Sumea Challenge #2

when you say Techno Soldier any time period .. does that mean pretty much anything that has a weapon?

quote:"The model should be created with polygons - triangles and planar quads - do not use any 5+ sided polygons."

Ok this rule makes no sence, what possible difference does this make unless you mean the polycount limit should be 6000 triangles.

Also the topic isnt descriptive enough,
Is it a human wearing futuritic armour
Can it be a alien or other creature wearing futuristic armour
Can it be a techno DJ/clubber who happens to be a soldier
Is it a mech

Pointy: I think that is just so its easier to view the mesh for judgeing purposes as its all the same triangle countno matter what the structure.

Could you specify wether textures need to be handmade only. Please no photo sourcing, or at least make it compulsory that you have to say if you used photosourcing.
We don't need to model a weapon with it right?

Cool topic btw. Thanks for the support with this challenge Rod.

Dean Ferguson - 3D/2D Artist

http://www.inkmancomic.com/dean/Portfolio/index.html

Regarding the polycount question.. I think it means the polycount needs to be 3000 triangles.. Using either triangular or quad based polies (poly can be any number of sides)

I'm not sure I agree with the photosourcing thing - i hand paint my stuff, dont like photosourcing, but in the end the only thing that matters is the final product, not how it was done.

Topic seems a bit broad too, not saying i'm unhappy with it, but I think some stronger guidelines may be good.

Yes, it is meant to be 3000 triangles. The reason I said to use polygons specifically is because I didn't want people to make a nurb mesh like in the sample thread. Twisted quads and 5+ sided polygons are illegal game art because the engine has to spilt them arbitrarily and this can produce undesired results.

Re photo source: This is a quite valid way to create textures. However if the photos aren't cleaned and touched up enough they won't look very good and this will affect their rating.

I'll update the brief accordingly.

Regards,

Rod.

cool, just colouring the concept now. this will be good fun :)

Make sure you all check out the reference thread....

[url]http://www.sumea.com.au/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=411[/url]

Rod.

I've sent an email to most of the modellers on Sumea, so hopefully there'll be more challengers this time.. and yeh, the topic is definately cool. Can't wait to see what people come up with! Should be very, very interesting!

you gonna join in the fun souri? :)

personal preference would be for everyone to be using the same 'concept' as to make it a bit more of a level playing field... but anyway

surgest 'jim burns' for people looking for concepts, hmmn, actully (glances at 400kg of reference books) think there might be some 'amano yoshitaka' stuff in there....

DSC

I would have gone the other way myself and said that you can be inspired by others work but the concept must be your own original design.

Its easy to find something cool, but to make it from scratch, thats a different matter.

Pantmonger

[img]http://home.iprimus.com.au/evilbunny/Jagged/GamaPantsWeb.gif[/img]

The problem is that not everyone would be able to complete adequate concept designs. I know this is a key component to creating game art but I wanted to make sure everyone could have a go.

Rod.

Didn't mean to say photo sourcing isnt a valid way of doing textures, its a waste of time hand drawing somethings when you can just snap away and fix it up.

I just thought that since its a challenge based on our skills as modellers/texturers that its a more accurate gauge of those skills if we don't use photosourcing or at least have to specify if we did.

I agree with Pants on the original design comment I would like to see the ideas everyone has out there, but it might leave out a few people.

Dean Ferguson - 3D/2D Artist

http://www.inkmancomic.com/dean/Portfolio/index.html

Well i think that it should be however the artist wants to do it.
If he/she wants to photosource thats fine.
Boths methods have advantages and disadvantages.
A developer really wouldn't care (i would think anyway) which method you use so long as the end product is good.
I will probably join in but mine won't be as good as anybody elses.
So does it need to be a bi-ped or can it it something like the tank at the end of ghost in the shell?

"A developer really wouldn't care (i would think anyway) which method you use so long as the end product is good."

Well that would depend on how you got your hands on the original photos. If you did not take them your self and you don't have permission from the one that did, then you are in breach of copyright.
Thats the kind of thing that the average Dev does care about.

Pantmonger

[img]http://home.iprimus.com.au/Evilbunny/Jagged/GamaPantsWeb.gif[/img]

If you create the textures using photos and sources that aren't licensed you are safe as long as you've changed it enough so that it's isn't recognisable as the source (I think legally it's like 25% difference or similar). If an artist takes a photo and just planarmaps it to a mesh then they deserve to be sued.

Photos aren't an 'easy' solution as it takes quite a lot of work to integrate it adequately onto the mesh so the lighting, depth and colours are believable. Photos can be a great basis for a texture allowing you to get that 'realistic' edge that would take hours and hours of 2D 'rendering'.

From my experience sourcing 'unlicensed' reference is common practice when creating game art since it is so dramatically changed before it's considered finished.

>So does it need to be a bi-ped or can it it something like the tank at the end of ghost in the shell?

I think that is bordering on a vehicle rather then a soldier, it's got to be an autonomous soldier - not driven.

Rod.

Hey guys,

Just to clear up the confusion, I use photo sourcing myself for certain models and maps, its an excellent way of creating textures in development, Max Payne for example.

what I was trying to say was for a "challenge" i believe its a more accurate representation of your skills if you only hand draw, but hey its not my comp so I'll do it my way and others can do it theirs.

Check out my all terrain vehicle in the exhibition thread, chockers full of photosource goodness. :P

Wonder how many people here knew about the copyright issue too, didn't realise about the 25% thing, good to know Rod.

God I high jacked the damn thread, argh !! Back to the sexy challenge.

Dean Ferguson - 3D/2D Artist

http://www.inkmancomic.com/dean/Portfolio/index.html

quote:Originally posted by rgreen

>So does it need to be a bi-ped or can it it something like the tank at the end of ghost in the shell?

I think that is bordering on a vehicle rather then a soldier, it's got to be an autonomous soldier - not driven.

The tank at the end of ghost in the shell didn't have a driver. The guy in there was fused with the tankand was part of it.
I just want to know how "human" it has to look.
Can it be like a dog robot like AMEE from red planet?

i think its a great idea, the ambiguous design element gives the freedom seldom achieved in project work and makes everyone get off there butts and work on there own ideas

nannoo nannoo

Meatex: I think the tanks is more of a vehicle with human components than a human with vehicle components, bit of a stretch to say its a soldier. Didn't realise it was actually fused in there, nasty...cool.

I love the open ended style of the comp.

"The tank at the end of ghost in the shell didn't have a driver. The guy in there was fused with the tankand was part of it"

My understanding of Ghost in the Shell is that no one is ever permentantly fused with any machine, they can plug into robots, but they are not part of them. anyway.
Where this distinction all gets weird is also from Ghost in the Shell in the Manga and TV anime series there are little supamobile spider tanks called Fuchikoma, they can be controled from within, but are also independant. So they are by def techno soldiers. But to keep it simple I'll prob go for the biped.

Pantmonger

a soldier doesnt have to be human in my oppinion, but at what point does it become a droid?
i think any organic (meaning) living element then therefore cyborg.
but then we can down the what is life arguement.

nannoo nannoo

Im going to be anal cause im such a keeno.

Cyborg is anything that was once a living thing that has had Hardware added.

Bio-mechanoid is any constructed machine that has living organic parts.

I hate that Hollywood always gets this wrong.

Pantmonger

quote:Originally posted by Pantmonger


My understanding of Ghost in the Shell is that no one is ever permentantly fused with any machine, they can plug into robots, but they are not part of them.

I reckon that he was in there for good
I mean the guy looked like he had only an upper body and all the wires and cables and shit coming out of him and going into the tank.
He wouldn't be getting out of there any time soon.
anyways
so will it be a soldier that was at least at some point human?

when is this cut off date for this one?
*fingers crossed* please be more a than a month
Also imho i think to keep a level playing field the soldier should be restricted to a biped of some description, it makes it hard to compare a tank verses a human soldier.

The closing date is three weeks from the start of the challenge.

FINISH DATE: End of the day Friday 4th April (3 Weeks Total)

OK, some clarification on the soldier vs Tank debate:
A tank type character is OK as long as we can visually identify that it is being controlled by an organic creature. So no pure tanks with the statement "There's a guys brain in side" ... if it's got a brain show it (i.e. Krang TMNT) So it's got to be self aware and visually so - Not just a vehicle.

Does this help or just add more confusion? ;)

Rod.

Helped me, thanks for the clarification, I think that things got a bit confused because one of the ref images looks very Mech.

Pantmonger

sorry folks, i gots ta disagree with you, i think the first challenge was a better idea.... one concept

sure the creativity side is good if you design your own concept but wouldn't you be modelling to a given concept if you were working in a game co. ?
and there may be issues when judging time comes round....
thats just my 2 cents

Peter Gillespie
www.3dluvr.com/eagor

Yeah you would be modelling from given concepts in development, but the fact that you can conceive, model, texture is a big thing for alot of us and I myself enjoy modelling my own concepts when its just for a challenge.

The challenge says model and texture so the only things that really should be judged are the those, not the concept anyway.

MESH:
-its use of polys
-their distribution
-its ability to animate well without deforming badly

UVW MAPPING:
-how well set out
-use of space
-seams created
-stretching

TEXTURES:
-this is different as no style has been set, so if someone does a cartoony one and another does realistic they should be judged according to there style.

The concept isn't being judged just the end product, saying that, if you concept a cow with guns and model it like a busty women you obviously did something wrong.

I tend to think most of the people saying why conceive your own are worried that if there concept isnt as good as others they might lose, don't its not about the concept.

Malus is correct. The quality of the concepts will not be considered when judging the entry. The focus will be on Modelling and Texturing (and as Malus said this includes good quality UVing). This is why I tried to provide some reference for the challenge, if someone creates a model directly from those images they won't be penalised. We didn't want to ostracise anyone from the challenge but wanted to give everyone enough freedom to create their own personal entry.

In any case we will see the results at the end of the challenge, and so far I think they are coming along quite nicely. Keep up the good work guys![:D]

Rod.