Mortal Monkey on 6/12/2006 at 16:35
Quote Posted by Para?noid
I don't know much but I know that something like MAX is complete overkill for what you need!
Indeed. Even anim8or would be good enough if you only need a simple render of a city. It doesn't do fog (although you could use the depth-rendering option and photoshop to make linear fog), nor does it do bump/normal maps, reflection, shadows, refraction, caustics or any other of them fancy things. But if you're only going to use the image as a reference, those things hardly matter.
If you don't want to spend your greens on a pre-built city though, you can fairly easily generate a fractal 'city' with POV-Ray. POV-Ray is not a modelling program, it's a compiler. I takes something like this:
Code:
#include "colors.inc"
#declare bldsize = 4;
#declare gap = 2;
#declare heightvariance = 5;
#declare rs = seed( 4459 );
background { color Black }
camera
{
location <-40, 9, -18>
angle 55
look_at <15, 15, 20>
}
plane
{
y, 0
pigment { White }
}
light_source { <-35, 20, 24> color White }
light_source { <7, 60, -40> color Blue }
light_source { <0, 80, 0> color White }
#macro building( loc, iters )
#if (iters)
building( loc, iters - 1 )
building( loc + (bldsize + gap) * x, iters - 1 )
building( loc + (bldsize + gap) * z, iters - 1 )
building( loc + (bldsize + gap) * (x + z), iters - 1)
#else
box // Simple box-shaped building
{
<loc.x, loc.y, loc.z>
<loc.x + bldsize, loc.y + bldsize + bldsize * heightvariance * rand(rs), loc.z + bldsize > // bldsize width, random height
pigment { White }
}
#end
#end
// Build 4^7 buildings
building( <0, 0, 0>, 7 )
and turns it into an image like this:
Inline Image:
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/7002/boxvillekr3.pngThe good thing is, once you've got the basic algorithm in place, it's easy to change how it constructs the city. For instance, I could easily make it do only half the buildings (that is, if I wasn't too retarded to figure out why "#if (rand(rs2) < 0.5)" doesn't work), or change the size of the buildings. I could even use another algorithm within the first to carve out details like windows, doors and balconies on each building.
It also does all them fancy things like fog and volumetric light, I just didn't bother to set them up in this scene.
Agent Subterfuge on 6/12/2006 at 17:36
There you go, fairly balanced set of viewpoints provided. Cant really agree on Softs like MAX or Maya being overkill, since they let you do as much or as little as you want, while leaving the way open for further development. I suppose it boils down to how far you'd like to go with your city, and the quality of the material you need generated as raw assets from the 3d soft.
If you're simply looking to generate blocks, then you can rest easy with any number of free programs available. If you're looking to light, foggify, and pretty much render your scene with a bit more detail, then Max Maya and all the other higher end titles give you that freedom. You have a broad range workflow-wise, basically, where you can define where youre most comfortable, as opposed to being constrained to a specific set of things you must do to get where youre going.
Gestalt on 6/12/2006 at 17:53
Nice work, Aircraftkiller.
I'm working on an isometric section of a town, but I've only got (
http://flickr.com/photos/pantechnician/315808852/) one building close to complete so far and I haven't had any free time for the last month or so.
Ziemanskye on 6/12/2006 at 18:48
Just on the software for 3d modelling front.
A) Google earth - people have been building bits of real places, and now the place supports steaming textures (acording to their blurb anyway) it might be possible to go for a walk in assorted "real" places to see if you can find anything to take pictures of. Save you having to build it yourself. And it's compatible with GoogleSketchup (that's the free version of it).
B) Bryce. Seems to be popular for (sci-fi) city scenes, and is cheap compared to Max or Maya. There's a version on a coverdisc of the magazine 3DWorld, about 6 issues back I think, if they haven't sold out. £9+p&p for $500 of software strikes me as an acceptable trade off. Issue had a tutorial on how to use the software to create a basic city scene too, if I remember right.
C) there's a few other things that might be worth checking out, but I can never remember the names of. They come under "Pre-proction" modelling programs, designed mostly for use by non-3D-Modelling professionals to mock up scenes for movies to see how things shoudl flow. Might be worth giving it a google and see if anything intersting come out of it.
Gestalt on 6/12/2006 at 19:11
Assuming it doesn't need to be a high-quality rendering or something, you could also just use the editor from a game you already own to mock something up. There's a neat example of someone using the Source Engine for architectural visualization (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tqsk4WARk2I) here.
Hewer on 6/12/2006 at 19:22
Wings 3D. (
http://www.wings3d.com/index.php)
I would recommend Blender, but Blender has a much harder interface to learn besides having a whole bunch of stuff you'll never use. I'm not as familiar with Wings, and it doesn't have the support or community that Blender does either, but from everything I hear, it's a great little app.
If you want to go more commercial (Wings and Blender are both Open Source), look into Silo. (
http://www.nevercenter.com/silo/) They have a demo version that limits how many polys you can save, but the cost of the whole program is about $110.
As far as what technique to use, a lot can be done with just making simple rectangular buildings then texturing, bumpmapping and lighting them cleverly. You'll need to make lamp posts and fire hydrants and stuff as their own models, but brick walls, windows, architectural details, etc... can just be textured. Especially if it's just background stuff you can cheat and get away with a lot.
Stitch on 6/12/2006 at 21:32
SELECTED REPLIES
(but thanks to all)
Quote Posted by Agent Subterfuge
Anyway, I'm keen on seeing this magical world of yours. Bust out some conceptual imagery why dont you?
That's the problem, mang. I'm keen to see this shit too.
Squares with textures tossed on won't do, if that were all I needed I'd simply draw it. I actually want to be able to see how light sources fall on overhangs and steps leading up to buildings and whatnot.
Quote Posted by Shayde
Just a suggestion, why do you have to do everything yourself?
Bringing an artist skilled in 3D modeling on board could benefit your project.
Agreed, and I'm considering looking locally for someone talented in this area. The problem is obviously there's no money in it at this point in time and it's not easy finding someone committed to putting in the hours pro bono for a project like this.
While this certainly is my baby, I'm not the only one involved. I've got a guy who gives me feedback on the visuals and our very own Scots_Taffer has been invaluable as script editor (thanks d00d :cool:)
Quote Posted by Gestalt
A non-3d alternative might be to wander around town with a reasonably-priced digital camera and then go over the images in photoshop later. That's assuming you have some skill with cameras and photoshop, though, and that you live somewhere remotely resembling where your story takes place.
Well, photoshopping existing photos wouldn't work because there is literally no place on earth like the city I've envisioned. Using photos of Eastern Block cities as a jumping off point for sketching would work--indeed, I've amassed quite the collection of reference shots--but right now I simply lack the skill to do even that.
Quote Posted by Gestalt
Assuming it doesn't need to be a high-quality rendering or something, you could also just use the editor from a game you already own to mock something up..
I've actually wondered about this option, as the graphics of HL2 are perfectly adequate for my purposes, as long as the engine supports fog and placed light sources.
A program that can generate cell-shaded images would be a plus, too. If done correctly then I might be able to skip drawing the backgrounds altogether.
I realize my demands are naive and I'm basically asking for a solution that does all the work for me, but I'm trying to gauge what my options are at this point.
Hewer on 6/12/2006 at 22:25
Unless you've got experience using game level editing software, then it'll probably be easier to do what you want with a 3D app. I don't know enough about the other two programs I mentioned before, but I know Blender will render with cel shading.
It's kind of hard to know what to recommend when there's nothing to show what kind of style you're after. I'd be interested in seeing some art too.
Mortal Monkey on 6/12/2006 at 22:41
Cinema 4D does cell renders. The limitations on the trial version is a watermark (that you can easily remove by rendering the scene twice), and that you can't save anything. That includes saving rendered pictures, so you'll have to use the good ol' printscreen button.
And don't forget - you can use a combination of any and all of the free options, IE POV-Ray or Bryce 5 for the background, a photograph for the sky (those are a bitch to get right in any modelling program I know of... a bit better in Bryce, but still) and 3DS MAX for the foreground.
If you want it all cell shaded it's a bit tougher, but with AccuTrans 3D you should be able to convert just about any model to 3DS and import it in Cinema 4D.
jay pettitt on 6/12/2006 at 23:21
It's been a while but Cinema 4D always used to be the dark horse of 3D; in an ideal world all software would be so good. While everyone else strives for ever more boggling complexity, C4D sticks with elegant, logical and quality. That said Max and Maya are industry standard and learning anything else is a waste of time. Anyone cosy with Lightwave or Rhino will disagree.
If it was me I'd be inclined to make an actual model using things and stuff and craft knives - or alternatively do what Shayde says. But not in that order.
