Athlete Model
Hi, Heres a model I've been working on recently for a client, please tell me what you think.
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=emzzmkmt41m&thumb=4
poly count: 5100
texture size: 1024x1024
I may be putting this up for sale, I'd like to know if this work is good enough for that and if so how much should models of this quality cost?
Cheers
Ryan.
Posted By: Nems
Re: Athlete Model - 02/15/08 23:31
Certainly a great looking model, good proportions and well dressed for the job
Posted By: JimFox
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 03:56
Hi Ryan,
It looks good to me. The modelling and skinning are at least equal to a half dozen or so model vendors that I see offering models in gamestudio format.
Animations are also important, of course, and I can't judge that. My only concern is the 5100 polycount. That is quite a lot.
I know of a number of modellers selling similar gamestudio models for about $25.00 or so.
But on Turbosquid, models seem to be selling from a few dollars to a few hundred dollars, though very few of these are in gamestudio format. Most are in 3DSMAX. ,obj, .3ds or .x. Check out turbosquid. Then check alienheretic's site. The link is in user contributions.
Keep up the good work.
Best regards,
Posted By: ulf
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 08:19
looks pretty good, but for a "runner" he is too bulky
Posted By: ShoreVietam
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 10:12
Looks well made
Posted By: alleen
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 12:50
Quote:
Looks well made
yup, that's also my opinion
Posted By: croman
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 12:58
Hmm...Nice looking model but too many polygons, unless your client aims on powerfull computers and they plan to put variety of shaders and effects on that model. Try to lower the poly count. Trust me, textures will do the job of improving sharp edged model.
Posted By: Slin
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 13:38
Why does everyone always think that 5000 polies are too much?
As long as they are needed to make the model look good, you can also use 10000 polies. If you are a bit carefull when using them, it is absolutely no problem.
The model looks very nice, but as ulf mentioned, he doesn´t perfectly fit for a runner
Quote:
The model looks very nice, but as ulf mentioned, he doesn´t perfectly fit for a runner
Change the name, and everyone is fine with it!
Posted By: Andvari
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 14:36
Looks good, but i agree that 5100 polys is too much, specially for that kind of model, in sport games there use to be dozens of model on screen at once.
Can you post a wireframe shot?
Posted By: croman
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 14:39
Well Slin, you are right. It is possible to have around 10k poys on screen, but to have 10k polygons on little slower pc's isn't good and I believe that he's not aiming on powerfull pc's only. Those 10k polys are possible to have in such type of game but not in rts or rpg game where couple of hundreds or even thousands of characters are rendered in one frame.
Ofcours, that can be talked about alot, so to cut short: Ask your client about his poly count wishes before you start modeling because it can be hard to decrease poly count after character is finished. If your client has no complaints about this model then you have nothing to worry about.
Nice work BTW.
Posted By: msl_manni
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 15:02
Very nice model. Think it will be used for highend syatems.
Quote:
Ofcours, that can be talked about alot, so to cut short: Ask your client about his poly count wishes before you start modeling because it can be hard to decrease poly count after character is finished.
Well it is very easy for me to decrease the polycount 
. I have mastered the art of decreasing the polycount keeping the prefered geometry and original textures intact. Any high polycount model can be hand converted into desired number of polies. In this case I see an optimised model of about 1700 polies will be achievable keeping the original geometry and textures intact. Contact me if you need any help there.
Overall, this is a nice model (from what I can see from the fairly small screen shot). However, I also agree that it is too many polygons. The reason I am saying it is too many polygons is because it seems there should be more details and a more clearly defined shape for a human model in that polygon range. For example, look at how square the shoulders are (the obvious points that are there). In a humanoid model with over 5000 polygons this should not be so obvious. I have models with about 1200 polygons that look just about as detailed (of course, it is very difficult to compare because, with such a small screen shot, it is hard to see how detailed areas like the shoes are, etc).
The last concern, not having seen the wireframe, is how well will this model animate. Whether the poly count is 500 or 50,000, none of it matters much if it does not deform properly.
Posted By: msl_manni
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 15:46
Quote:
The last concern, not having seen the wireframe, is how well will this model animate. Whether the poly count is 500 or 50,000, none of it matters much if it does not deform properly.
Well as I have already said, and dont want to beat the trumpet, The desired poly loops and vertex geometry can be achieved even after completing a base model, before animating it finally .
Posted By: croman
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 15:51
@msl_manni - I pmed you for second time and I added you on msn. Do you use it and have you received my pm's?
Sorry for off topic.
Posted By: Blattsalat
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 16:03
the dress doesnt match the ones an athlete would wear. he looks far more like a german football player then a runner to me. athletes have cut out shirts and different shorts.
if he is a football player the socks are wrong. Also for an athlete i would either remove them or make them slightly larger.
the people here are right about the polycount. way not enogh details for that polycount. though its hard to tell without wires and a lot larger screens. (maybe we are all wrong and the shotsize ruins the details... hard to tell).
keep it up
cheers
Quote:
Well as I have already said, and dont want to beat the trumpet, The desired poly loops and vertex geometry can be achieved even after completing a base model, before animating it finally .
Who is talking about a base model here? The model shown is completed in that it is modeled, UV mapped and textured. If you start adding vertices, edges and faces to improve how the model will deform when animated, then you run the risk of totally destroying the UV map and having to do that all over again which, in turn, may cause you to have to adjust or re-do the texture map as well. At this stage in the game, the model has to be "right" or else there is a lot of re-work to be done. This is what I was talking about when mentioning about how well it will animate. My concern is basically this: if the model is using 5000+ polys, looks like a model with a lower poly count (1200 - 2000 poly range) then where are all the other polys? And could these "other" polygons interfere with the deformation of the model making it harder to animate? I mean, I can open up ZBrush, load in a 100,000 polygonal sphere and sculpt away until I get a decent looking humanoid model, but the flow of polygons would be all wrong and it would animate poorly.
Posted By: msl_manni
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 17:06
Quote:
Quote:
Well as I have already said, and dont want to beat the trumpet, The desired poly loops and vertex geometry can be achieved even after completing a base model, before animating it finally .
Who is talking about a base model here? The model shown is completed in that it is modeled, UV mapped and textured. If you start adding vertices, edges and faces to improve how the model will deform when animated, then you run the risk of totally destroying the UV map and having to do that all over again which, in turn, may cause you to have to adjust or re-do the texture map as well. At this stage in the game, the model has to be "right" or else there is a lot of re-work to be done. This is what I was talking about when mentioning about how well it will animate. My concern is basically this: if the model is using 5000+ polys, looks like a model with a lower poly count (1200 - 2000 poly range) then where are all the other polys? And could these "other" polygons interfere with the deformation of the model making it harder to animate? I mean, I can open up ZBrush, load in a 100,000 polygonal sphere and sculpt away until I get a decent looking humanoid model, but the flow of polygons would be all wrong and it would animate poorly.
It does not matters for me to reduce polycounts of any highpoly model. The textures wont be destroyed and geometry would be almost exact as the original model. I am not going to do any retexturing or like that. If you are using and have already applied a bip on the model then that can be taken care of. I can re-loop or adjust the polygons while keeping the underlying textures intact. There is absolutely nod need for any re-work. If the model is not animating then the polygons and edges will be adjusted so that they can animate properly. I can convert any high poly model into a lowpoly model and still take care that no degradation takes place or there is no need for re-work.
Quote:
but the flow of polygons would be all wrong and it would animate poorly.
I will re-layout the polygons and so all the problems that you mention are nothing for me. But that has to be done as an extra step and you can guess what I am offering/expecting 
.
Well, you keep saying that this is "no problem" and the like, but it simply is not so. If the model is already animated and you change the vertex number order in any manner or add/delete vertices then you have a bit of a mess and have to do a bit of re-work to get the model re-animated.
In most cases, adding/deleting geometry (such as adding edge loops, etc) will mess up the UV map (portions or perhaps the entire thing) and force you to rework portions of the UV map.
Reducing the polygon count on a higher polygonal model is not difficult. I do it frequently. However, it is a bit of work in that it is not just the geometry that you have to work with but, as talked about previously, the UV map and, if the model is animated, the animation as well. Yes, there are tools out there to help, but in most cases, even with these tools, you have to do some hand tweaking.
In any case, you are missing the point (I believe). All I am saying is that there are a lot of unknowns about this model. It has a mid-range poly count but looks like a low-poly model. It has a decent sized skin (1024 x 1024), but it looks like a model with a 512 x 512 skin. Because all we can see are the textured shots, we cannot see the wires and therefore we don't know how well the model is constructed.
Yes, I could re-do the topology. Yes, I could rather quickly do a new UV from scratch (it would really only take a few minutes). None of this is the point. The best way to model is to get it right from the start. He showed the model here and I brought up my concerns. That is all. Whatever you can do with a high-poly model, etc, is of no concern to this thread.
Posted By: msl_manni
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 17:31
Well I am unable to satisfy you.
1. No need for re UV-mapping.
2. No need for Re-vertex generation.
3. No need for adding edge-loops.
4. If you are using a bone or bip animation and have them handy then no need for reanimating.
All these things will be done in a single step by hand. Without using any software or redoing anything. If you are not understading then yet then I am sorry to say that I fail to put forward my speciality.
I have already offered my services if the concerned party needs my help. Other than that I cant do anything to convience you.
As an example, if you go from a 5000 polygonal model to a 2000 polygonal model then the number of vertices change. As a result, you would need to re-assign your vertices to your bones. If you go from a 5000 polygonal model to a 2000 polygonal model then the edge boundaries of the UV map will change and, as a result, the UV map will become a mess. The result is you will have to re-create the UV map or fix the problems on the current one. I am not saying this is difficult work. I am just saying that it is not as you say it is. I am not trying to stop anyone from using your services. I could care less if they do or don't. All I am saying is none of this (including what I am saying) has anything to do with the original intent of this thread, so perhaps both of us should just shut up.
Posted By: msl_manni
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 17:43
please mind your language.
You seem to assume everything to your liking. The modeler has already said that the texture is of 1024x1024 and yet you assume that it is of 512x512.
When I say that I am not going to re-uv or anything that you know of then still you insist that I am wrong. I think that you should appologise for this. You could challenge me by sending any model and see what I can do with it. Instead you talking [censored].
Quote:
The modeler has already said that the texture is of 1024x1024 and yet you assume that it is of 512x512.
Please learn to read. I never said that it was a 512 x 512 texture. Here is my quote:
Quote:
It has a decent sized skin (1024 x 1024), but it looks like a model with a 512 x 512 skin.
Notice that I said, "It has a decent sized skin (1024 x 1024)". What does that mean? It means that I fully recognize that the skin used is 1024 x 1024 pixels (as he says in his original post). However, the details on the texture (or lack, thereof) do not make the model LOOK like it is using a 1024 skin, but rather one that LOOKS like a 512 skin. Get your facts straight or learn to read.
Quote:
please mind your language.
I did not cuss or swear. And, if you read what I wrote, then you will see that I told us BOTH to SHUT UP (not just you). The word "shut" is a common English word. It is not slang and it is not improper. It means: to close. To "shut up" is to stop speaking because the mouth is closed. In this case, it would mean to stop posting off topic in this thread and, yeah, I need to heed my own advice .
Quote:
When I say that I am not going to re-uv or anything that you know of then still you insist that I am wrong.
You're right. I am insisting that you are wrong or that you are over-simplifying the process. If I am wrong ... oh, well.
Quote:
I think that you should appologise for this.
Keep thinking. It will do you good. However, prove me wrong and I will. But your insistence does not prove anything. I can insist that I can fly, but that does not make it so.
Quote:
You could challenge me by sending any model and see what I can do with it. Instead you talking [censored].
Now who has to watch their language? Nothing I wrote had to be censored. Sheesh.
No. Sending you a model would prove nothing. I would not be able to see the process. I would only get back a completed model. Besides, I don't need you for this. I can easily do this myself. I was never doubting that you (or about anyone else) could reduce polygon counts on a model, do UV maps or any of that. I was only contending with your concept of being able to significantly reduce a mesh and not have to touch the UV map at all. There is always an in-between step from the original to the reduced model. It could be doing it by hand (i.e. a new UV map or tweaking the original) or using something like XSI's Gater to transfer the UV map.
No, go play nice somewhere. I don't intend to (play nice, that is ).
Posted By: frazzle
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 17:57
As for the model itself, this looks done quite properly as far as I can look into it due to the small picture
About the amount of polies, standards have rised thus putting in a 'few' extra polies wouldn't hurt AFAIK.
Cheers
Frazzle
Posted By: ryangregory
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 18:54
hi, Thanks for all the great responses. I agrre with most that 5000 polys is a bit too much, however my client asked for a 10,000 poly model or a 5,000 poly depending on the time constraints. I didnt have much time or referance to go on and agree that the model could have been better.
Cheers
Ryan.
Hi Ryan,
The model is good. Don't get me wrong. There is, these days, nothing wrong with a 5000 poly count model, either. The problem (from my perspective) is that the 5000 polys could have been used a bit better (i.e. re-look at the shoulders).
I am a bit confused by these two statements, though:
Quote:
I may be putting this up for sale, I'd like to know if this work is good enough for that and if so how much should models of this quality cost?
Quote:
however my client asked for a 10,000 poly model or a 5,000 poly depending on the time constraints.
If you made this model for a client, why are you considering selling it also?
Posted By: ryangregory
Re: Athlete Model - 02/16/08 19:43
hi, Fair question, He just wants the rite to use it in his game, he said I have full rites to the model and how I use it, rest assured I would never sell a clients model without their consent.
Cheers
Ryan
Cool! I like those kinds of deals
.
Posted By: msl_manni
Re: Athlete Model - 02/17/08 04:32
Dan, you are right about not being able to see the process. I dont want to disclose it for anybody.
But on for the record I would like to emphasise that it is a special process done in max and I am proud of the process that I have mastered. And if for any reason, anybody wants my services then they can contact me.
Posted By: Andvari
Re: Athlete Model - 02/17/08 08:38
Well, it's not that hard to reduce the polycount when the model is textured.
You just have to weld some vertices on the mesh and then, under the Edit UVW Map modifier, weld the UVW vertices that are broken after the poly reduction.
Let me show an example
We are going to weld the 4 vertices marked in red
When the vertices are merged, the texture looks texture, cause the UVW vertices are broken
Just Weld the broken UVW vertices and voila!
Posted By: msl_manni
Re: Athlete Model - 02/17/08 09:12
Andvari Sir, Its more simpler than you have described. I dont touch the UVW map in polyreduction process. I layout new loops and still dont do any kind of welding or texture mapping.
OK. OK. I don't remember this being a thread for msl_manni to toot his own horn and to offer his services. What you need to do is go to the Jobs Wanted portion of this forum and offer your services there. There are MANY of us here that could have taken over this thread and said something like, "Me! Me! Send your work to ME!" but we didn't do it.
Let's get back to discussing the model and answering the original posters question.
Posted By: croman
Re: Athlete Model - 02/17/08 13:50
Let me ask you something. We are creating epic action rpg...but we are not sure what performance impact will have the main character of 10k polys. We are not aiming our game on slow pc's. Any answer? Thanks
Posted By: ventilator
Re: Athlete Model - 02/17/08 13:56
rendering a model with 10k polygons isn't really a big deal for a modern gpu but gamestudio does bone animation (and stencil shadows) in software so i better would do some performance tests. bone animated 10k polygon models could get quite slow, especially if using weighted deformations.
Andvari,
You give a good (and simple) example, however the model (or portion of the model) you show is ideal for the kind of work you are talking about. However, not all corrections (or reductions in poly count) are that "soft" on the UV map. Some additions of edge loops or some deletions of vertices will traverse UV edge BOUNDARIES and this will royally mess with the UV map. I think you know what I am talking about, but I may post some images later today on this.