Chicago BAT Project

[darn42 1,268]

Can you send me a pic of what you mean by the small flat roof thing? I'm confused by what you mean. I'm doing a render of a slightly pink and darker tribune tower now, I'll edit this post in 5 minutes with it. I also added a slight, hopefully subtle, bump map to exaggerate the difference between the bricks. Though, I think I just figured out a way to make just the grout only darker.

edit: here's the pic

I think I'm on the right path, but it still needs work. I also already lightened both the spandrels and the roof like you said and it will be apparent in the next preview.

  Edited July 16, 2012 by darn42  

[nick13 194]

Did you scale it up yet?

[darn42 1,268]

Ok, so I've been working on the limestone texture for a while now. I think I got some much better results now.

Also how do the lightened up areas francis pointed out look?

[T Wrecks 10,209]

Yes, we're getting there! The last version is the one I like best so far. You can see the outlines of the blocks, there's some slight variation, and yet the overall look is smooth enough not to appear cartoonish. Some subtle weathering, and I think we have a winner.

One more area that will require some more attention is the windows and/or the ground plane.

[Toothless Stitch 2,901]

I agree with T Wrecks

This is by far the best version you have shown us. I like how the brisk distinguish. The windows look too light in my opinion. That small black window Francis brought to your attention is too dark in my opinion. The interior walls should have the same the colour as the rest of the wall.

MADE BY FRANCIS

One thing I have still prblems with is the upper flag. Althought they're looking like the RL flags I think they are overscaled. And in my opinion, the flag itself is actually too big

Francis is a good teacher

One questions about lotting: Will you do it in 3ds Max or by using Lot Editor.

  Edited July 17, 2012 by skyscraper241  

[darn42 1,268]

From what I acn see from those pictures you showed me is that the flagpole is too short and the flag is slightly too big, I can fix that. I can lower the transparency on the windows and darken the diffuse level to make them darker and I can lighten the roof. Thanks for the feedback.

[darn42 1,268]

edit: uploaded wrong pic...

Darkened windows and such, lightened the mansard roof more, resized the flag on top, and added some slight dirt/grime to the bricks.

Here's what I've got on robie house so far

  Edited July 17, 2012 by darn42  

[JayStimson 211]

The tribune is getting there. Just awesome.

[Shy Dude 149]

The amount of detail is insanely awesome. I think the arched windows' frames need to be darker so they pop out more though. And the platform thing on the top should be more recessed and almost hidden behind those little spires. Best picture I found on Bing Maps:

The Robie House would look nice next to the game's MacVicar Building

[darn42 1,268]

Ooh, thanks, also, it seems that the platform at the top is octagonal as well, not circular. I'll fix that, too. Also, I agree with the darker frames

[Francis90b 748]

I was speaking about the area circled in green.

That area is missing it's roof and parapet, or, more simply, you modelled this as a flat stone surface, which shouldn't be.For comparison look at the area i've circled in red...what's different there is that there's a parapet and a roof.

This is one of the small commercial buildings at the entrance of the rockefeller center.

Focus on the last floor of the building, below the green roof.Look on lower right of the pic.

You see, it's set back from the other floors of the building, and, the recessed area is not completely covered with stone.There's a small roof, and then a parapet.

As a general rule, each time there's a setback, there's a flat roof and a parapet.

Texturing:

The "material" is more clear.Now, you might work on the tiles, rather than grout...(slightly) increase the contrast between tiles.

The colour is way too pink.

  Edited July 17, 2012 by Francis90b  

[darn42 1,268]

Ok sweet. And just for full understanding, the parapet is the part that sticks out like 3-4 inches from the wall after the setback?

[Francis90b 748]

Exactly.A parapet is the part of a wall that goes above the roof line.

[darn42 1,268]

okeedokee, I can definitely fix that I think. Do you know if that roofline at the bottom has an ornate parapet or a simple one?

[Francis90b 748]

The wall is exactly as you modelled it.The top of the parapet is flat.The back of the parapet should probably be flat as well.

[Toothless Stitch 2,901]

* Update time*

I know about the proportions of the annex. This is definitely going to be fixed.

[darn42 1,268]

Sweetnesss... Looking fantastic so far sky. This is going to be a beauty.

Also, since I'm waiting to work more on robie house since it's a difficult one to model from pictures alone and I'm going to be goin there soonish (my sister goes to university of chicago so next time I go there I can go to robie house) and I was waiting for tribune tower feedback, I started a new BAT >.> It's the harold washington library in chicago (of course).

There's the real building. A pretty nice looking building. It's also gigantic.

Here's my progress on it as of now.

  Edited July 17, 2012 by darn42  

[darn42 1,268]

Here's another update on tribune. I added that roof thing you talked about francis. I also tried to make the texture less pink. idk if it actually did I just slid the red slider away from red and added a few of that color... Not sure if that is a valid move for coloration but oh well.

[Cockatoo 2,256]

You're almost there with the brick texture. Just needs to be a bit darker and less saturated now. After that, the last major issue you'll need to sort out is the glass. IMO the rest is all just minor details.

Btw, in the building above, there’s not enough steps in your curved arches. You should know that by now!

[darn42 1,268]

I had to lay low on the amount of steps to keep the mesh clean I'm probably going to add nurms or something to it later to reduce the jaggedness but it's just a bit difficult to work with something that's been subdivided more than twice. I also changed it to a hard surface rather than a smooth 30 surface because of some other edges so that's why the shadows are so cleancut as well

  Edited July 18, 2012 by darn42  

[Cockatoo 2,256]

I had to lay low on the amount of steps to keep the mesh clean I'm probably going to add nurms or something to it later to reduce the jaggedness but it's just a bit difficult to work with something that's been subdivided more than twice. I also changed it to a hard surface rather than a smooth 30 surface because of some other edges so that's why the shadows are so cleancut as well

Not entirely sure what to make of that, you know your modelling skills are way ahead of mine.

Right now, I'd just recommend not getting bogged down too much in the 'theory' or 'rules' of modelling. If it's a dirty mesh in the viewport vs something that doesn't look right in a render, I'd always take the dirty mesh.

But to find a simple, efficient way to model a problem that will work in both the viewport and the renderer, that's what you should always be aiming for.

[Francis90b 748]

Crop of your render on left, crop of the original on right.

Two areas had been highlighted - in red and green.On the original building they look almost the same, on yours they're different.

By "parapet" i defined a wall that extends above the roof line.

In your model, the top of the parapet and the top of the roof line are at the same level.

You might try adding an hint of blue to the limestone texture.

[darn42 1,268]

Francis: Ok, I see that, They are the exact same thing, apparently there's no glass texture on the glass in the ones that look different, but they are instances of each other so they are definitely the same in the viewport. I notice that the roof above the balconies on the right that is part of the parapet thing seems to dip in closer to the building there. In terms of the parapet not going past the roofline, It does, just a little bit, it's a very small amount cause in the picture it looks like it doesn't really extend far up at all, just a little bit. Then thanks I'll add a bit of blue to the limestone texture.

Cockatoo: The dirty mesh in the viewport makes it difficult to model any of the details that I would like to model. It's easier to add subdivisions to an arch after you have modeled everything, than having a mesh with a ton of subdivision to start and trying to block in a large shape using that. I just looked at it more and I realized I could have done another level of subdivision to start with without doing much to the difficulty but like I said it's not too tough to fix.

This is it with just a turbosmooth applied. I like turbosmooth anyways because it turns all the corners softer which is more realistic anyways. And if you've made a clean mesh it's very easy to optimize the look of it with turbosmooth with some well placed edge loops. I just optimized the corner of the building and the windows as a quick example of what can be done to make the render look better. Another good way of locally smoothing out the arches would have been to do a simple chamfer on them, but I like the look of a fully turbosmoothed mesh better in the end.

edit: I do agree with you that if it's impossible to get a clean mesh to make it better in the renderer, I'm mainly trying not to get in bad habits because if I do modeling for something besides 3ds max or static images, dirty meshes will be very difficult to work with and will definitely be frowned upon.

  Edited July 18, 2012 by darn42  

[Francis90b 748]

What matters is wheter it's visible in game, so you might want to add some more (not much) depht to the roof so that the difference is visible in game.

I highlighted the two things because the stonework below the roof but above the windows is not present on the "red" area of your BAT but is present on the green one, and it should be present on both.

[darn42 1,268]

Yea, I know. I will fix it, it seems that the stonework might not be visible on the right if I follow totally true to life and make it look a bit weird. I'll see what I can do without making it too noticeable.

[darn42 1,268]

Just thought I'd post this since I was just talking about clean geometry.

Here's the wireframe for my building in realistic view. See how it's all in quads, then notice the green line spanning the building at the bottom of the building, it doesn't go all the way cause of the symmetry, but anyways, that's the main reason to keep a clean mesh swiftloop makes any sort of modeling go much faster, also, the ring and loop selection only work on clean geometry as well. Problem is that swiftloop requires quads to work, which is why I try and keep everything like that.

[Sgt Pepper 864]

*gasp*

I'm a little dubious about this so keep in mind Cockatoo's and Francis's points.

Looking great.

[Cockatoo 2,256]

I like turbosmooth anyways because it turns all the corners softer which is more realistic anyways

It also adds nasty artefacts as can be seen in your render above, as well as reducing realism quite substantially through eliminating the sharp corners that are often found in the exterior of buildings. I'd highly recommend not using turbosmooth for any large-scale architectural modelling unless it's absolutely necessary. Chamfering edges the traditional way and localised smoothing, like you said, are the way to go.

I'm mainly trying not to get in bad habits because if I do modeling for something besides 3ds max or static images, dirty meshes will be very difficult to work with and will definitely be frowned upon.

Very true. If you're making stuff for games or other 3D environments, you do need to keep your modelling as clean and simple as possible. But applying those principals to a project where the end result will be a static image is not always going to yield the best results.

Just thought I'd post this since I was just talking about clean geometry.

Yep, it is all in quads alright. Personally, I've never gone down the quads track too much when tackling things like arches, just because of the effort v. reward problem. I want to get the best result in the least amount of time. Just for interest's sake, I'll show you how I would model something like what's in your building, and if you like you can point out any disadvantages in my method.

Make this shape. Control the number of steps to your curved segments by adjusting the number here.

Convert to editable poly.

Cap the mid-section. Then in poly sub-mode using the extrude and inset commands repeatedly, create this.

It looks okay...

Now with some standard smoothing...

Render…

Go back, maybe edit some things, chamfer edges, etc...

Looks good.

Probably would have used a steps number more like 24 or even 32 if I were going to render this element any closer in production. At this distance 12 steps would be a bit borderline.

Overall, this only took a few seconds to make, and for a static render, it'll do its job nicely. Through the use of commands like slice, extrude, chamfer and inset, further editing shouldn’t be too much of a hassle. The process has created one unnecessary edge that can be seen in the third image, but it isn't hard to get around that by manually shifting it to a place where it won't get in the way of any further modelling.

[darn42 1,268]

Yea I getcha on that. You make a lot of points that make a lot of sense. I will just do the local chamfering like you said for the reasons you said . But I do like to still keep as much stuff quads as possible. If you see on the reference picture I posted of the library, there are little pale lines running across the facade of the building that continue into the arches and they protrude just the slightest amount, + I want to detach them to texture. I'm glad I kept my geometry clean when I made those because it made grabbing the loops chamfering and extruding them a lot easier. You are of course right about it need to look better in the renderer than the viewport, but I still maintain that if you plan on doing any sort of odd modeling to them later, it would be better to take the time to make sure it's nice, solid, and on a basis of quads. And that's why there's one thing I disagree with you on, and that's converting it to an editable poly to make it 3d geometry. I try and stay away from high count ngons 100% because they are impossible to model stuff on. There's a very simple way to get the same control of subdivision if not a bit more using the surface modifier and it maintains clean geometry. (if I'm doing something that I don't plan on editing at all after making it I'll use extrude modifier or convert as well, but if I plan on doing anything to it I use surface)

Here we have the same thing that you would, I used refine to make it into quads a very quick process that saves trouble later if you plan on modeling on this

Here is the same thing after surface has been applied. I chose to make it have a subdivision of 6, that means each face you see on this, will be split 6 times creating a very nice high res mesh, and you can see that the arch is very nice and smooth as well.

Add an edit poly modifier to bake on the subdivision and do the same thing as you did with the arch before, using loop selection to cap.. I just selected the faces at the bottom and scaled them to be flat because I like it better that way The good thing about this, is that at any point in time you can go back down the stack, and edit the shape of your original spline.

The main difference we have at this stage is that I decided to do some extra modeling on the side similar to what I had to do for the library. Just chamfer, select rings and extrude along local normals just a bit. That's the main reason to use this kind of method. You can do something like that. You can still get the same subdivision as normal but you have a lot more control over it.

Here's my render after applying some basic smoothing. It looks very similar, we did a few things differently, but the basics look the same. And then I have some extra details on the side of it and a very clean mesh all the way through for little extra effort. That's the main reason to use this kinda method really. Also, selecting by a loop ring or adding a swiftloop only work on quads, which is another reason why I try to keep my mesh quads.

On another note, I don't know why you are convinced I'm a better modeler than you. You get a lot better results than I can and have a lot more experience in this. The only thing I have different is that I've watched a ton of tutorials so I know some more features and methods that people wouldn't know about by just using the program. In almost every other aspect you are better at 3ds Max than me.

  Edited July 18, 2012 by darn42  

[T Wrecks 10,209]

I'm not a modeler at all, but I have the impression that the shadows are really wonky in the last screenshot. The two very dark areas in the first two recesses as well as most shadow lines on the left side don't make sense to my eye.