Fantastic Park // WIP

Just for fun, it’s a test. The final project will not be animated ! ^^

1 Like

It’s called Zfighting, sadly in certain angles it’s just not really possible. Sometimes it just doesn’t want to the way it should :stuck_out_tongue:

could be your vertex normals that are a bit out of control there.

So not exactly sure, what you could have done is put a lot of repeating uv’s overlapping especially since you don’t seem to have an ao map :slight_smile:

do you export via exporter or as obj/fbx? there might be some settings that affect that somewhere :slight_smile:

Overall i think you have a cool project that could be a bit better optimized in certain areas (for example using a plane for repeating textures, saving space that way, the modeling looks very clean on the other hand. I guess the final texture res and co will depend on what you plan to fill your scene with. I did 3 very big scenes before with vastly different outcomes. Less Vram = faster load speed

One where the textures needed to be high to not look bad didn’t do to much preplaning on there.

Vram - 4GiB / 82 Textures / 15 Materials/ 50431 Vertices

One that i did plan out before and put multiple things on the same materials and looked that nothing is higher than it needs to be

Vram - 1GiB / 100 Textures / 18 Materials / 55412 Vertices (more of them were lower res)

My first one, therefore the “worst” didn’t do much planing and in a lot of areas did waste quite a bit of polys and materials that could have been combined :wink:

Vram - 7GiB / 236 Textures / 58 Materials / Vertices 552465

Maybe those give you a bit of insight in how to plan for your final scene :slight_smile:

1 Like

Thank you so much @dark_minaz !

1/ Too sad :disappointed_relieved:, I hope that in the final project, that will be cool…
2/ I don’t think so… Or there are something I don’t get about vertex normals.
3/ I think I will bake the AO in the final piece… I’m not sure to understand everything about texture optimisation on sketchfab… Is it better to have numerous little maps or a few big ones ? I will do tests…
4/ I make a FBX, but I believe all the meshes have identical parameters… So why I obtain a variable aspect ?.. Mystere!

Thank you for your scenes ! I will think about ! That’s my very first “big scene” but I give it a lot of time… I hope it will be clean enough at the end. Good job for yours, I like your batman stormtrooper ^^, very funny and “match-up” like my project! :slight_smile:

autodesk sure got a funny way of doing magical things sometimes
maya currently adds vertexes when i mirror (sometimes) really odd but as long as you know how to counter the bugs it’s not a big issue :slight_smile:

to 3, if you add an ao you need a non overlapping uv (or atleast a uv map for the ao, you can have mutliple) for the texture you can simply use overlapping ones for all the chairs for example. Would save a bit of space / looks better even in lower res

for sketchfab it’s better to have fewer slightly bigger textures. The lower the vram the better. especially for phones and older pc’s, most newer ones you can go pretty heavy on, as you can see on my first scene that got 5mio verts and 236 textures :stuck_out_tongue:

you can also just upload it, see the vram and then check where you could lower it from 4k to 2k for example :slight_smile: that is how i did it on my mad labs scene, testing between 4k,2k,1k,512 at what point it looks to bad and where you can still say “good enough” :slight_smile:

looking forward to your next steps, really interesting to see mixups between multiple movies/ideas. Quite a big fan of those (kinda why i made 4 models doing that already^^)

1 Like

I spotted the Cerebro door in the lab too ^^.

I already made tests with a different UV for chairs, but I realised that the difference was too slight to permit me to pass from 4096px to 2048px maps…

I noticed also that if normals maps works fine on Unity with overlapping UVs, it’s not the case on Sketchfab where symmetry reverse the effect . So, I decided to do without overlapping!

Right now, for the bus I have 4096px maps for Diffuse and Normals, and 2048px ones for the rest (Opacity, Metalness, Roughtness, Emissive, when it’s necessary)… But it’s already too heavy for mobile (or this is the transparence algorithm…). My optimisation work isn’t fully achieved yet! ^^ :sweat:

Little step to share my progress with you ! ^^


1 Like

Hello !

Just a message to inform you that the project is still on track. With time, I created three characters, the hills, the bridge and a few plants. Also, I discovered some powerful tools.

The scene isn’t totally ready to be shown on real time. Now I have to add details and to bake the occlusion because I’m not totally fond of the Sketchfab’s. I’m pretty happy for the moment.

My draft model is displayed in SD by default, I have to select “HD” to see an “unblurred” result. so I have a question :
Is it because of the weight of the maps (which I can reduce with the JPG settings from Photoshop), or because of their count or resolution ? Wich is the most likely case ? Without the answer I will make a lot of different tests to find the solution, so if you have an idea, don’t hesitate to share it with me ! Thank you ! :slight_smile:

1 Like

And so, finally it’s done !

Your comments are really needed !

Thank you @nomadking for following the subject, even under the radar.

And thank you @james and @bartv for being available and making this platform such a great place !

4 Likes

@YannickDeharo Well now you’ve ruined my silent stalking!!!

I think the scene came out great - I love the bridge and the dynamic posing of everything. It’s a very fun concept.

If I was going to offer some critiques, I would say 2 things:

1.This is mainly personal preference, but when doing a ‘slice’ of a landscape I still prefer it to be blended away softly at the edges rather than have a hard cut. It would help the cliff area seem more solid and give a good base for the theatrical stuff going on above. As it stands right now it doesn’t feel like it fills much of any view.

From a practical point, this would be extending the ground area with simple geometry and either alpha blending out to the BG colour, or bending from your detail towards a ‘base’ colour and have the alpha fade further out from your detailed geometry. I can photoshop something together as an example if my rambling is unclear!

No need for this on the bridge - hard cuts work fine on man made / structural stuff.

2.Some of your colour choices feel a little ‘heavy’. The black on the dragon, the purple on the bus and the all the clothes on the guy. With such deep colours you have to push your material maps to the extreme to get the light to interact with them, leading to those areas feeling a bit over shiny or plastic-y.

By contrast, the materials on the bridge and ground feel much better - more realistic colours with softer material maps that lead to lots of interesting subtle details from light and shade.

Still a really cool piece - maybe I’ll stay silent next time :wink:

1 Like

Hi! Thank you for your comment!
I will try to answer correctly:

  1. I tryed different approaches but I never was completely satisfied. The alpha blending is the solution I choose for plane areas. It’s very efficient if the mesh totally disappear when you look from the back. But my hills is anything but flat and the apparition of pieces of rock from behind would break the charm. So I swept away the idea. If I could have put a “mask” object behind, I’d definitively chose this option ! Afterwards, I considered to close the hills mesh as a simple “box”, but I felt that my entire scene would lose its lifelike feel, because it would look like a miniature that can be placed on a shelf (Despite the “birds”…). My last attempt was to explode the edges of the ground as you can see on the following picture.


    I pretty liked the effect, but I felt that the message had change because it made me think about a “Virtual reality scene under construction”. That wasn’t the story I wanted to tell. Finally, I returned to my sharp ended ground… Doesn’t that make sense to you?

  2. I probably have to practice more about the whole rendering side of the profession. for now on I can’t see the issue. I chose the shiny aspect of the Draptor. It has a odd texture merging the aspects of scales and skin. Maybe I’m not experimented enough to see the problem… For the man, I just see he is not as realistic I wanted, but this project was my first PBR experience and I’m self-taugh about that, I probably gonna end up realizing what gonna wrong, over time.

Thank you again, and be a ninja if you want ! But what you have to say is interesting to me!

1 Like
  1. How to ‘contain’ your work is definitely one of the trickier parts of uploading to Sketchfab - knowing that the scene has to work from many different angles - I’ve struggled with some of the approaches you mention as well! You were right to avoid the exploding edge version, it feels quite busy and distracting from the real details. I think the “boxed in” approach might have worked (maybe an octagon rather than a box) well for this. I’m a fan of miniatures so I don’t see the comparison as an entirely bad thing :wink:

Just to be clear, I do really like what you did with the landscape, it was just the framing of it that I thought could be improved. In fact the rocky cliff face with it’s great shapes and colour changes is very realistic.

  1. I don’t have much PBR experience myself, so my opinion of it may be way off. It’s a great piece for a first PBR model - I’m sure you learned lots that you can apply to your next work :slight_smile:
1 Like
  1. The rocky cliff was a pain in the neck to sculpt ! This project actually was a self-taugh first time for a lot of things… 3D Landscape was one of them, and also my first 3D vehicle, my first FX dust, my first “stage direction”… That was the test of fire !! ^^. So it’s touching if anyone find the result quite good !

I like miniatures a lot, too, but I was afraid of the “mise en abyme” effect. That would be the 2D Display of the 3D representation of a miniature representing a scene with a dragon. Each new layer of interpretation would be one more distance witch weaken the epic feel. But maybe I’m too literary?

That’s a lot of firsts for one piece! :slight_smile:

I’m not sure dilution of the impact of a scene would really apply here, although I have to confess it wasn’t something I had given much thought too. I’m used to working in more stylised ways which already require a certain willingness of perception when it comes to representation. Some call it artist license, others call it cheating! :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I understand ! I’m much literal… So, Literal & literary… :smiley:

1 Like

Really nice work! Great use of so many of our features. My only complaint is how heavy the textures are. HD uses something like 2GB of VRAM to render.

SSR and SSAO are both very expensive effects in terms of performance. If you can get away without using them, it will make the viewing experience a bit easier on our poor computers :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Hi james, thank you for your intervention !

I believe it’s something I can do ! That was very cool for me to use your all new SSR function but YES its not really essential here…

For the textures size I believe I can do something too… But I have questions:

  1. Is the clamp mode on the textures is less heavy than the repeat mode or that makes no difference ?
  2. I’m not sure to use the best solution for glass. I have one mesh and I separate its pieces by 11 different shaders in order to prevent Z fight as possible… maybe I could really break the mesh in pieces directly in the FBX and apply one only shader on them ? But is it always true that you didn’t merge transparent objects with the same shader ? And would it make a difference in matter of optimisation ?
  3. How can I see myself the needed amount of RAM ? That could be cool to see its variation when I apply changes.
  4. How are you ? Personaly I’m fine ! :wink:

Edit : I already decrease Maps size and turn OFF AO and SSR. Is it enough for memory ?

@stephomi correct me if I’m wrong:

No difference.

Transparency is trickier. If you’re using Blending mode, you will have to keep meshes separate to avoid z-fighting, but they should still be able to share a single material.

memory usage = width x height x channels (i.e. 1 byte per channel per pixel)

so a 4k texture memory = 4096 (pixels) x 4096 (pixels) x 4 (RGBA channels) = ~67 MiB

2k texture memory = 2048 x 2048 x 4 = ~16 MiB

So, decreasing your texture size by 50% reduces your RAM usage by 75%.

Doing well, happy Friday!

2 Likes

Thank you for answering everything. I realize that the time I get to define the “Clamp” mode was lost time :sweat_smile:!

In fact my second point is always hard to understand for me. For now, my mesh isn’t separated in the FBX. That’s the fact he as different shaders on it which makes it split into pieces by sketchfab itself.

I understand that I can have one unique shader on already splitted meshes.

My question is based on my misanderstanding about your textures support. About how many times is loaded:

  1. one unique map used in different shaders applied on different meshes each.
  2. the same map used in one unique shader applied on different meshes (which remain splitted because of their transparency).

Is there a method better than the other ?

In addition you seems to say that only the pixels number counts ? So the JPG compression ratio isn’t took in account by the memory ? Just by the download time ?

Thank you and have a good Weekend or monday… depending on when you are reading ! ^^

Correct, as far as I know.

I’m not really sure about the performance difference here. @stephomi or @tuan_kuranes probably knows.

Okay, thank you James !
I will wait a possible answer of @stephomi or @tuan_kuranes in order to make the best choice for my scene.