Where is CBBE Maximum?

[JerseyKid23]

Why is it gone and is there a way I can find it?

[NightroModzz]

I think the author violated the terms of use of the original mod author by re-uploading a modified version of CBBE without permission, thus it was taken down.

 

It could have had issues anyways, because it was a divided version of the mesh and wasn't quadrified before hand. Not something you even normally see in pictures of a wire framed mesh, and is common topology knowledge to avoid (dividing a triangulated mesh, especially an animated one). I think it had 6-8 triangles per square, but should have 2 triangles per square.

Edited April 16, 2018 by NightroModzz

[Meeps]

Who or what site the original author/mod originated even from is it still being updated noticed the latest version what i have was titled 0.15.0.0BETA

[NightroModzz]

Who or what site the original author/mod originated even from is it still being updated noticed the latest version what i have was titled 0.15.0.0BETA

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/2666?tab=description

Edited April 17, 2018 by NightroModzz

[RedKnight]

For all the PM'ing people, I'm just going to link this page. The reason it was taken down was either Jeir or Ous reported the mod for me not contacting them before uploading it, and that's that. I do not support Maximum CBBE or answer any questions about it any longer, however, multiple places have uploaded the latest version. But do not despair, I have in my "to do" list a new body project. If you follow StaticPhobia2 (me) at LL, you'll see the progress on that... assuming I'm not banned anytime in the near future.

 

--- End ---

 

Side note for other aspiring 3D modelers:

 

It could have had issues anyways, because it was a divided version of the mesh and wasn't quadrified before hand. Not something you even normally see in pictures of a wire framed mesh, and is common topology knowledge to avoid (dividing a triangulated mesh, especially an animated one). I think it had 6-8 triangles per square, but should have 2 triangles per square.

 

Any issues it had were due to non-completion. Topology had nothing to do with it, and since this is a commonly misunderstood thing about would-be modders, I'd like to share my knowledge with you and all who are under the misconception that all meshes need to be in quads:

 

Quadrification is the collage way of doing things and in most cases is the best way of doing things. This is because a quad balances out input data from the DirectX API evenly. Meaning height maps, bump maps, occlusion maps, normal maps, specular maps, sub surface maps all give similar visual representation with the same input numbers (Lighting stats I.E.). If you have topology like Picasso, you'll have a very uneven surface, visually, even though your diffuse map will look correct in the render window of your 3d modeling program. The other reason you'd want to quadrify is that if you were to apply morphs, like phonemes, or extrusions, or deformations. The proper topology will yield natural results. Picasso topology will look edgy and uneven. In most cases, you'll want to stay with quadrification, but in the Maximum CBBE case, NURMS generate triangles work fine, in fact, better than fine. They look even better than quadrification at a very comparable polygon-count cost, given their layout. The reason for this is that each vertex of the CBBE body divided evenly into equal sized polygons. So the animations worked great, the deformation worked great, and the weighting worked. The only problem was the pelt seams for the UV map and just the UV maps in general. The first truth is, no matter what you do to a model, if it's a substantial enough edit, you're going to have to redo the UV mapping, it's just has to happen. The 2nd truth is, deforming parts need much more polygons, and the whole body deforms. The final truth is, it takes a lot more squares to make something look round, than it does octagons. Octagons divide into 8 polys, squares into 2, and in my opinion it takes about a ration of 1:5 octo's:quad's to look about even. In my new body, I'm experimenting with topology and deformation, as well as simplified UV maps. Either way, it should be a much more efficient use of polygons than the CBBE Max for sure.

Edited April 22, 2018 by RedKnight

[NightroModzz]

 

Any issues it had were due to non-completion. Topology had nothing to do with it, and since this is a commonly misunderstood thing about would-be modders, I'd like to share my knowledge with you and all who are under the misconception that all meshes need to be in quads:

 

Quadrification is the collage way of doing things and in most cases is the best way of doing things. This is because a quad balances out input data from the DirectX API evenly. Meaning height maps, bump maps, occlusion maps, normal maps, specular maps, sub surface maps all give similar visual representation with the same input numbers (Lighting stats I.E.). If you have topology like Picasso, you'll have a very uneven surface, visually, even though your diffuse map will look correct in the render window of your 3d modeling program. The other reason you'd want to quadrify is that if you were to apply morphs, like phonemes, or extrusions, or deformations. The proper topology will yield natural results. Picasso topology will look edgy and uneven. In most cases, you'll want to stay with quadrification, but in the Maximum CBBE case, NURMS generate triangles work fine, in fact, better than fine. They look even better than quadrification at a very comparable polygon-count cost, given their layout. The reason for this is that each vertex of the CBBE body divided evenly into equal sized polygons. So the animations worked great, the deformation worked great, and the weighting worked. The only problem was the pelt seams for the UV map and just the UV maps in general. The first truth is, no matter what you do to a model, if it's a substantial enough edit, you're going to have to redo the UV mapping, it's just has to happen. The 2nd truth is, deforming parts need much more polygons, and the whole body deforms. The final truth is, it takes a lot more squares to make something look round, than it does octagons. Octagons divide into 8 polys, squares into 2, and in my opinion it takes about a ration of 1:5 octo's:quad's to look about even. In my new body, I'm experimenting with topology and deformation, as well as simplified UV maps. Either way, it should be a much more efficient use of polygons than the CBBE Max for sure.

 

Well... I have no doubt you know things I don't, but this is based on my knowledge, experience, and research.

 

Not all meshes, but animated ones, especially organic meshes.

 

While most of what you say is true, the cons still outweigh the pros. It is an easy way of going about it, but the fact remains that it still makes things more difficult for the texture artist, will be a nightmare for the animator to work with, and frankly, is something no employer will find acceptable. I guess the only acception is when it is a mod and there are other compatible bodies to work with for those things.

 

As for deformation, yes, the division of a triangulated mesh would bare better results, but only for the basic simple toplologized meshes. Now or days, people are practicing topology with more complex patterns which is very tedious and takes a good amount of experience to start doing at a decent pace. Knowing retopology is now a high requirement for getting hired. This way would bare better results at a lower polygon count than the division of a triangulated mesh, and can help keep a denser polygon count where you want it. For that, you need software that can offer you full control over polygons like Quad Draw from Maya.

 

 

Props to you for working on a new body instead of a divided one. I have been doing so for a long time with lots of topology practice on a complete body with a somewhat high poly-count based on muscle deformation, and started over this month with all that I have learned at a lower poly-count which is half done. The plan is to also have a uterus and anus.

Edited April 23, 2018 by NightroModzz