Author Topic: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2  (Read 11775 times)

Wired_Crawler

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 429
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #75 on: May 01, 2006, 12:28:30 pm »
 \\o//
Thank You, Judges for Your time and comments.
Thank You, contestants for participating, I hope next time there will be even more entries (I won't win, so there is Your chance ;) :P)
And thank You all spectators for cheering us on.

I'll use the opportunity and try to squize at least little more informations out of judges  :devil:


  • Quote: Originally posted by ArcaneFalcon
    Wired_Crawler:  Your concept and model are ok, but your textures need work.

Argh... I knew You would say that...


  • Quote:

In general, the holes look a bit too big I think. It was good to be inspired by the reference, but you would have been better off to create your own version of that material, and make the holes appear smaller.[/list]
I agree, but it was hard to achieve with the limitations we were given and my expectations. I need to have texture, which:
  • is not bigger than 512x512 due to overall texture limit
  • looks good from big distance - this was easiest part, even after 4x shrinking base texture still looks good when you have the whole tower on the screen; aside from that - smaller holes would be hardly visible from big distances, especially without using "advanced" techniques like bump mapping etc... - just plain, grey pile of rocks.
  • looks acceptable from small distance - this is hardest part for me. I could make holes smaller, but they would have sizes (in pixels) varying from 1x1 to 6x6. How much details such elements can have ? They would not look good at closer look.
  • allows to add details - I could make holes smaller by scaling up uv maps, however it would require me to subdivide mesh (not possible due to polycount limit) to have triangles small enough to fit in single tile. Besides, tilable textures and big uv maps result in undesirable mosaic effect.

A compromise must be reached, so here comes my dilemma: is it better to make texture looking good from big distance or small distance ? In 3d games giving player full freedom of movement (like Planeshift), we can explore world in large and small scale. Which case takes higher priority ? (of course, I'm talking about big objects like a tower). In PS some walls are very pixelated and detailless when examined (Hydlaa walls), some look quite good even at close look (entrance to sewer behind tavern). Are the any general rules, or should we rely on "artistic instinct", which is rather subjective thing ?


  • Quote:
Filters:  Please, please, please stop using filters.[/list]
Could You be more specific, which filters are bad ? (Any examples from contest works ?) What should we avoid ?
For example - should I avoid using automated filters to generate shadows/highlights (I use them intensively) ? It would be rather hard for me to do, although I must admit, that brush-painted shadows/highlights look really good on textures which I saw in tutorials etc.


  • Quote:

Every inch should be gone over with a paintbrush, adding detail.[/list]
Is it general rule or rule for PS artwork ? Many 3d games use photographs as textures, with little editing and ... filter processing. And they look good.


  • Quote:
Textures (specific to 3d):  Tender loving care.  Attention to detail.[/list]
What would You suggest - make BIG detailed texture (for example 4096x4096) and shrink it to 256x256, or add details to the image of destination size ? Which method gives better results (if there is any difference at all) ?
"Close the world, txEn eht nepO."

ArcaneFalcon

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 591
  • ?
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #76 on: May 01, 2006, 03:39:03 pm »
Ok, I'll try to hit all the questions here...

Texturing the tower was definitely difficult with the limitations I gave you.  1024* probably isn't enough space for a building that's going to be viewed up close.  At the same time, games typically put far less detail (resolution wise) into the environment than they do into characters/objects.  With your specific tower, you said you had holes ranging from 1* to 6* pixels.  You could have reduced them 3 or 4* pixel, and probably been much better off.  More about it later.

As far as filters go, most of them are bad.  The only ones I use are some of the blurs (guassian = leetsauce), add noise, offset (under other), and unsharp mask when doing photo retouching.  For everything else I use brushes and/or blending options (I've even started using blurs less though, in favor of the blur and smudge tool).  Automated filters that generate highlights/shadows are less flexible than simply painting them yourself.  You can maybe get pretty close to emulating whatever material you want with a filter, but you can always get exact with a brush.

Most textures use photos, it's true.  But no textures use plain, unedited material photos.  Let me clarify a sec, these are my definitions:
material: a basic, generally monochromatic image representing a single surface type.
  examples - http://www.stone.uk.com/images/newjpeg/Grub_polished1.JPG   http://www.cnr.vt.edu/dendro/dendrology/wood/hard_maple.jpg
texture: a colored 'skin' of an object or creature; consists of one or many materials, with details (scratches, dirt, highlights/shadows, designs, wear & tear, etc.) layered on top
  examples - http://www.poopinmymouth.com/3d/dragon_tex.jpg    http://www.poopinmymouth.com/3d/tri_severin_tex.jpg
Now, tileable ground textures for a game, and environment/character textures are 2 very different things.  Tileable ground textures can consist of a few photos blended on top of each other, with some color correction, and editing to make tileable.  Environment/character textures are very different.  You can't simply slap some material photos on a statue, and expect the game to do all the shading, and if it's not shaded properly, then complain about not getting enough polys.  That's what you can do in movies, when you have a room the size of a gymnasium full of high-powered computers that render 24 hours a day.  We aren't making movies. :)  If a detail isn't big enough to affect the sillhouette of an asset (I'm using "asset" as a blanket term for any object or character), then it is a detail that should be put into the texture, and not the model.  This is where I got that 3 layer rule > http://www.poopinmymouth.com/process/tips/dirt.jpg  If you haven't looked through them already, I'd highly recommend looking through some or all of the tutorials at www.poopinmymouth.com.  It's honestly the best resource I've come across.

About your resizing (and about that hole sizing thing I refered to earlier), check out this article on PIMM > http://www.poopinmymouth.com/tutorial/resize.htm

(if you haven't figured it out by now, Ben Mathis = my hero :P )

edit: How do I make some text a link with this new forum?  I don't like having long urls littering my post...

edit 2: A little heads up - contest 3 will be a little bit different format than the previous 2 have been.  It is going to be texturing intensive, modeling non-intensive, and there will only be 1 section, no seperate 2d and 3d.  More details when we're ready. ;)

:emerald:
« Last Edit: May 01, 2006, 04:02:25 pm by ArcaneFalcon »

Wired_Crawler

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 429
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #77 on: May 01, 2006, 05:16:12 pm »
Thanks for clarifying. I thougt You wanted us to create materials from scratch, using only brush. Now I'm fully satisfied (and I feel relieved) :).

Yes, I know PIMM site, I have watched most of the video tutorials, it seems that I haven't payed enough attention to text :sweatdrop:

Ad. edit 1: do it the same way like on old forum (manual editing required, but You dislike automatic "filters" anyway :P):
Code: [Select]
[url=http://www.poopinmymouth.com/tutorial/resize.htm]True resolution vs Resizing[/url]result: True resolution vs Resizing
"Close the world, txEn eht nepO."

Clayzekiel

  • Traveller
  • *
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #78 on: May 01, 2006, 06:32:01 pm »
All I can say is bleh, better luck next time:P

Well, I think the most important lesson for me is the time usage. It went quite down the drain because of that.. And I surely willl take the hints given:) Although I think I'll go on with a more skethcy style..

I hope the next contest will also be a nice and challenging one:)

LigH

  • Forum Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 7096
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #79 on: May 01, 2006, 06:52:32 pm »
After reading the reason of my complaints, the "no filters" rule at first simply sounded like "everyone who is not able to draw free-handed, is no real 2D artist", as if I should have avoided telling how I did it, and got a "technique malus"...

I know that you don't mean it so generically.

Our opinions probably differ regarding the rating categories - obviously, the used technique was important for the jury as well as the result's impression and presentation. I will try to remember that in case I feel able to attand in another contest again. But being handicapped here (I just can't draw well with pencils or mouse, also I don't have a scanner or a tablet), I see low chances for me in this case.

But if you feel I misunderstood you, then let me assure you: Probably only in a few details. I promise, I understood other objective points of criticism very well (e.g. the lack of a door - I know that assuming it behind the building is the wanted, but not the most comfortable reaction).

Gag Harmond
Knight and Ambassador
The Royal House of Purrty

Frank

  • Traveller
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #80 on: May 03, 2006, 10:39:50 pm »
man i cant believe i missed the deadline i had a picture i was drawing but i never got it finished :(

oh well congrats to thoses who won, but i will try to give yall some compition ::) next time and try to complet my drawing and turn it in on time, Im just getting done with my AP test too so i will have nothing but time in class to work on them.

ArcaneFalcon

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 591
  • ?
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #81 on: May 04, 2006, 10:21:45 am »
Frank:  Can you just go ahead and post what you had done?  The deadline may be past, but that doesn't mean we can't look at it and give some possible suggestions. :)

LigH:  Sorry if I offended you or something, but the point of these contests is to practice and get better.  Sounds like a perfect opportunity to try some traditional drawing and see if you can't improve.  The next competition will be an extra perfect opportunity, so maybe just give it a try.

:emerald:

Frank

  • Traveller
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #82 on: May 06, 2006, 01:44:30 am »
ok just give me like 3 week to finish it up... I am having ap test at school right now and I wanna take my time on it too

Baldur

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1446
  • Disillusioning since 1989
    • View Profile
    • My Deviant
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #83 on: May 07, 2006, 03:00:16 am »
I'm so pleased with the criticism and i've improved alot, though on indpiration-drought atm  X-/

BlackAcre

  • Hydlaa Resident
  • *
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Unofficial Fanart Challenge #2
« Reply #84 on: May 08, 2006, 09:42:38 pm »
Elentor and Wired Crawler both knocked it out of the park.  I like that both of them used large natural pieces of rock for their structures, which seems more "kranic" since you imagine stone beings being excellent and strong stoneworkers that allow stone to flow naturally and not chisel it down unnecessarily.  Those were both excellent--wish I could draw anything nearly as good.