Creating higth poly 3D Models and sending it to the DEVS

[knellknell]

new point of view

 

http://knell.chez.tiscali.fr/delire/27-11-06.jpg

http://knell.chez.tiscali.fr/delire/27-11-07.jpg

http://knell.chez.tiscali.fr/delire/27-11-08.jpg

[jctrnacty]

sshots

 

knell , OMFG its incredible. Congratulations.

[wsoul2k]

Update work from TS-77strikemax

 

here are his reply

 

Hi guys, Thank you for being patient.

 

I decided to restart the fuselage from scratch. Its more accurate and easier for me this way rather than adapting a previous work.

 

Last friday night I setup the new 3 view backdrops, thanks to the accurate drawings provided by chiz. Sat and friday I worked on the fuselage. now the "hump" looks smoother and more proportional. Tonight I had a vollyball game , very exhosted now, but decided to continue the fuselage. Started my 3ds software and suddenly, decided not to touch the fuselage tonight and start on the intake. Work is progressing "beutifully"

 

And by the way, I still didn't shape the nose, so hope you wont mind a wiered cylindrical nose for now

 

here are the new pics

As I said, this is work in progress.

 

 

 

Niceeeee :D

[wsoul2k]

New pics from his work ont he su-27

 

 

 

"She" is growing up and taking shape very fast ...this is my baby :D

[F l a n k e r]

Good work!

[SebTom]

Hey... over here... :)

 

http://www.checksix-forums.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=48139

 

a new plane project by El Knell : Mirage IV

 

 

8) :lol:

[Skywall23]

Lol, if we continue like this we will have a collection of Mirages in the game. :twisted:

 

Btw did the F1 get submissed to ED?

[knellknell]

A small picture (1600*1200) with the real aircraft and the 3D model. The 3D look not bad :)

 

http://knell.chez.tiscali.fr/simu/1ressemblance.jpg

[kam]

Very impressive knellknell!

 

That looks amazing. :)

[MikeRocker]

Is there anyone interested/able to do an F-111?

 

It was just reminded that the old F-111 3D model from Flanker is still hidden in LOMAC. If this could be replaced with a better model with a complete UV-map it could be 'reactivated' and finally give NATO another deep striker ála SU-24.

 

KnellKnell:

 

Rockin' Mirage dude!!

[wsoul2k]

A small picture (1600*1200) with the real aircraft and the 3D model. The 3D look not bad :)

 

http://knell.chez.tiscali.fr/simu/1ressemblance.jpg

 

Nice work knel have you sibmited it to ED ?

[wsoul2k]

Any of the devs know if this can work in game ??

 

because 77-strikemax think it can make easy the life from skinners puting directly in the model the PANELS from the fuseleage

 

[D-Scythe]

It'll work, AFAIK, but if it's going to mean more polys than it has to be, I say just skip it. That's just my opinion. My reasoning is drawing in the lines for the skins don't cost FPS, but extra polys do.

 

Anyway, looking great so far :D

[KuostA]

Actually it does, to actually see the rivets and bolts, you need to have a high res skin, and that itself drops FPS. Having the rivents and lines made into the model would save ALOt of trouble for skinning and make the entire process for easier. You could then have alot lower res skins as well.

[knellknell]

Nice work knel have you sibmited it to ED ?

 

Is it not the right forum or the right place ? :)

[Witchking]

I would say LINES in the SHAPE!! It would be sooo much better result and I feel it is worth to have that TEEENY WEEENY FPS loss. But think about this su 25T has 52000 polys ...it wouldn't hurt to have some more polys for flanker ;)

[knellknell]

But think about this su 25T has 52000 polys ...it wouldn't hurt to have some more polys for flanker ;)

 

WHere do you have this information please ?

[Witchking]

from lockon.ru site

 

http://lockon.ru/index.php?end_pos=9&lang=en&scr=list&page=1#323

 

 

3D Aircraft Model

 

Number of polygons: 52000;

Number of parts (sub shapes): 547;

Skin: consists of 3 textures 2048x1024, one texture 1024x1024, 3 textures 1024x512, one texture 512x512. Total volume of texture is: 26 Mb.

[D-Scythe]

Actually it does, to actually see the rivets and bolts, you need to have a high res skin, and that itself drops FPS. Having the rivents and lines made into the model would save ALOt of trouble for skinning and make the entire process for easier. You could then have alot lower res skins as well.

 

Absolutely not.

 

Skins don't cause FPS noticeable slowdowns at any resolution as long as they're installed into the CDDS. Bottom line, more polys equals greater slowdowns compared to bigger skins. Besides, many 3d models in the game already have 2048*2048 skins, that can show rivets and stuff with lotsa detail, like the Su-25T and the F-15C, and there's no problem with FPS at all. In comparison, you take a model like the F/A-18C with lots of polys, and you can instantly see the FPS drop.

 

I know, the F/A-18 has no LOD levels, but what about close up, where detail is maxed anyway? Slowdowns still occur no matter what way you look at it, and gets worse with extra polys, rather than larger skin textures.

 

Plus, you have to look at other issues with panel lines, like light modelling and shading, so that they actually show up. Bam! More CPU cycles used.

 

It would be sooo much better result and I feel it is worth to have that TEEENY WEEENY FPS loss

 

Inches add up to miles, especially in LOMAC, where even the fastest computer can only afford so much. With the addition of the Su-25T, my opinion and mine alone is to forego it and try to save as much polys as we absolutely can. Just because the Su-25T has 52 000 polys (and already with some slowdown according to devs) doesn't mean the Crane needs just as much.

[knellknell]

from lockon.ru site

 

http://lockon.ru/index.php?end_pos=9〈=en&scr=list&page=1#323

 

 

3D Aircraft Model

 

Number of polygons: 52000;

Number of parts (sub shapes): 547;

Skin: consists of 3 textures 2048x1024, one texture 1024x1024, 3 textures 1024x512, one texture 512x512. Total volume of texture is: 26 Mb.

 

Ok thanks Aquarius, i missed this information. So i can add some poly to my model, and also some textures :)

[ALDEGA]

Actually it does, to actually see the rivets and bolts, you need to have a high res skin, and that itself drops FPS. Having the rivents and lines made into the model would save ALOt of trouble for skinning and make the entire process for easier. You could then have alot lower res skins as well.

 

Absolutely not.

Given that the highest LOD of these new models will be high anyway, I don't see why adding a relatively small number of polygons would impact the performance much. I'd rather have a model with more detail (and that means actual details, not just ultra smooth cones ;) ). Rather that than a texture that is supposed to make up for a lack of geometry. Welcome to the 21st century :lol:

[wsoul2k]

Absolutely not.

Given that the highest LOD of these new models will be high anyway, I don't see why adding a relatively small number of polygons would impact the performance much. I'd rather have a model with more detail (and that means actual details, not just ultra smooth cones ;) ). Rather that than a texture that is supposed to make up for a lack of geometry. Welcome to the 21st century :lol:

 

Agree...but my only concern is about FULL SHADOWS active...i think the rivets will cauyse a some kind of shadow also..soh more cpu cicles... but maybe 77-strike max can make the panels a litle less DEEP .... and only visible in LOD0 ...but i really think we should wait a response from the devs..but oh man it is really NIceeee :D

[knellknell]

Really nice, certainly.

Beautiful too

The problem is very simple and the answer will solve the question regarding Fps and so on : How many polygons at this step ?? i think that this number should be around 10.000 ..........

Means a big challenge to stay beelow 50.000 ......

[ALDEGA]

Absolutely not.

Given that the highest LOD of these new models will be high anyway, I don't see why adding a relatively small number of polygons would impact the performance much. I'd rather have a model with more detail (and that means actual details, not just ultra smooth cones ;) ). Rather that than a texture that is supposed to make up for a lack of geometry. Welcome to the 21st century :lol:

 

Agree...but my only concern is about FULL SHADOWS active...i think the rivets will cauyse a some kind of shadow also..soh more cpu cicles... but maybe 77-strike max can make the panels a litle less DEEP .... and only visible in LOD0 ...but i really think we should wait a response from the devs..but oh man it is really NIceeee :D

Well of course they would only be for the most detailed lod :)

 

As long as the budget of 50,000 (maximum) polygons is not exceeded, it should be ok. The designer can distribute the polygons as he thinks is best.

[D-Scythe]

Rather that than a texture that is supposed to make up for a lack of geometry. Welcome to the 21st century

 

Well, the average 21st century computers still can't handle Lock On as it is, and then we have this Su-25T with 52 000 polys as it is causing slow downs?

 

Don't get me wrong, I want a new Flanker model as much as the next guy, but I just don't think that a 50 000 poly model is really necessary. As wsoul2k said before and I said even before that, it's not just the polys, which are actually a lot more than you're letting on; more CPU cycles will be used just for the shading and lighting, for an effect that won't even be noticeably different from a 2-d textured one unless from really close up. The width of the lines are, what, one pixel across? And where're sacrificing thousands of polys for such a simple affect?

 

Welcome to the life of the average 21st century guy, dude. Not everyone can afford a $3000 rig every time a new sim comes out - certainly, I can't ;)