A reasonable poly count for Skyrim models?

[Matth85]

Eh, I would say anything from 300-1000 polygons would fit for that ship. It is very "basic" in terms of shape, so it wouldn't need more polygons. Unless you decide to detail it some more.

 

Though I probably shouldn't say anything, since I really can't help: I've never used the workflow you currently work with. I guess Ghogiel got some advices -- since it seem he knows what it is about!

 

Best of luck!

Matth

[Ghogiel]

what do you expect at 25 steps on a surface modifier. :confused:

 

 

Just retopo the thing would probably be easiest/best thing.

[PrometheusTS]

yOU HAVE SEVERALL ways to downscale , if topology is not your prioority as you have not to animate it anyway you can decimate it in zbrush with decimation master, you can crounch polygon count with the tool in 3dsmax , you can rebuild a box model over that shape , use balancer to reduce the number of polys or finally retopologize it with zbrush tools or topogun may be , but even 3dsmax has that with the graphite tools ...

[Hagroth]

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.

[Matth85]

Even if the model is not perfectly straight, there is no reason to go past 4k polygons.

 

And a normal way to model is to make a high poly, make a low poly, then bake the details from the high poly to the low poly. Then you texture it, using the AO from the high poly. Quite simple, and good results.

 

I would either take it into Zbrush and retoplogize it, or just use it as a guideline where I modelled it using a box or a plane.

[Ghogiel]

I don't understand this issue with these ribs, I don't even know what I am looking at or is supposed to be looking for.

 

 

I would either take it into Zbrush and retoplogize it,

I certainly wouldn't for this. I would do this one in max. I think we would both agree just use the retop tools/ regula poly modelling to make a new LP. It would take a matter of minutes.

 

I use ZBs retopo fairly often and will right now tell you it will a: take ages and b: be waaaayyyy harder to control vertex placement afaik you cannot 'poly model' in ZB, like for example you cannot grab a vert you placed and move it around the surface of the mesh as you retopo like you can in max. and you cannot make cuts into the topology to add extra loops and have it dynamically snap to the surface of the high poly mesh like in max.

 

all ZB does is you click to place a vertex, and it draws edges as you place them, you connect a few and a face will form. You can't grab them and move them about, or start making cuts or use any poly modelling tools like in max. It'll just be quite wobbly and tedious. and I bet you it would take longer to do than in max,

 

more specific would be like 4k tri or something. 'polygons' is a bit undescriptive, Say quads or tris so no one has to ask: is that tri?

Edited December 24, 2011 by Ghogiel

[Matth85]

Say quads or tris so no one has to ask: is that tri?

It is rather common to try and hold a model in quads, unless you are forced to waste another row of verts to keep it quads. If somebody say "Polyglon", it most likely means "As many quads as possible, but tris if necessary".

The model shown is far from complicated, and could be done with about 500 polygons, as in quads. Which would translate to 1k tris in a game engine.

 

That said, I would agree doing a full low poly model would be quicker than retopoing in Zbrush. However, if the OP is not used to the way of doing it, it might become akward. Then it is fine enough to paint in your topology inside Zbrush and go from there. I never use that method unless my sculpt is over 5 million -- at which max crashes, but I would do it if I had problem modelling using a box or a plane.

 

That said, I am generally confused of the workflow outlined here. I really don't get the strength of it.

You outline the shapes with splines, and then it calculates the mesh, using multiple thousand polygons? Why not simply start with a box, or a plane, and build it from scratch -- having full controll of your polyflow. Being clever with modyfiers, and you could also turn the high poly model into the low poly in 2 clicks.

I am sorry if it is off topic, but could anybody explain what workflow this is, and why it is preffered for some?

Thanks,

 

Matth

[Ghogiel]

Say quads or tris so no one has to ask: is that tri?

It is rather common to try and hold a model in quads, unless you are forced to waste another row of verts to keep it quads. If somebody say "Polyglon", it most likely means "As many quads as possible, but tris if necessary".

So when you say polygon you aren't giving an accurate count is what you are saying.

[Matth85]

So when you say polygon you aren't giving an accurate count is what you are saying.

It never is an accurate count. It all depend on the context. A non-game model is never in tris. A model before sculpting is never in tris. A model preparing for high poly modelling is never in tris.

If somebody say "Polygon", you can think "tris!" or "quads!". It is very common to work in quads, since it gives a better flow. Hence "Polygons" are often used for "quads".

 

Besides, when you work with a mesh, do you use tris? Not many turn their mesh to tri's before exporting, as the game engine does it for you.

If you don't turn it to tri's, then it is rather clearly what I am saying.

 

But, by all means, if you like to work with tri's, then that is none of my business.

[Ghogiel]

So when you say polygon you aren't giving an accurate count is what you are saying.

It never is an accurate count. It all depend on the context. A non-game model is never in tris. A model before sculpting is never in tris. A model preparing for high poly modelling is never in tris.

If somebody say "Polygon", you can think "tris!" or "quads!". It is very common to work in quads, since it gives a better flow. Hence "Polygons" are often used for "quads".

 

Besides, when you work with a mesh, do you use tris? Not many turn their mesh to tri's before exporting, as the game engine does it for you.

If you don't turn it to tri's, then it is rather clearly what I am saying.

 

But, by all means, if you like to work with tri's, then that is none of my business.

lol No one is talking about if you have actually triangulated the faces or not. What has that that got to with anything lol.