Hagroth

Kudos, ghosu! I understand now, the elements are placed anywhere inside the Unwrap UVW space which is full of that same texture and thus can look different even though they all use the same 1024x1024 texture, and they could also use slightly different parts of that texture as it is repeated throughout space. I'll just make some 1024x1024 tileable textures and just use this procedure for the parts that don't need specific detail. Once again, thank you so much for taking your time, and I'm sure this might be useful to other beginners! :) Just one more question, the memory this model will use for texture will only be dependent on the amount and resolution of textures used on the model, not so much how the parts are mapped (like the size of the elements in UVW space and so on), correct? And yup, doctorhr2, normal maps and specular maps are definitely important, I noted that while playing Skyrim on the 360. I'll just make specular level and normal equivalents for every 1024x1024 diffuse map, if that'd be a reasonable approach?

All right, but if I split the ship up like that, I'd probably need 20 or so 1024x1024 (I always mean "Unwrap UVW" when I refer to "UVW maps") UVW maps to avoid it looking grainy. So basically, I could make 1/4 or 1/2 of the deck one UVW map, and one side of the "railing" another UVW map, the mast and the sail one UVW map and so on? Would for example 8 1024x1024 UVW maps be better than one huge 8192x8192 UVW map for the same parts, even though it's the same amount of pixels? The models already in the game all use UVW maps, not multi subobject materials, tiling and the likes? Perraine, I suppose that's a good idea. The reason I haven't is because I haven't even touched my PC copy of Skyrim yet, and I'm not the least acquainted with the CK. But I suppose I could give it a shot later today.

You mean several Unwrap UVW maps? Well, the general consensus on most forums I've asked on was that it'd be better and more economic with the video memory to just have some 1024x1024 or 2048x2048 textures (not UVW) and just apply them to the model in 3ds max, rather than using huge UVW maps. Or are you saying it would be better to have like eight 2048x2048 UVW maps rather than two 8192x8192 UVW maps (because the 8192x8192 only covered half my model, and even then the texture looks grainy up close, which is relevant as the model will be large in comparison to the player in game)?

Hey, I'm making a Viking ship for potential use in Skyrim, and since it's my first model I'm not completely sure how to approach the texturing. Since it's a ship, it's going to be pretty large in the game world, which means I'll probably need to use multi subobject texture tiling (my 8192x8192 UVW map still wouldn't do - check this out: http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1680620, so I need another approach rather than trying to cover it all in one huge 8192x8192 map), but I might still use UVW-mapping for certain parts that require more precise detail like the dragon's head etc. Anyway, my question is if a combination of these approaches will work for exporting the model into Skyrim? What kind of approach do the larger Skyrim models use (such as buildings and ships etc.)? Thanks in advance!

Hello, I'm and I'm making a Viking ship (my first complete model) in 3ds Max 2012, and before UVW-mapping it I'd like to know a few things regarding the process: 1. For the hull and the benches, I'm considering simply cutting it in half, duplicating one half and mirroring it so it becomes completely symmetrical. But before duplicating it, I'll UVW-map that half so I'll only need to do half the work. Is this possible? I'll have to separate but identical parts with the same UVW-map, albeit one of the parts is mirrored. Then I'm going to merge them together. What will happen? 2. A similar question. On the ship, there are various ropes, "gadgets", a sail and, of course, a mast. They are all separate parts as of now. Should I UVW-map them separately and then merge them with the rest of the ship? Does it matter if I merge them and the ship into one single object or can I leave them as separate objects? I'm going to export it for use in Skyrim later on. Thanks in advance!

You would make a blockout of the model using a box and you could then start getting in the curves and details with loop, ring and connect tool. Or you could use a reference, start with a box and just build your way out. It might look like a pain, but it is clean and quick. I am a personal fan of using a single plane, or cylinder, and working from that. From there I draw out polygons by selecting an edge and s*** dragging. Goes quite fast. If I then want to high poly model, I add controll edges and add a turbosmooth modifier. Though I can't really say which method is better, since I never tried the one you are doing. I started modelling with a box, and moved towards using a poly plane. I use a spline or two to make complex tube shapes. It does seem less painful with a reference plane I guess. I haven't even heard of these loop and ring tools you mention so I guess it's a good method once you've learned it. I'll give it a try in future models (this ship is the first one I'm doing on my own). And Ghogiel, here is a better image to explain what I meant: http://imgur.com/eZHyY

Sorry, I know the image can be a bit confusing. The ribs are only supposed to be visible on the inside of the ship. They are just planks going across the floor on the deck, so naturally I don't want them to poke through the hull. I first made the upper lines of each rib, that is, the top of them. You know, the part that you walk on if you are aboard the ship. What I need now, apart from the top surface of the ribs, is a surface going from the top of the planks to the deck/floor surface. So I get whole planks, not just floating surfaces above the deck. In order to do this, I can only figure out two ways. One is to make an outer line (the bottom end of the planks or the bottom side if you will) and make it go inside the hull. I'd then generate a surface between the top side and this new bottom side. It sounds easy, but the hull is very narrow, so I just can't do this. The other way is to not care about if the bottom side pokes through the hull - I'd just extend the hull temporarily and create a boolean object by subtracting this huge hull from the ribs/planks. So the part of the ribs inside the hull (or outside of the inner area of the ship) would disappear and they'd be cut off along the deck. I uploaded a better image, so I'm posting it here as well: http://imgur.com/eZHyY I'm a beginner at 3ds Max, and I just thought that seemed like the easiest way to do it. I just draw the silhouettes in minute detail and the program generates the surface for me. I can't even imagine making this model from a box or something. I'd have to pull one vertex to one place, and measure the distance to where I want to next one, pull it over there and make sure I get the curves/beziers right from all angles and the alignment... It'd be a true pain. :( I've been working in Solidworks before and you always started with sketches before extruding or whatever. You have a lot more control over angles and measurements and all that. When I made the wooden frame and the rock for the anchor, I made the base model from splines and surface, and then I used poly editing to make it more random. I had control over the amount of polygons and didn't get many. But needless to say, I don't have much experience with the poly editing method.

Is that a common way to do it? To first make a high-res model and then retopologize? And should you add texture before or after retopologizing? My model will require quite a lot of polygons because the hull isn't straight, there are curves everywhere. But I'll try to aim at below 10k. For example, the rail is fairly plane. By the way, could you please help me with another problem I'm having? I made these “ribs”, if you will, that go across the deck. They are the purple things on the image: http://imgur.com/CoJpA The problem is that I don’t know any way to make them go into the hull without going all the way through. The hull is very thin, so I can’t do it manually. So I tried making the outer hull really large and then making a boolean object by taking the “ribs” and subtracting this hull from them. In other words, the surplus parts (the part that goes outside of the hull) of the ribs are removed. Or that was my thought at least. When I do the operation, the ribs don’t change at all. Could anybody please point me in the right direction? Maybe there's another way, like extruding a surface between the upper line of the "ribs" that only extrudes until it touches the boat surface? I know that was possible in Solidworks but I haven't seen an option for that in 3ds Max.

Here you go: http://imgur.com/XGaPz The upper and lower images to the left show the ship excluding the interior "ribs" and benches etc. which I haven't done yet. The green and purple things in the middle are the mastfish and its upright. To the upper right there's a shot of the spline cage, and in the lower right you can see what it looks like in vertex mode after having converted it to an editable poly. This is at 25 steps on the surface modifier. I now end up at 350827 polys for the gray model.

Just out of curiosity, do you mean the Narsis city in Tamriel Rebuilt? Then you would get very low ress texture. But yes, then it would be a model and you'd need about 30k polygons. It would still be a scene though, but also a single model. A castle would be made with tiles, hopefully. That would save time and energy, and use minimally texturing. That would mean a model would have 1 - 500 polygons, and you'd have up to 30 models there. The scene would then have 15 00 polygons in the scene, and probably another 20k from random objects and assets. A scene is what the camera see at any given point. That scene can contain as many models as it wants, it is still a scene. That is how polycount is being decided: How many polygons can the scene take without problems? Then it is up to the artist to choose a polycount per model to go under said limit. I am not sure what the limit is on todays computers, but I can guess it is high. I also know that you do not need any super poly-model to get a good model. Here is a tileable ground texture I made, it is 1 polygon and tilable. The texture is 1024x1024 and the model is 256x256: http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/3904/floortilequickrender.th.jpg The render you see is 4 polygon, 4 models, and 1 scene. I could have zoomed in and have 1 model in the scene, or tile it over and have 20. And yes, texture size comes in when we talk about lagging. That is why you should never hit the limit for polycount: Since the texture means a lot as well. There is rarely any texture that needs to hit 2048x2048, and most don't need to go over 512x512. I personally render out maps at 2048x2048 and downscale to 1024x1024. Sorry OP for off topiccing your topic! I just want my point across ;) I would still want a picture of the model before I could judge how many polygons that should have. No problem! In fact, your post was very informative because I haven't thought about how much textures add to it. Thanks to everyone for a lot of replies! I've come to realize I might just easen down a bit on the steps since the edges don't really need to be knife-sharp. Since this is my first model that I'll make from splines to maps, I've focused too much on the basic form. The textures will probably cover up the slight blurryness that occurs with a lower amount of polygons. I suppose one might not even notice the difference with the maps on. What I meant was that if my model is huge, I could have more polygons because I could still have the same polygon/m^3 ratio, you know? On the other hand, as long as the model doesn't stretch out of the scene or the radius the engine renders, it doesn't matter. 10k polygons will be as heavy on a large object as they would on a small. I'll upload an image of the entire thing tomorrow, since I don't have the computer I'm using available right now!

Like Matt said, splines+surface is a very useful method. Mostly because you can make very precise and accurate models with curves. Especially useful when it comes to cars, airplanes, buildings, viking ships... anything non-organic. But it's also pretty good for creatures and so on. In fact, once you've drawn the basic shape, you can edit and add vertices just like you would a poly or whatever. When I made everything manually, the ship was at less han 2000 polygons. When I converted it, the program makes extra polygons for the complicated curves and geometry, ending up in a very high total. Take a look at this image of the dragon head I uploaded a while ago for another question at another forum (you can also see a small part of the rest of the ship): http://imgur.com/hloIT See how awesome spline caging is? ;) So you convert it to either an editable poly or mesh before exporting? But how many polygons do you usually end up with? This is a rather large model, about 30 meters long and 6 meters wide at its widest (in the middle).

I haven't spent a second in any Contruction Set to any previous game, and I've just learned 3ds Max. I've made a Viking ship and a house using splines and then a surface modifier. The poly count is very low (under 2000), in fact it's so low I'm starting to think you actually have to convert it to an editable poly or something first before converting it to a file supported by Skyrim and its CS. When I do convert it, I get a couple of hundred thousand polygons. I know the maximum poly count for a model is 64000. Is there any way to get around this? Or can you actually use the surface object? Thanks in advance! Here's an image of the ship: http://imgur.com/XGaPz