Jump to content
LordGood

===[TASK]=== Trees

Recommended Posts

what a surprise deciduous trees are even more difficult.

I'll get the hang of it eventually

screenshot0070.png

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LordGood said:

what a surprise deciduous trees are even more difficult.

It's difficult to find the right placement for the planes and getting the right textures.

A trick I found to make trees seem more natural its placing the planes in an upward angle with a bend. Took forever to figure this out :brickwall:

Spoiler

77974302_treeexample.thumb.png.758a3ef6b6a3afb8e4b2c5211529c32f.pngscreenshot0087.thumb.png.ce82b0716285fece8fe6f6aa19d0f270.png

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

The planes should mostly be at a 45 degree-ish angle. 

Whew imagine if it were this simple, that would be lovely

 

4 hours ago, Bigtiger said:

A trick I found to make trees seem more natural its placing the planes in an upward angle with a bend. Took forever to figure this out :brickwall:

I think you got such good results here because the tree's actual growth patterns do complement that branch structure, here they have more of a droop down which leaves some flattening around the crown. My textures a bit on the opaque side so the consequence of flat geometry is a bit more extreme than with my previous evergreens, and also makes those upward angles look horrific lol

definitely more work to be done, but it's a start

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LordGood said:

Whew imagine if it were this simple, that would be lovely

 

Random angles look messy. The 45 degree angles of, say, the carobs, give ther best illusion of fullness, while angling the planes directly at the standard camera view.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dmzerocold said:

@LordGood could you please let me know where can i find blender files of this artworks?

AFAIK no blend files were committed.

5 hours ago, Loki1950 said:

BTW there is a blender plug in for generating trees much more polys than we require though.

Enjoy the Choice :)

Which means you have to do cleaning work to stay under 800 polys. Might be worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Random angles look messy. The 45 degree angles of, say, the carobs, give ther best illusion of fullness, while angling the planes directly at the standard camera view.

That's how you get all the trees to look the same, poly structure needs to follow the branch structure. Only one side of these 45 degree branches are going to be facing the camera, the others will look horribly stretched, since they will be facing edgewise towards the camera. Curved branch structures have fewer harsh edges and breaks, and will complement the rotation of the camera rather than cut against it.

There is plenty of trial and error in this process, if we could have unique trees and keep to the simplicity of 45 degree foliage we'd have done so

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm neither an artist, nor a biologist, nor a mathematician, however, has anyone tried Fibonacci numbers? They avoid the repetitiveness of fixed angles and approximate the golden ratio. Besides, “Fibonacci sequences appear in biological settings, such as branching in trees”, according to its Wikipedia page.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LordGood, @stanislas69, I have one more silly question. So you double the faces and invert the normals right? But I see that you leave a tiny gap between the 2 faces. Is this actually necessary? Do the faces interfere with each other even if their normals are facing opposite directions? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

@LordGood, @stanislas69, I have one more silly question. So you double the faces and invert the normals right? But I see that you leave a tiny gap between the 2 faces. Is this actually necessary? Do the faces interfere with each other even if their normals are facing opposite directions? 

Yes they do

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am quite sure you will vehemently disagree, but I figured it could be said anyway. I think doubling the faces and inverting the normals should be unnecessary. This isn't a FPS, so you really don't need the tree to look good at every possible angle (especially from not below the canopy). You're doubling the triangles and doubling the transparent faces to render. (If you also worry about reflections in water, the water renderer already renders the back face for you, {though something needs done to add a darkness/shadow to this rendering, the reflection is too bright, but that's an aside}).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I am quite sure you will vehemently disagree, but I figured it could be said anyway. I think doubling the faces and inverting the normals should be unnecessary. This isn't a FPS, so you really don't need the tree to look good at every possible angle (especially from not below the canopy). You're doubling the triangles and doubling the transparent faces to render. (If you also worry about reflections in water, the water renderer already renders the back face for you, {though something needs done to add a darkness/shadow to this rendering, the reflection is too bright, but that's an aside}).

I didn't know the water would render the blackface. Then my only concern would be the cinema manager when rendering cutscenes. But else yes they might be unnecessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2019 at 8:56 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I am quite sure you will vehemently disagree, but I figured it could be said anyway.

>:CC

Yeah I would say if at all, be extremely conservative about how many polys go underneath, as long as you can reasonably cover the canopy. not waste more than say 64 tris? I know some of my new ones are a bit excessive. Still havent outshone the cretan date or tropical palms though so thats a plus lol

 

screenshot0071.png

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I will mention that @Enrique used auto-smooth for the canopy faces on his oaks and other "newer" trees. The benefit of this is that those faces don't immediately darken when the sun is rotated in a different direction than standard. He applied this smoothing to the wheat models as well, which helped make their self-shadowing look nicer too and didn't make them blah out when rotated. This also gave a nice pseudo-transparency effect. See the trees in Britannic Road.

 

Awesome baobabs, btw. Should look awesome on the African savanna maps!

screenshot0004.jpg

Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're not quite done but I'll commit what i have. I'd like a full age range for the trees just in case code supports growth, also for more gradual forestation

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

 auto-smooth

its a mix between auto smooth and an applied normal edit modifier, I thought that was for reorienting normals on messy canopies, but lo and behold

screenshot0073.png

ah crap now i need to fix all the other trees

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

@Sundiata, when can we get your awesome new "African" huts and stuff? With Lordgood's baobabs, I'm really looking forward to punching up the savanna maps!

Ah yes, soon! I keep obsessing about the acacia, lol... Modeling trees is hard... I'll be sending more huts and stuff very soon!

At least I just finished the first new Acacia variant, I think... I read something about keeping it under 800 tris, so I kept it at 784 :P ... The other variants will be simpler/smaller and have less tris. This is just the mother acacia.

1148824995_Acaciatesting.thumb.jpg.d00dad7a359b8ad3a180a05d4a80c87f.jpg

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...