muzzy Posted June 5, 2004 Share Posted June 5, 2004 Any review or purchase of animated people by lowpolygon3d ? http://www.lowpolygon3d.com/cgi-bin/cp-app.cgi?rrc=N&pg=prod&ref=9008&cat=imagegallery&catstr=HOME:imagegallery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard McCarthy Posted June 6, 2004 Share Posted June 6, 2004 I like to know too I have tried their free sample of the static model, he look really good with GI. Here are some sample I have test rendered with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 he look really good with GI. He does. But where the heck is that guy always running off to? I just had another look at their collection of peeps. They look great. The sitting baby is way cute, and the toddler looks a lot like my boy. But this description belongs on engrish.com Individual geometries may introduce modelling and texturing "errors" that are due to used technology and optimized cost-effort ratio and thus belong to the naturalistic nature of the collection. Say what? What has bothered me about their cars is that they do not have ONE UV map, but a small horde. Use six of their cars and you have a materials map mess on your hands. I have other low polygon cars that are built with a single UV map with an alpha channel. That is all you need, you could throw in a specular map if you really wanted to cover the bases... I hope these people models don't have multiple the materials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRAT Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 i purchased their cars and love them to bits. super real and fast rendering. as EBIII says, a load of materials get thrown in if you have several cars in the scene, but put these materials in tidy material trees in your 3d app and you never even notice they're there. C4D does material partitioning lovelyly. As for the peeps? havent tried them, but if i ever need any these will certainly be the ones we purchase. (unless RPC is out for C4D by then) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 put these materials in tidy material trees in your 3d app and you never even notice they're there. That's what I did since I used three of their cars for the hospital renderings I posted. But I would rather not have to deal with all those textures in the first place. Especially when I want to modify them. It is near impossible to metch what you do to one on the adjoining. I have tried working on them in BodyPaint, but I am more comfortable in Photoshop. I will email the low-poly makers and ask them if they will look into using one or at least fewer maps per model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRAT Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 you are correct. they do use so many maps per model, and it would be nice if they looked into this. the more maps the models use the more ram and longer render times the 3d app uses. but on a personal note i find this a minor inconvenience compaired to the quality and price of these cars. if this is what i must endure for the quality i get then so be it. there's no close alternative at the mo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muzzy Posted June 7, 2004 Author Share Posted June 7, 2004 I have the free sample people that Richard use. For their still 3D people, they use single map, different than cars. I am curious about their animated people. How easy/hard to make a walking movement for architectural animation ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRAT Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 why not use RPC? or is this too expensive/incompatible with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muzzy Posted June 7, 2004 Author Share Posted June 7, 2004 Thanks Strat, That is all about my thesis. It is motion entourage in architectural animations/representations. I compare all the techniques green screen custom people, rpc, model people, etc.. Not only people but also other entourage elements (car, tree, fountain, etc.) Since lowpolygon3d has a different approach than Marlin Studio & RPC, I just want to learn people's experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRAT Posted June 7, 2004 Share Posted June 7, 2004 ah, gottcha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard McCarthy Posted June 8, 2004 Share Posted June 8, 2004 Thanks Strat, That is all about my thesis. It is motion entourage in architectural animations/representations. I compare all the techniques green screen custom people, rpc, model people, etc.. Not only people but also other entourage elements (car, tree, fountain, etc.) Since lowpolygon3d has a different approach than Marlin Studio & RPC, I just want to learn people's experience. I suppose Lowpolygon3d people are good for GI because it gets proper reflection and lighting / shadow thus it blends in with the scene. RPC on the other hand do not... it just feel kinda odd and out of place most of the time when I try RPC people and they feel like photo cut-outs. There is one thing I notice with lowpolygon3d.com's model though, those model are still too shiny sometimes, and doesn't quite look like skin. So there are a little tweaking needed (with some bump mapping too) and you should get a better result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muzzy Posted June 8, 2004 Author Share Posted June 8, 2004 Thank you Richard. Also lowpolygon3d still are not for close up camera views. You can easily see texture problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard McCarthy Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Thank you Richard. Also lowpolygon3d still are not for close up camera views. You can easily see texture problems. I suppose that's because the of the technique he use to make those models. I am guessing he use Photomodeling/photogrammetry software to make those, that's whythe materials, and UV are all kinda messy and hard to edit. The machined output are usually quite illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmedraft Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 you are correct. they do use so many maps per model, and it would be nice if they looked into this. the more maps the models use the more ram and longer render times the 3d app uses. but on a personal note i find this a minor inconvenience compaired to the quality and price of these cars. if this is what i must endure for the quality i get then so be it. there's no close alternative at the mo. I am considering purchasing the cars. Any chance you could post a sample rendering with their cars? Thanks, Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 The cars look fine, there is not an issue there. We were commenting on how many maps were used to get there. It is not a HUGE problem, just an annoyance that I would expect the makers to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard McCarthy Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 http://axyz-design.com/ Check it out, guys, this is just amazing, looks like Lowpolygon3d.com has got a serious competitioin. Those models look pretty damn good to me. I am getting a demo model send to me now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Knourek Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 Yea I just saw those also. Demo on order -dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 I cant see they're stoopid site!!! Seems like everyone has the goods but me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted June 15, 2004 Share Posted June 15, 2004 Oh, goodness. Those are the ugliest damned models I've ever seen. Their 'gallery' effectively makes the case that using static figure models is a bad idea. It's like a really low-budget horror movie. Ug-ly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard McCarthy Posted June 16, 2004 Share Posted June 16, 2004 I just downloaded my demo.. rendering them out.. This is just a test render... Ernest >> erm what?.. ugly? what's wrong with it? What's wrong with you! LOL !! I don't see anything wrong.. maybe only with the eyes...(there are some holes in it) but beside that.. they look heaps better than lowpolygon3d.com one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted June 16, 2004 Share Posted June 16, 2004 Ernest >> erm what?.. ugly? what's wrong with it?.... How can I explain this to a guy with a clownface avatar? Ugly? I think so, but maybe more not-quite human. Freaky, strange. Especially as illustrated on their own site. At least the lowpoly collection has a cute kid or two. Good people for digital rendering is still an open problem. I don't have a set solution to it, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now