Post Mortem

For my final project, I wanted to research into a technique for 3D Modelling that would allow me to hone skills needed for jobs in the industry. I undertook autonomous study and tests with feedback from my specialist tutor and produced a final set of assets for submission to demonstrate the skills I had learnt and which I could use in my portfolio.

By the end of the project I was able to produce a set of modular tiles with two props that could be used to construct environments. These assets used PBR Textures to produce renders of the assets as environments.

I felt that the research I undertook was thorough, and where it wasn’t, I was able to rectify this by listening to feedback from tutors. While I am pleased with the renders, the assets themselves are flawed and there is room for improvement, both in geometry, and texturing.

If I allocated more time for it, I would have produced a user guide that enabled the tiles that I created to be more user-friendly, as, currently, they have no directions on how to use them, and are used by me to create the environments that I did for my renders.

In a previous blog post, I mentioned wanting to add grime and texture to my assets, something I felt I did not achieve last year. This is also something I feel I missed out on accomplishing with these assets too, which, ultimately, leads to a very clean, flat looking scene in some areas. The quantity of props is something that I would have liked to improve upon also.

Modular Assets: Texturing

Having UV Unwrapped and modelled the assets that I want to texture, I took them into Substance Painter to texture. This software I have previously researched into, and conducted tests to use, but had never undertaken the task on assets that needed seamless textures, so this was a task that was new to me.

Overall I am disappointed with this stage, as I felt I didn't leave myself enough time for it and the phase was rushed. There were maps I didn't use, such as an opacity map, which would have made the tube props look more realistic in the final renders. However, I was pleased with the stone brick texture. Unsure of how to accomplish it in the program, I did not make any decals for the environment, which could have added the level of detail that would make the scene look less synthetic and clean.

Prop textured in Substance Painter

Brick wall textured using a default material, and layered in Substance Painter to add grunge and grime effects.

Modular Asset: Production

I have now produced 15 assets that are modular, as well as 2 props. The modular assets have been textured progressively, as I modelled the geometry to maintain a consistent texel resolution, as well as to ensure the assets tile the texture too.

This UV Unwrap ensures that Substance Painter materials arent warped or offset to the point they're no longer seamless in their texture.

The props I have produced are to reinforce the theme of modern, industrial elements being hidden among the old, decaying underground. While these still need to be unwrapped and textured, I want to ensure the environmental assets are complete first to allow the environments to be built for renders.

Modular Asset: Constraints

In looking at assets available on the asset store, I considered a poly limit that considers the fact that these assets will be used as modular, accumulating a larger amount of polys just from the construction of environments. Each asset that is used as an environmental piece is limited to 5k polys, which allows for geometry to be detailed enough to be of a professional standard, but lacks the 10k+ polys that I have seen from other props at industry standard.

As I am able to include more geometry in these assets, I have looked at reference material, and tried to add as much detail as I can to match these images. This includes things like using Substance Painter to paint calcium buildup caused by water damage, or using alpha maps to include hanging algae from the walls and edges of the floor.

As these are game assets, I am optimising as I model, and using textures that are placeholders to UV unwrap the assets. In my tests I have done, this ensures the best tiling from Substance Painter, when implementing the PBR Materials, however, I have experienced problems with Ambient Occlusion tiling improperly due to the nature of the atlas of textures. Any grime or effects added to the materials in Substance Painter need to be tilable too, otherwise the modular asset creates a seam, so this is something that I will need to consider as I continue

Modular Asset: Pre-Production

Deciding upon using remaking my modular assets from last year, I retrieved what files I could from the project.

While the assets were still able to be used, the textures and modelling did not conform with the quality seen in professional portfolios I had looked at, or requirements cited from job listings.

Therefore, I decided to begin constructing and testing a new set of modular assets. These would have a high poly count than the previous ones, while using a texturing method that followed a PBR pipeline.

In terms of rendering, from my feedback during my presentation, and from the research into how different portfolios present their assets, I need to decide where appropriate to commit time to full, still image renders, and where to include real time rendering examples. Both I would like to include as my end deliverable. Props and assets that require evidence that I have textured and modelled them to the quality necessary to include in my porfolio would benefit from a turnaround, as this allows perspective employers to examine textures and modelling methods used, without having to open large, 3D Modelling programs.

While full renders I would like to use to show the skills I have gained in conveying mood within an environment, not just in creating assets, but how I am able to control the elements in these renders to create an atmosphere for the player who will explore them.

Modular Assets: Theming

My assets from last year used the setting of an underground sewer system for its theme and while I was happy with how they turned out, there is room for improvement which I would like to address.

Pipes

In my original piece, the pipes were a big disappointment, the texture being unrealistic and pixelated due to improper texel density compared the rest of the model. The pipes also could have had more variety in appearance to break up the monotony of the tiles.

Tiling capabilities

Unable to spend more time on them at a certain point, it was too late in the process that I realised some of the assets weren't tileable, so left minute gaps between geometry, while this was fixable with hiding the seams, I would rather the pieces were completely seamless, so as to avoid any unnecessary hiding of seams.

Rendering Method

Following my Presentation to my tutors, Chris mentioned using Real time Rendering Methods to show off the models I am making for the project. This would mean that less time would be taken to render the assets, but where I am still able to maintain the quality that I am looking to achieve.

This will require more research into doing this and does not eliminate the need for final renders. However, it ensures that I can lessen the time spent rendering, as this was something that I had allowed a lot of time for in my project milestones.

Next Step

I would like to research into tools for real time rendering, like Marmoset Toolbag and SketchFab, taking some assets that I used for testing and making an informed decision about using this method and whether it can be in lieu of renders in my portfolio

Update on Deliverable

In preparation for the Final Project presentation, I pooled my renders and tests together to evaluate where I was in my project, and what still needed to be completed.

I have undertaken tests in Modelling, PBR texturing and Sculpting, to the point where I am comfortable about where these stages belong in my pipeline as well as how they differ to the traditional methods taught in my previous two years of 3D Modelling for games.

Looking at my milestones, I had planned, by this stage in the project, to be undertaking the PBR texturing phase, but have yet to begin this. Instead, I am still in the modelling phase, modelling my final deliverable.

For my final deliverable, I wanted to showcase the skills I had learned throughout the project, while displaying an understanding of how these methods are different to traditional methods. It is for this reason that I am working to remake my assets from the 3D Modular assets module from my second year. I feel that this allows me to demonstrate how I have improved my skills in this year, as well as providing me with the opportunity to use all these skills and display in my portfolio.

Retopology

In my research into retopology methods, I found that there are more ways than using 3DS Max and the freeform tools.

ZBrush and Mudbox

ZBrush and Mudbox have automatic Retopology functions that can retopologise a sculpted object with customisation options to maintain certain topology in key areas of a model. For example, a face may need more focused topology than the body of a character. ZBrush has the option to PolyPaint to define areas that need double the amount of polys.

The problems I've found with this method is that the topology is still automated and the topology still has room for optimisation.

3DS Max Freeform tools

I found 3DS Max freeform tools ensured that I had more control over topology, but it was a very manual, time consuming method. However, it is still a viable method, but for my project, it would need to be taken into consideration the amount of time this method takes.

Retopolgised Version of sculpt

Baked Normal Map on retopologised model

Sources

Knowledge.autodesk.com. (2016). Freeform Tab 3ds Max [online] Available at: https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/3ds-max/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2016/ENU/3DSMax/files/GUID-2D8C6EFA-6073-4CCF-ABE7-E87FF6F0ADA0-htm.html [Accessed 8 Feb. 2018].

Mudbox Help (2014) [online] Available at: http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/mudbox2014/en_us/index.html?url=files/GUID-3F981486-5AAD-44BA-B1B3-84B19DA50C1E.htm,topicNumber=d30e29698 [Accessed 7 Feb. 2018].

Modeling/Sculpting Stage

The first stage in my pipeline is the Modelling and sculpting stage. My initial research tested some modelling techniques, but as per my feedback, I looked at modelling a small asset to determine the order in which I would geometry model, and sculpt.

Because I chose, also, to reevaluate the Software I used for Sculpting, I have tested a few assets, rather than just one asset, to get an idea for the advantages and disadvantages of sculpting certain things. For example, Hard Surface Modelling in 3DS Max can require a lot of polys to avoid the default "sharp" edges, but is generally easier to accomplish compared to sculpting flat surfaces in ZBrush.

Softer Edges in 3DS Max using Turbosmooth

Kukri Knife modelled in 3DS Max to test Hard Surface Modelling Techniques 

Sculpt of Mountain in ZBrush, ready for retopology

Pillar 3D Modelled in 3DS Max, then sculpted in ZBrush, and textured and baked in Substance Painter

My tests aimed to:

• Determine which methods in the modelling stage would be the most efficient
• Which methods would also allow me to produce a quality of work that is portfolio-ready. 

The Kukri Knife took significantly longer to model in 3DS Max, but produced a model that needed no retopology and came in at a lower poly count than any of the ZBrush sculpts I produced.

The mountain used ZBrush entirely to model, handling retopology after the sculpting process. I found this process the most time consuming, but could understand the necessity of it for sculpting organic modelling in a short amount of time.

The method used for the pillar involved geometry modelling in 3DS Max, then sculpting onto this primitive mesh in ZBrush. The high poly model was then baked onto the original, low poly mesh using Substance Painter, reducing the poly count to under 1000 polys.

This method ensured that the geometry was never dramatically warped during the sculpting stage, but it would depend on the complexity of the geometry being produced in the final product.

Next Step

These tests helped me to determine a workflow for this stage of the pipeline, so I would, therefore, like to stress test it. I have found that sculpting from scratch in ZBrush is not advisable with my current level of skill, and so these further tests will focus primarily on the Geometry modeling (3DS Max ) >Sculpting (ZBrush) > Baking/Retopology (Substance Painter)

There are also different methods of retopology, using different software, which I feel i can test in more depth, dedicating a post to just the findings from that.

Sculpting Program

By undertaking this testing phase again, it gave me a chance to further investigate which of the two sculpting programs to use. Whereas I previously only had access to Autodesk Mudbox, now I had the chance to use ZBrush and compare the two.

Mudbox definitely used a more familiar layout that I was accustomed to, being part of the Autodesk Software. This meant there were a lot of shared traits with 3DS Max, and I had also learned my way around the software during the first few weeks of my project.

However, while ZBrush lacked this familiarity, it made up for this in the intricacy that it allowed one to sculpt. An array of brushes were available with precise settings for each brush, and any deformations and modifications one wished to make on the model.

Setting up Reference images was intuitive, integrated into the scene so that the sculpting was easily comparable to the source images at any point during the sculpt. This is in contrast to the limited projection settings provided by Mudbox.

In terms of learning this new software, ZBrush was the more popular among 3D Modelling forums and websites. The tutorials available were more in depth and plentiful, especially on Lynda.com, my preferred means of tutorials.

Next Step

The test that I want to undertake makes use of the sculpting software, so after learning it, I would like like test some assets out in it to determine this area of the workflow I am wanting to follow. By doing this, I hope to assess whether it is preferable to sculpt from scratch in ZBrush, then retopologise, or to create a poly model in 3DS Max, then sculpt in ZBrush and return to 3DS Max to retopologise. 

The method of retopology also needs addressing, as many programs are capable of doing it, but I need to figure out which is the most efficient, effective and professionally used, if applicable.

Sources

Munoz, P. (2018). Learning ZBrushCore. [online] Lynda.com - from LinkedIn. Available at: https://www.lynda.com/ZBrush-tutorials/Welcome/648907/690587-4.html?autoplay=true [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].