RE: [Algorithms] Highest Quality Look for 3-d Characters

[Matt H. <ha...@ui...>]

Fnatastic tips!  I have not used bump maps in real-time engines enough to
make decisions about their performance.  What links or demos do you know of
that I can see more the results of such an implementation.

Best Regards,
 Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: gda...@li...
[mailto:gda...@li...]On Behalf Of Peter
Bertok
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 2:46 PM
To: gda...@li...
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] Highest Quality Look for 3-d Characters



    Try per-pixel lighting through bump-maps and DOT3 blending. I've seen
some amazing stills at Microsoft Research, where they took 1M polygon
models, reduced them to a few thousand, and stored the difference in a
bump-map. There is also silhoutte rendering, but it looks pretty complicated
to implement in practice.

    IMHO, bump-maps give the best results for the effort required to
implement them, and DX8 vertex/pixel shaders make them easier then ever.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Harmon" <ha...@ui...>
To: <gda...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 6:08 AM
Subject: RE: [Algorithms] Highest Quality Look for 3-d Characters


> Eric,
> Thank you for your excellent response.  It sounds like the lighting has
the
> biggest effect on the quality of a 3-d model.  Do you have any thoughts on
> customization to light routines to maximize visual quality?
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Matt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gda...@li...
> [mailto:gda...@li...]On Behalf Of Eric
> Maslowski
> Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 8:33 AM
> To: gda...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Algorithms] Highest Quality Look for 3-d Characters
>
>
> Well, asking on how to make something better is completely relative.
Without
> seeing what you're using as a point of reference, makes it a little
> difficult to
> assess what might be "wrong". Anyway, here's some of the things that I've
> personally encountered:
>
> - if a real-time preview program isn't an option for your artists, make
sure
> they don't judge the visual quality of the character based on renderings
but
> rather the characters appearance in the viewport. Renderings typically use
a
> form of shading that is better than what  your engine can provide.
Viewports
> typically use Garaud(sp?) shading which allows for a much more accurate
> representation of the character
>
> - When creating the character, have your artists setup a "extreme lighting
> conditions" scenario. This would include lights of high intensities in odd
> positions. This will allow your artists to better understand how light is
> falling on each polygon. In polygon modeling, each edge is extremely
> important
> for getting the right appearance if any lighting other than ambient is
used.
>
> - if your engine can handle it, use geometry detail instead of texture
> detail.
> IMO texturing detail will always look artificial and "off". It looks
> particularly odd when moving between lighting conditions since alot of the
> highlights and shadows are "burned" into the texture. If you use a little
> more
> geometry and let the lighting engine figure out the highlights and
shadows,
> then
> I personally think that the art will be better for it. Plus, your
character
> can
> then be dropped into any lighting condition without concern for the
> highlights
> and shadows looking "fake".
>
> - good animation! If a character has truly wonderful, believable
animation,
> then
> it's appearance seems to increase ten-fold. From experience, is seems that
> many
> people seem to ignore many imperfections in a model if the animation is
> really
> well done.
>
> - simpler textures. This goes along with the statement above regarding
> geometry
> detail and is mostly for characters. for environments, I think that alot
> more
> attention to detail in the textures is good if a decent mipmapping scheme
is
> used. For example, from the distance the texture looks smooth, but as you
> get
> right up to the wall it becomes course with all the nooks and crannies of
a
> typical wall. The Serious Sam engine did this very well.
>
> - Try to avoid resampling textures. This saves some cycles and provides
more
> consistent visual quality.
>
> - some form of shadows is a must in my opinion. Shadows anchor a
> character/object to the ground and provide essential depth cues. I all you
> can
> afford in terms of processing time is to drop a flat circle beneath the
> character, do it. It's far better  than nothing at all.
>
> I hope this is of some help. Take care
>
> Cheers
>
> E.
>
> Matt Harmon wrote:
>
> > When using a real-time engine that supports, for example, OpenGL and
> > DirectD3D, what is the best advice I can give to 3-d artists to make it
> look
> > as best as possible?
> >
> > I'm rendering out a 3-d character, and he looks pretty good.  I'm
> wondernig
> > how much can be done with Texture Maps, Polygon COunts/Bezier Curves,
> > Lights, Effects (Shadows, specular, etc.) to make him look even better
or
> > more realistic.
> >
> > What technologies are used to maximize the overall look of rendered
> > characters or environments?  What tricks are required in texture maps to
> > make them look best?  What is the ideal light setup?  What can I do with
> > software to increase visual quality?
> >
> > I hope my question is coming out clearly.  I'm trying to decide if a 3-d
> > character can look better, and I think it can, but how?
> >
> > HAPPY NEW YEAR!
> > matt
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> > GDA...@li...
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
> GDA...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list
>


_______________________________________________
GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
GDA...@li...
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list