Some artwork (3d car: Pagani Zonda) [Archive]

Aaron Lussier

01-09-2003, 09:35

Overall the car looks extremely good, you are an extremely good animator to draw such a thing. The lines onthe car are excellent, I know its not done but I have one tiny problem with it. The windshield, it appears to have some sort of a bump right in the middle of it. The bump throws off the smoothness from the front of the car. You asked for comment and I gave you what I though. Excellent Job:D

Salik Syed

01-09-2003, 20:44

Thank You, I prefer constructive comments, although the fanboy comments do help my ego (after it's destroyed on cgtalk!! :D )

Yeah I know about the bump it annoys me alot but I still haven't fixed probably because I did ten edit meshs after the spline cage and all that work will be lost if I edit it ... I could use edit mesh but then the reflections are messed up by even a tiny mistake.

I will most likely scrap this model and use the spline cage to create a new and improved roadster version

or maybe give this one out for free (only to look at) u never know!

This thing takes 6-7 minutes to render ! w/ no other objects, The roadster will be more efficient and more neat , i think this one is really sloppy

Tytus Gerrish

01-09-2003, 22:22

Originally posted by P1NKfreak13
OmG! I absolutely love that! It's like amazingly awesome you can do something like that. WoW...I don't even know what to say. I wish I could do that. I mean like I don't have much experience / expertise in computer graphics, but I think your car looks SOO real! (I love it!)

Steph, Did you get into the pixy stix again?

Ryan Dognaux

01-09-2003, 22:31

WoW! That's amazing. Great job!! What program did you use to create that??

Keep up the amazingly great work :)

Salik Syed

03-09-2003, 00:11

i use 3ds max

i like pixie stix too, but too many.... :D

here is a starting composite, it is with out global illumination (through High density radiance image most likely I will do it ) because it takes sooooo long... 300k polys u know.

I know the environment map doesn't match so It kinda doesn't fit but anyways see my work so far:

Salik Syed

03-09-2003, 00:15

My goal is to fool the people on the Pagani Forum in to thinking this is real! (not the image above but eventually) or maybe try to sell it on ebay .... just kidding (about the ebay part)

lets see if it works Hope fully with refinments to the side mirrors to authenticate it to the real versions I can fool some people it's photo real?

Kiwi_queen

26-10-2003, 22:59

All I can say is WOW. That's a pretty darned good job on that car. You did a marvelous job.

Salik Syed

27-10-2003, 00:31

alright thanx.... btw i changed my screenname cuz that one wuz 2 hard 2 type.....

ANDIE111001101

30-10-2003, 20:47

WOW thats AWSOME I'v seen some awfull real animations but this one definatly beats it!!! Way to go!!! I realy like the reflection onf the "floor" its so real too when i try and do that it always ends up looking wrong!!! NICE JOB

Wana come do our teams animation???

--Andie
_____________
111001101 Whats that spell? 461

stevek

30-10-2003, 23:51

Looks pretty good. You already pointed out some of the weaknesses, so there's no need to reiterate. Every thing you stated was right on the money. The strenths are that you were successful at creating a super detailed model. I know this took some time, keep going!!!

Often wiuth detailed models and even thins that appear simple, you will get partway or even all the way through a modeling process and findout that you went about the thing all wrong. Or you perfect the skills along the way so the first parts of the model are sloppy and the last stuff you did are clean and crisp. The solution, throw is out and start over. You will find that it will go 10 times faster. Things that have taken me a week the first time around, could be redone in a day or two just because you've already perfected the techniques.

You will find that modeling with spines and patching the surfaces will give you more control over the smoothness without all the modifiers that end up taking forever to render. Look in the books for the process of creating spline contours and then patch over it. If you need more help pointing in the right direction let me know I will look it up.

BTW: This is not an animation it is a still- so it is premature to state that the artist formerly know as $_@_1_i_|< is a great ANIMATOR, and it is premature to ask him to do your animation. He is obviously a talented modeler and texturer. I'm sure he's a good animator as well, But there's not enough evidence here to convict him of that. So don't get syced-out by his talent and keep developing all of yours. I look forward to a great your of new improved talent from you all.

...............

01-11-2003, 16:31

why is it poly?
it should be nurbs (more efficient for this type of modelling)
nice model btw - it would be nice to see an interior though.

gsensel

01-11-2003, 17:07

Also if you want people to think it is real thee is way to much of a glossy shine on it, but nice work.

stevek

02-11-2003, 21:27

Yeah, you want to reduce the specularity. If you make the windows clear it will force you to work on some of the interior, but it will blend in a bit more. Try to use the elements of the phot in you revlection maps. If you can add shadows and reflections from things like a tree that may be unseen in the foreground. These things will add more reality. Look at the cars in the background for clues to that to do.

djcapelis

03-11-2003, 21:54

A strong tinting on the windows would allow you to get rid of the glare while only having a few primitives inside to give the interior a general shape.

Ashley Weed

03-11-2003, 22:01

Sorry to throw this a bit off topic.... however, I was just curious as to where this car originates... and what comes under the hood? :D

... otherwise, amazing drawing!

KenWittlief

04-11-2003, 09:03

if you want to make people think its real, save it as a low res jpeg file, and see if that smooths out the imperfections enough to make it match the background.

It looks like the background you used for the reflections is createing a rippled effect in the surface of the car.

Gadget470

04-11-2003, 10:26

Originally posted by Ashley Weed
I was just curious as to where this car originates...
http://www.paganiautomobili.it/
*.it is Italy

and what comes under the hood? :D
http://www.paganiautomobili.it/english/scheda.gif

Tyler Olds

05-11-2003, 16:05

Hey man nice job,

What programs and plug-ins did you all use for this??

Once again nice job, I'll look forward to seeing your animation this upcoming year, especially if it is of that caliber.

- The person who has not been respondign to posts for a while (sorry).
- Tyler

Salik Syed

06-11-2003, 19:52

no plugins .
only hdri importer.... from Splutterfish.. it doesn't make a difference tho because i do not use it for global illumination only as a bright reflective map..

I just liked the HDRI files i found... tho u could convert to tif etc.. and do the same.

softwares: 3dsmax 3.1 thats it.... the background everything it's all procedural

although i did use paint shop pro to make Pagani Logo bump maps but that barely counts u can't even see the logo (ithink)

Salik Syed

06-11-2003, 19:54

ALSO I AM SORRY BUT MY WEBSITE IS DOWN! Im looking for a new host w/o all the :ahh: tripod started giving... i really hate tripod... maybe some one can host it 4me ? thanx!

Matt Hallock

17-11-2003, 11:04

Originally posted by ...............
why is it poly?
it should be nurbs (more efficient for this type of modelling)
nice model btw - it would be nice to see an interior though.

NURBS is not an effective tool in modelling automobiles. It can be used but it's an inferior method, using splines and adding mesh to them is probably the best way. The quickest way is box modelling with booleans and cuts.

The car looks good, try and HDRi render or set up a new scene. If you'd like a good material for your car here is one if you're in 3DSMAX.

Open the material editor
Change from STANDARD to RAYTRACE
Change the IOR (Index of Refraction) to 2.5
In the reflective map box, add a falloff map
In the falloff map, change it from perpendicular to fresnel
Uncheck override material IOR
Uncheck the two boxes by the maps at the top (On the right)
Change the diffuse to the color you want for your car

This material completely depends on what is in your scene. The reflective material is only half the magic. You have to have something to reflect to actually have your car reflect. I'd recommend you change the enviroment to white, add a floor, and then a C-Box. Put the car in the C-Box and render.

Lev

17-11-2003, 15:10

why is it poly?
it should be nurbs (more efficient for this type of modelling)

In theory - yes, NURBS are almost ideal for car modeling with organic shapes, but in practice - 3ds max's implementation of NURBS is really limited, so poly-modeling is probably the best choice. (I.e - try stitching together two NURBS surfaces in max - the chances that you will get what you expected vary from 5% to none. And im not talking about complex cases - two surfaces that are almost perfectly aligned. Tweaking the Join parameters,and rebuilding the curves only makes it worse.)

This is not to say that Poly modeling is perfect either - idea of creating extra geometry just to adjust the curvature of the surface is repulsive to me.

Matt Hallock

17-11-2003, 19:37

Originally posted by Lev
In theory - yes, NURBS are almost ideal for car modeling with organic shapes, but in practice - 3ds max's implementation of NURBS is really limited, so poly-modeling is probably the best choice. (I.e - try stitching together two NURBS surfaces in max - the chances that you will get what you expected vary from 5% to none. And im not talking about complex cases - two surfaces that are almost perfectly aligned. Tweaking the Join parameters,and rebuilding the curves only makes it worse.)

This is not to say that Poly modeling is perfect either - idea of creating extra geometry just to adjust the curvature of the surface is repulsive to me.

A Non-Uniform Rational B-Spline is still geometry, it's the mathmatical equation for curvature but is represented by a solid, which is still geometry. It's just calculated differently. If you know how to control meshsmooth, then you'll get the same outcome.

Salik Syed

17-11-2003, 19:38

I don't use nurbs cuz it sux in 3dsmax 3 it even sux all the way up to 5... at least compared 2 what i've heard about rhino and others... spline modelling is easy... you don't have to create extra geometry to tweak and stuffs... and althogh box modelling w/ booleans works it kind of sux for higher detail models because it screws ur geometry up and when you mesh smooth it is very twisted..!

oh yeah thanx for the suggestion on the materials...i've already tried the basic raytrace w/ fresnel reflection... didn't really tweak the IOR so i think i'll seee what that results in. as for nothing 2 reflect: I have a spherically unwrapped environment map so it is kind of like a sphere around the car..

one more thing i am unsure what u mean by C-Box can u clarify?

oh btw... i am still working on animations skills i am not so good at it i want to know how to really get it done EFFICIENTLY not my kinda half baked ways of doing it

Matt Hallock

17-11-2003, 23:26

It's actually called a C-Extrusion

Create - Geometry - Extended Primatives - C-Ext

You can find it there.

JamesWu

18-11-2003, 01:18

Why does the windshield look so wierd. other than that the only bad thing is the shaders. they don't look realistic

Lev

18-11-2003, 02:21

A Non-Uniform Rational B-Spline is still geometry, it's the mathmatical equation for curvature but is represented by a solid, which is still geometry. It's just calculated differently. If you know how to control meshsmooth, then you'll get the same outcome.

Well - the beautiful part of NURBS is that the actual hull is hidden from the user most of the time - you can just work with the curves, and can build a whole detailed surface without even touching the actual surface CVs.

What i meant by creating extra geometry just to define curvature is following:

Suppose you want to create a fillet along an edge in your surface. In Polys, you would have to chamfer it, and then tweak the chamfer amount ,and maybe even the generated verticies to adjust the curvature of the fillet. In NURBS (in theory - it almost never works the way its supposed to in max) you'd just create a fillet surface with a specified radius - and wont have to worry about tweaking the CVs, because the software would do it for you and hide the CVs themselves

And about controlling the meshsmooth - if you are referring to adjusting the edge/vertex weights for NURMS, it is the most awkward way of controlling curvature of your model, because the weights are affecting the whole surface, and all of your model will get distorted by setting weight value too high (for example, if you'd like to make a sharp edge) The results from chamfering the edge are much more predictable.

Matt Hallock

18-11-2003, 10:30

Originally posted by Lev
Well - the beautiful part of NURBS is that the actual hull is hidden from the user most of the time - you can just work with the curves, and can build a whole detailed surface without even touching the actual surface CVs.

What i meant by creating extra geometry just to define curvature is following:

Suppose you want to create a fillet along an edge in your surface. In Polys, you would have to chamfer it, and then tweak the chamfer amount ,and maybe even the generated verticies to adjust the curvature of the fillet. In NURBS (in theory - it almost never works the way its supposed to in max) you'd just create a fillet surface with a specified radius - and wont have to worry about tweaking the CVs, because the software would do it for you and hide the CVs themselves

And about controlling the meshsmooth - if you are referring to adjusting the edge/vertex weights for NURMS, it is the most awkward way of controlling curvature of your model, because the weights are affecting the whole surface, and all of your model will get distorted by setting weight value too high (for example, if you'd like to make a sharp edge) The results from chamfering the edge are much more predictable.

The results of the meshsmooth are as well predictable when used properly. As long as the base model has enough vertices you can easily stop distortion.

Lev

18-11-2003, 11:28

As long as the base model has enough vertices you can easily stop distortion.

Exactly! But why would i want to add extra geometry just to prevent distortion? Am i defining shape by adding the extra verticies? No. Am i refining the surface detail with them? No. I have to add them just to help meshsmooth algortihm to produce predictable results.

Matt Hallock

18-11-2003, 16:38

Originally posted by Lev
Exactly! But why would i want to add extra geometry just to prevent distortion? Am i defining shape by adding the extra verticies? No. Am i refining the surface detail with them? No. I have to add them just to help meshsmooth algortihm to produce predictable results.

Meh, I see your point. However, NURBS has some unpredictable outcomes when you use rail sweeps.

stevek

20-11-2003, 02:15

Hey guys, I fully understand most of what your are saying. I personally dont use alot of Nurb Modeling- mainly because I havent spent any real time with it. So I dont know the best techniques there. (I do mostly Poygon or Spline/Mesh Modeling)

However- I'd love for a couple of you to throw together a few simple tutorials that discuss each technique and either post them here (maybe in its onw thread) or post them on a website (I will host if you need) so that some of the newer students can get a handle on what each modeling method does and why and when you may want to use one or another. Maybe you can each pick and object and show 2 or 3 different approaches. Or you each pick a different approach and you all create a similar object.

Any Takers?