Topic awaiting preservation: Human Head (~150k)

Alright, like I said in the other thread, I'm planning on making a live-forum-tutorial for making a head. I had a couple hours today, so I thought I'd practice making a head. Here's what I got:



I just started with a box, made a few cuts, and went from there. Its quick, and I didn't use any reference, so its probably not quite proportional. Texturing was a 5 minute job in photoshop, not going for photo-real here.
Seems like it turned out alright, comments? critiques?

I figure I'll try to post something new every couple weeks or so, to get this forum more active. (Hopefully others will follow in suit)

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

dunno much-uh-tall about 3d modelling but you said rip aaprt a picture right? ok.

his eyes are huge and his ocular cavity small, know what I'm saying? he's got meat up in his eyelid areas where there ought not be any.

his nose is pretty blocky on the end and his cheek bones should maybe stick out farther than the bags under his eyes.

the flat spot directly under his nose in tandem with the indentions where the Fu Manchu stash would go conspire to make him a little birth defected

chin's a bit polygonal

skin texture is grainy

oh yeah, his ear is melting. Put your finger in your ear, fingernail toward your back, pad towrd yo front, go on... I'll wait. Now, now flick finger toward your front. where's that thing? the nubbin? melted right off.

ha! see if you ever ask me to rip somethin again fartknocker. It's light years ahead of what I can even conceive of me doing in a 3d app though. Glad to see more of your stuff, I liked the water as well.




Jason

Definitely not bad for good ol' fashioned box-modeling. Care to post a wire?

If you had used a reference pic or two, I think you would have totally nailed it.

Wireframe:



Polygons:

I've been staring at the "quad" wireframe ever since you posted it. I'm still not quite sure how to articulate.

The geometry kinda sucks pretty bad in a few place. The top of the head for one. Between the nose and mouth for another. Those two spots really stick out as nasty.

:ugh:

I can see the problem between the nose and the mouth (and can/will fix it), but please go into detail about whats wrong at the top of the head.

Explaining what and why I think the top of the head is wrong is a tough one. Rather than fumble with words, I quickly tossed together a shitty example of "better" geometry.



Maybe you can see the differences.
Maybe I'm just talking out my ass and it's just a personal difference in style.

edit: Got to looking closer. The only differences I am now seeing are in the curves between the faces/polys. So now it's starting to look more like a proportions deal. I don't know. I'm confusing myself.


[This message has been edited by warjournal (edited 10-23-2002).]

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

I think I finally figured out why the top of the head looks so funny to me. Looks wider than deep (this could very well be a trick due to perspective, though). To add to that, there is the grid that caps the top of the head - the quads are 10 wide and 4 deep. Most heads that I've seen have the cap closer to 8 wide x 10 deep or abouts.

So it basically boils down to proportions. Nothing too terrible.

To tell you the truth, InI, I don't know much about edgeloops or modeling entirely in quads. To me, a quad is just 2 triangles. Using planar quads is a waste of possible curvature. Like the difference between a longitude-latitude sphere and a geodesic sphere.

For a prounced example of my triangle style, take a peak at Eustace Banks. I did quite a bit of playing with him (quads vs. tri), and I can get same proportions, and better "rolling" curves with far less faces. Eustace in action. For a low-poly character (1098 faces), the extra TLC I have him is definitely worth it. (Although he could use a few extra faces in his head and crotch.)

Dan, I would like to take a crack at geodesicing your head, if you don't mind. It looks like a good exercise. Care to post obj/3ds or e-mailing it to me?


[This message has been edited by warjournal (edited 10-23-2002).]

Emailed.

Thank you for posting that you e-mailed it. I quickly deleted it thinking it was spam.
When I get something with it, I'll pong it right back at ya.

Been seeing this tutorial being tossed around quite a bit lately: Subdvision Head Mode. Also been seeing a lot of Joan of Arc as well.

How sub-d modeling differes from box-modeling is now clear to me.

I also did some playing around with MeshSmooth. I'm pretty sure I figured out why people like to have quads when MeshSmooth will be used in the final -- because MeshSmooth works on visible lines. If you do an Auto Edge before MeshSmooth, you'll get some *serious* funkiness. However, no funkiness if you tell MeshSmooth to work on triangles. Even though I now understand this, I still don't totally understand why some people are do draconian about not having any tris at all. (In the head tutorial, the guy does say a that a tri will cause funkiness when animating. Not sure how much stock I put into that statement.)

Dan, I played with your model some more. I think I've taken it about as far as I care to. I'll e-mail it to you one of these days.

heh... I think we could all use a few more faces in the crotch...


Code - CGI - links - DHTML - Javascript - Perl - programming - Magic - http://www.twistedport.com
ICQ: 67751342

I see broken image!