skin tone on the texturization. +rep from me, looks great.

Installed Junkie: looks pretty damn cool, can you export this? And what are the capabilities? for games? etc?

[Reflection]

Beautiful. Would be really cool with hair. Awesome work!

[Bloomfalls]

Interesting, never heard of this, but I'm not bashing your work at all, but couldn't you do something like this reasonably quick in for say, 3DS Max? It looks like a egg shape thats been pushed and pulled with the sculpture tool, I understand the eyes being hard fully, but I can't properly judge the worlk since I didn't download the stress test software, but it looks awesome, game quality design, you did good with skin tone on the texturization. +rep from me, looks great.

Hello there.

You can do the model with any tool that allows you to, well, model. Unity is not a modeling tool, it's a game engine. I use it to make possible for you to play with the model in real time, in your browser. The model and textures are still done in other softwares.

As for "reasonably quick", that depends on how good you are with human anatomy (a skill completely independent of computers or any software at all) and how well you're familiar with the software you use (can be any, doesn't matter which. There are lots of good free softwares) and the modeling techniques.

Most artists I've seen take their time modeling one basic head (which can take days or weeks) and then reuse it adapting it so they don't have to start over. Some artists are exceptionally good at this after years of training and can make far better heads in 1-2 hours of work. And some very few are simply born really good and don't need to take years of practice at all.

I'd like to point that regardless of my result being good or bad, modeling a good-looking human face is not a trivial work.

Anyway, because I've been extra-busy with work, that model took me a while, actually. I think I spent a whole week on it. It was far more tiresome to design the skin shader while limited by the lack of true subsurface scattering than anything else, though.

The main point of it is seeing how well it can run on other computers though, so if you could install the web player and test for me, I'd appreciate.

Cheers

Beautiful. Would be really cool with hair. Awesome work!

Thank you, Reflection.

Installed Junkie: looks pretty damn cool, can you export this? And what are the capabilities? for games? etc?

The original model is in a format any engine can use, but you can't export from the web player, no (at least I don't think so/hope not). I'm indeed using it to test how far I can go with 3D on the Web, so that I have a good reference when I start making 3D games playable straight on your browser.

[Dr. Doom]

Hello there.

You can do the model with any tool that allows you to, well, model. Unity is not a modeling tool, it's a game engine. I use it to make possible for you to play with the model in real time, in your browser. The model and textures are still done in other softwares.

As for "reasonably quick", that depends on how good you are with human anatomy (a skill completely independent of computers or any software at all) and how well you're familiar with the software you use (can be any, doesn't matter which. There are lots of good free softwares) and the modeling techniques.

Most artists I've seen take their time modeling one basic head (which can take days or weeks) and then reuse it adapting it so they don't have to start over. Some artists are exceptionally good at this after years of training and can make far better heads in 1-2 hours of work. And some very few are simply born really good and don't need to take years of practice at all.

I'd like to point that regardless of my result being good or bad, modeling a good-looking human face is not a trivial work.

Anyway, because I've been extra-busy with work, that model took me a while, actually. I think I spent a whole week on it. It was far more tiresome to design the skin shader while limited by the lack of true subsurface scattering than anything else, though.

The main point of it is seeing how well it can run on other computers though, so if you could install the web player and test for me, I'd appreciate.

Cheers



Thank you, Reflection.

I feel you, I just learned how to do some stuff in 3DS Max while I was in high school, the class was connected with my local city college (which is like 2nd or 3rd in the world) and we we're able to get the general head model in a short amount of time, by short amount I meant a day or two, sorry for the misunderstanding. I just dont think people realize the extent of how long this shit takes! I tried the engine, and I am using a Nvidia GTX 260, and it ran flawlessly, good work. Don't want you to think I was bashing what you produced, I was just asking questions since I don't do much in this field anymore, I'm majoring in Computer Forensics

[Bloomfalls]

I feel you, I just learned how to do some stuff in 3DS Max while I was in high school, the class was connected with my local city college (which is like 2nd or 3rd in the world) and we we're able to get the general head model in a short amount of time, by short amount I meant a day or two, sorry for the misunderstanding. I just dont think people realize the extent of how long this shit takes! I tried the engine, and I am using a Nvidia GTX 260, and it ran flawlessly, good work. Don't want you to think I was bashing what you produced, I was just asking questions since I don't do much in this field anymore, I'm majoring in Computer Forensics

Getting a general head model is fairly simple. Detailing it or making it absolutely correct is a different story. I attended a very good 3D modeling college and most people couldn't get it right after months.

Another issue is being able to recognize your own mistakes. Often when I finish something I'm unable to see some of the obvious mistakes until I get my mind off of it for a few days, so I end up just asking other people to C&C extensively. With art this happens... a lot. A lot of artists, people who spend years on the craft think they're doing a superb job and can't recognize some of the things they're doing wrong. That's why self-criticism is very important.

Of course it might be that your class was indeed very awesome and/or you got one of the best professors in the world teaching step-by-step a precise formula to get a good model going and/or I am a slow-poke and met people who were terrible. Either way, why don't you give 3D a shot again?

And don't worry, I'm not sensitive to criticism. Without people complaining you can't really improve, so I'm always well open to that.

Anyway, thanks for the input and for telling me your video card, that information is very useful.

[MadameGrip]

Sorry but you're better at making weapons and items

[Bloomfalls]

Sorry but you're better at making weapons and items

Would you mind giving a more in-depth explanation of what's wrong so I can hopefully improve?

[2dgreengiant]

Great work Classic unity 3d

[BrightChild]

This dude looks like he has downs, awesome work though.

[Remus3]

Background from the point of view I am coming from:

Full Sail, an Entertainment "everything" university, Game Art being the bachelors I am involved in.
4 months on modeling with about 4 more coming up, them being: 3DFundamentals (low-poly), Model CReation(low-poly), Character Design & Creation(mid-poly), PRoduction Modeling(high-poly, detail work).

I've shown some of my 3d work off in the past dealing with organics, request if you wish to see em.

CnC

the top half of the head is too large, unless you are going for a smooth Klingon look.. it just won't look right perspectively.
the inner facials are solid from the front, but as you move to the side, the jaw is pushed back too far and the back itself not pushed out (check out some muscle reference pics)
while mentally fixing the top of the skull, the dimensions are some what solid excluding the ears. what would be done best is moved down for the bottom half of the ear lobe and some depth apply while viewing from the front. this means having the tips flare out a tinge more.

(neck region, front)judging from the creases you have some n-gons and or a row of triangles. try and keep it quaded(4 sides max) with good edgeflow (spacing and a "net" being cast over the head) if it is all quaded, you have some incorrect edgeflow going on / non-manifold geometry.

from a 3/4th view the back of the skull into the neck is pronounced down and out, the only thing back there is the spine and muscle connecting into the skull.(deformation in the center helps define)

3/4 view looking down to where the eyes look closed from the eye lashes: the skull is pulled to far back to keep a solid roundness akin to a slightly morphed ball.
tear ducts should be added with the eyes "kinda wrapping into the nose". this means like a batman mask how it is slightly angled. your eye regions aren't flat coming into the nose.((((thus meaning pull em out a bit)))

and lastly .. cheek bones, she has none :P modeling is all about profile. if you cant see what gender it is by covering it in a matte black, then the job is not complete. subtle features for females are the cheek bones being visible from a slight 3/4ths angle to where the nose barely protrudes out of silhouette.



SSS looks ight, could use tweaking for sure for variance in skin pigment and unity.. /eww personally :P but to each their own on software.

ight cg vs good cg. variation, asymmetrical features. if a subtle pattern can be seen unconsciously in the human mind... it will feel weird, thus destroying the illusion it could have had.
--i do not claim to "know it all" or be perfect. anyone who takes the time to look for differences can and will find something of fault. i've had my fair share of ight models.

rating for it though is a 7.5/10 you're better off than a good chunk of people but not portfolio quality yet.

[superfly19092]

nice job dude, way better then i could do, luv the eyes and ears haha

[Bloomfalls]

Background from the point of view I am coming from:

CnC

the top half of the head is too large, unless you are going for a smooth Klingon look.. it just won't look right perspectively.
the inner facials are solid from the front, but as you move to the side, the jaw is pushed back too far and the back itself not pushed out (check out some muscle reference pics)
while mentally fixing the top of the skull, the dimensions are some what solid excluding the ears. what would be done best is moved down for the bottom half of the ear lobe and some depth apply while viewing from the front. this means having the tips flare out a tinge more.

(neck region, front)judging from the creases you have some n-gons and or a row of triangles. try and keep it quaded(4 sides max) with good edgeflow (spacing and a "net" being cast over the head) if it is all quaded, you have some incorrect edgeflow going on / non-manifold geometry.

from a 3/4th view the back of the skull into the neck is pronounced down and out, the only thing back there is the spine and muscle connecting into the skull.(deformation in the center helps define)

3/4 view looking down to where the eyes look closed from the eye lashes: the skull is pulled to far back to keep a solid roundness akin to a slightly morphed ball.
tear ducts should be added with the eyes "kinda wrapping into the nose". this means like a batman mask how it is slightly angled. your eye regions aren't flat coming into the nose.((((thus meaning pull em out a bit)))

and lastly .. cheek bones, she has none :P modeling is all about profile. if you cant see what gender it is by covering it in a matte black, then the job is not complete. subtle features for females are the cheek bones being visible from a slight 3/4ths angle to where the nose barely protrudes out of silhouette.



SSS looks ight, could use tweaking for sure for variance in skin pigment and unity.. /eww personally :P but to each their own on software.

ight cg vs good cg. variation, asymmetrical features. if a subtle pattern can be seen unconsciously in the human mind... it will feel weird, thus destroying the illusion it could have had.
--i do not claim to "know it all" or be perfect. anyone who takes the time to look for differences can and will find something of fault. i've had my fair share of ight models.

rating for it though is a 7.5/10 you're better off than a good chunk of people but not portfolio quality yet.

First of all - thank you very much for the reply. This is the kind of post I look for when I ask for CC, but rarely do people have the technical knowledge and/or patience to type it.

A 7.5/10 is better than I expected. I spent the past 6 years working with Environment Art, Technical Art Direction and props for both major and minor games so ever since I graduated, then I ended up working almost exclusively with 2D for 2 years, so I haven't had the time to touch organic modeling. This is probably my first head in all these years.

So let me see:
I knew that the top half of the head was huge, yeah. I'll focus a bit on fixing that.

Thanks for pointing the issue on the z of the inner facial, I knew something was off but couldn't put my finger on it.

As for the neck, I don't use N-gons, but I do use a lot of triangles (I suppose it's a fault for being used to really low-poly objects).

The back should be really easy to fix.

The SSS was hard to write because I don't have access to some shader functions yet. I have an idea of how to improve the shader, but it's not a priority. Anyway,
As for asymmetrical features, I tried to put some. I will detail more the texture then and make the veins larger, that should be enough.

Anyway, I'll work on these issues then post an update. Thanks.