So when I was working in Blender I would create human heads via subdividing a cube until it looked right for modeling and go from there, this is what worked best for me in Blender. Now that I have moved to 3ds max 2015, I'm not sure which way to create a head. What do you guys do? I can do it like the previously mentioned one or I can do it with a plane. Which one is more productive as far as poly count? Or easier in general?
🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
Making a Low Poly Human In 3ds Max 2015?
I'd say that whatever worked in Blender will work the same for you over there, just that the names of things will be different. I think they call subdivision(catmull-rom) from Blender something like Turbosmooth in Max for example.
Modelling techniques in general work the same all over. You may find you use a different technique in Max, but then you could likely still use the same in Blender if you wanted. I will say that different methods can get some of the same results. Subdivision type methods tend to have a bit more polys in the end result, but or usually better than direct poly modelling when you need detail like organic models do. Many times organic models need more polys in the end result anyway so this isn't a problem usually.
You best bet is just to try different things. There are different ways to model, from subdivision modelling, box modelling, primitive modelling, tool based modelling(like using curve modifiers, displacements, screws(or turns, whatever you call it), and others that I don't know or do but don't know names of. Many of these also overlap, for example you likely would use a form of box modelling when creating the basis for something you are going to use subdivision modelling on. And you would likely use parts of primitives if you are going to model something using curves or other modifiers. Things generally combine. So learn as many different techniques as you can, and what they can be used for, and you will eventually just kind of know the best way to do any given thing. For example, in Blender they recently added a modifier that takes a bunch of edges and turns them into geometry, using the scale of the verts(have to use a different scale though then just regular scaling). You can use this thing to get pretty good results really quickly.
I'm also a fan of using modifiers to the best I can. For example, I use a simple cube with a subdivision modifier pretty high. Then I add a couple displacements, one for large detail, and one for small detail, with the cloud textures accordingly, and BOOM, I have a pretty nice asteroid for a space scene or game. And you can simply adjust the 8 points of the cube, along with bits of the cloud textures to get much variation. These are things that would be quite tedious by hand. I've also seen people use object space to do things. I think Andrew Price does rocks like this, using a cloud texture for displacement, but using object space for texture coordinates for said displacement. This make instant variation based on the location of the rock in the world, and in fact could be animated for some interesting effects if it fits the scene.
So the basics is simple. Learn the tools you have and how you can use them for different things. Then when you have practiced modelling enough, you will know the best and quickest way to get the shape you want, possibly using some tricks with modifiers instead of having to do it all yourself.
Author
Yeah I messed around with it some more. I'm liking all the alternative routes your can do when modeling. I went with turbosmoothing a cube. That works pretty good for me, like it did in Blender. Are you a 3ds max or blender kinda person, since you said that thing you did with the displacements and the cloud textures, which as far as I know is only in 3ds max, then I assume you use that?
Nope, I'm Blender all the way. Blender has tons of modifiers, and displacement is just one of them. The same applies to Max I'm sure, but there are so many little tricks and things you can pick up using modifiers. Find a little video or tutorial showing all the modifiers. They usually show tricks that you can do with them along with the explanation of how they work.
I don't have the money for Max, especially when Blender fits my needs more than enough and is free. Why pay if you don't need to?
Author
I see, Well I'm not buying Max anytime soon but in my opinion it has such a professional work space compared to Blender and once you've completed a video game you could just kick-start it and buy 3ds max and then publish it. 3ds max isn't the number one used 3d modeling software no reason. But either way there are so many ways to do something. Whatever fits your needs like you said.
I agree with kburkhart84, what works in Blender will work in 3ds Max.
Just because you are changing your tools won't change your technique.
I use Blender at home, 3ds Max at work and with both I am a by polygon modeler. The simple fact is that for the few tools Max has that Blender doesn't I am not willing to pay for, there are also a few modeling tools I miss, from Blender, when working with Max.
If you plan on rendering a lot, or doing a lot of animations then Max is worth it. If you only wan't to make 3D models then Max is over priced, 3D modeling is after all only moving vertices around.
Now for the hard truth, you need to know all of the basic modeling types to create a amazing model. When I say I am a by polygon modeler it means that I use by polygon modeling thirty-four percent of the time.
You will use box modeling for the proportions, by box modeling I include primitive modeling and extruding.
Then you will use by polygon modeling for details and topology, with by polygon modeling I am including sub D modeling as it is a combination of box modeling, by polygon modeling and extruding.
Last is my personal demon, 3D sculpting. Sculpting is used for quick prototypes, adding details and showing volume.
For making humans you will also need to learn about edge flow, human topology, anatomy and character creation.
Considering this, it is clear why a realistic 3D human is believed to be, the best representative form of 3D skill and dedication.
Author
Yeah it really is time consuming to create a good human, which I'm no where near at right now.
Also, you say that you should get 3ds max if your doing rendering or animations, but honestly that's a huge factor in game design, if your making a game that needs a lot of animations (which is another reason why AAA companies use 3ds max so much) then you should be using this.
But again, I have no beef against Blender, I used it and then I started using Max, there both great but I like one better.
Also, you say that you should get 3ds max if your doing rendering or animations, but honestly that's a huge factor in game design, if your making a game that needs a lot of animations (which is another reason why AAA companies use 3ds max so much) then you should be using this.
True, this is why so many AAA companies use Max. However as a single developer expecting to make BOTH great models and great animation, is a herculean task.
Animation artist spend there whole life searching and learning new things about animation, just as a 3D modeler spends his life learning about modeling. If you have a team that can push 3ds Max to it's limits then it's money well spend, however for small indie developers or 3D artist that just want a modeling tool Blender is a great choice.
The largest deciding factor for what tool to use is, which do you prefer. After all no tool is a artist.
Yeah it really is time consuming to create a good human, which I'm no where near at right now.
If you are just starting out I have two good points for you, these helped me a great deal when I started.
First start with cartoon characters, these will help you see the idealized form people want. Cartoon characters also allow for mistakes and experiments.
Last and most important is to get a anatomy book with photos, the anatomy books with drawings are useful but you need one with photos. The thing about anatomy books with drawings is that thy are drawn by a artist, a artist who is showing you his art and interpretation of live. For it to be your art, it has to be your own interpretation.
Author
If you are just starting out I have two good points for you, these helped me a great deal when I started.
First start with cartoon characters, these will help you see the idealized form people want. Cartoon characters also allow for mistakes and experiments.
Last and most important is to get a anatomy book with photos, the anatomy books with drawings are useful but you need one with photos. The thing about anatomy books with drawings is that thy are drawn by a artist, a artist who is showing you his art and interpretation of live. For it to be your art, it has to be your own interpretation.
Interesting, I never thought about the importance of an anatomy book. I always looked over the internet for a few pictures and then set them up as images in 3ds max or Blender. A lot easier to do that in Blender fyi.
And how exactly do you make cartoon characters? I never really attempted this. I've focused a majority of my time on realistic depictions of humans or other well defined things.
So what kind of cartoons am I supposed to make? Giant human like bunnies and weird frogs? xP
Well, you kind of have to either be really good at remembering them in your head, or you would draw the images yourself, or you could maybe get lucky and find them somewhere that is close enough to adapt to your needs.
I can't draw for squat, but remember that for this, your main concern(at least at the modelling stage) is to get something down, with close proportions to what you want, in order to model it. I'm sure you recognize the ease of using references as opposed to not having any. But that reference doesn't have to be that good at all. Sure, it would be great if it has lots of detail and was perfect, but if you can't draw like me, those cartoony things just aren't going to happen like that. It is better to get some kind of outlines etc... at a minimum. I've used Inkscape in the past for this and it works pretty well because it is vector based, so you can easily modify those lines you have drawn, along with other Vector Art operations.
Another great tool I've used to get something out of my head onto an image is Alchemy. It is quite quirky, but you can get some interesting results quickly once you figure out a bit about how it works, which is actually easier than most any art program, except for all the little tools it has that you probably don't need. Those don't get in the way, in fact the whole GUI tends to disappear on it's own unless you turn that part off too. And it has a little mirror kind of thing to automatically draw mirrored things, which is also great for things that are going to be used as reference images.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
