X-37B Replica and doubts

[mariohm1311]

Ok, modelling masters. Do you think this is accurate enough? I still have the unsubsurfaced model, so I can still make changes easily.

Some doubts I had:

1. How would I go about making the cargo bay? Could someone teach me?

2. How do you UV unwrap such an organic shape into a rectangular one? If it isn't viable, how do you make the texture have the same shap as the UV unwrap?

3. What about the landing gear? Any trick?

PS: I'm sorry if these doubts have been already answered. I have exams and I don't have much time to check.

Edited May 28, 2015 by mariohm1311

[martinezfg11]

Are you going to create a low poly version as well? You could probably achieve the same results with less than at a tenth the current amount of polygons. As for all your other questions check here http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94638-Mod-Development-Links-Compilation-START-HERE

UV unwrapping definitely takes some practice if you've never done it before i suggest looking at some youtube videos; preferably one where the author unwraps something more than a box. Also, pieces like the wings are going to need to be separate parts in-game.

[mariohm1311]

Are you going to create a low poly version as well? You could probably achieve the same results with less than at a tenth the current amount of polygons. As for all your other questions check here http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94638-Mod-Development-Links-Compilation-START-HERE

UV unwrapping definitely takes some practice if you've never done it before i suggest looking at some youtube videos; preferably one where the author unwraps something more than a box. Also, pieces like the wings are going to need to be separate parts in-game.

1. Maybe I could reduce the subdivision in some noncritical places, but if I reduce it on the wings, tail or nose, the shading gets messed up.

2. I have done UV unwrapping before with seams and with mesh duplication. The problem here is that the shape is so rounded I don't know how to abord it.

[comham]

That is probably too high poly, yeah. when you've got less polys, smooth shading turned on and it's textured you won't be able to tell that there are less polys. Although polys don't matter a huge amount for ksp performance, so i'm told.

When placing your seams, a little bit of stretch is acceptable, don't worry about it being perfect. I hate doing UV's but it's something that has to be done.

Given the way KSP handles crafts, you'll want to split it up into (probably) nose as the command pod, cargo bay/fuel, engine, wings and control surfaces, and that means modelling the flat end caps that interface these parts

For the cargo bay, at least in blender, you'll want to separate the door geometry then model the inside by extruding the edge down inside.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

I am only a blender novice but that's how I would do it. That last step was just, with the inside edges selected, extrude then create face.

It's definitely recognisable as the X-37 shape, keep up the good work

[mariohm1311]

That is probably too high poly, yeah. when you've got less polys, smooth shading turned on and it's textured you won't be able to tell that there are less polys. Although polys don't matter a huge amount for ksp performance, so i'm told.

When placing your seams, a little bit of stretch is acceptable, don't worry about it being perfect. I hate doing UV's but it's something that has to be done.

Given the way KSP handles crafts, you'll want to split it up into (probably) nose as the command pod, cargo bay/fuel, engine, wings and control surfaces, and that means modelling the flat end caps that interface these parts

For the cargo bay, at least in blender, you'll want to separate the door geometry then model the inside by extruding the edge down inside.

http://imgur.com/a/UzjEd

I am only a blender novice but that's how I would do it. That last step was just, with the inside edges selected, extrude then create face.

It's definitely recognisable as the X-37 shape, keep up the good work

Thanks for the good response! Yeah, for the polycount apart from what you said, I was told that the CSS uses a ....ton of polygons, so I gave myself a bit of a margin to work with. It can only be seen in those places I told you, even with smoth shading, so if there's a method to subdivide just some places on some axis, I'll do it.

Another doubt, should I create the cargo bay with the unsubdivided model, or with the subdivided one? And what about the UV unwrap?

[CaptainKipard]

This looks like you used subdivision surface, and cranked it too high. Reduce it until you start seeing angles, and don't stop until you do.

[mariohm1311]

This looks like you used subdivision surface, and cranked it too high. Reduce it until you start seeing angles, and don't stop until you do.

You keep saying the same... I already see angles in the previous level, and very obvious one. How do I go about unwrapping it?

[CaptainKipard]

You keep saying the same...

Huh?

I already see angles in the previous level, and very obvious one.

I have no idea what you're looking at but this model is exactly dozens of times more complex than it needs to be for that particular shape.

If you want to make it fly you will need to make the stabilisers into separate parts, and that being the case you really shouldn't have them be part of the original pre-subdivided mesh. I can see from the topology you made it one whole mesh. That's just complicating the area at the roots of the stabilisers for no good reason at all.

The main fuselage is mostly straight but for some reason you have about a hundred edge loops all the way from the nose to the tail, where only about 25 would do with no difference in visual quality. The same goes for the edge lines running lengthwise. You could safely remove four fifths of those. The cross section is very simple. It even has flat vertical planes.

Every flat are like the wings or the back should not have a subdivided mesh at all.

TBH I don't even think subdividing is even a good idea for this thing. If you need to get the smooth shape, then one subdivision from a very low-res mesh would be enough, with a lot of cleaning up after it. In your place I'd stick to the "box modelling" method, rather than organic. The shape is simple enough to allow it. Box modelling would also let you intrude a cargo bay and cut away the doors more easily.

If you're making the wings into separate parts, you'll do well to plan your edge flow ahead of time. As it is right now the edge flow will cause a lot of very ugly lighting/smoothing artefacts if you were to simply cut the wings off along a straight line parallel to the fuselage.

You'll also need to plan your edge flow to divide control surfaces, and possibly to cut away gear bays inside for the same reason as above.

I can't think of anything else right now. As you can see you have a bit of work ahead of you. You should adjust your expectations. The shape looks great, but your workflow needs some adjustment.

How do I go about unwrapping it?

It's way too early for that question. Take your time. What's the rush? You can do it quick or you can do it right.

[mariohm1311]

Huh?

I have no idea what you're looking at but this model is exactly dozens of times more complex than it needs to be for that particular shape.

If you want to make it fly you will need to make the stabilisers into separate parts, and that being the case you really shouldn't have them be part of the original pre-subdivided mesh. I can see from the topology you made it one whole mesh. That's just complicating the area at the roots of the stabilisers for no good reason at all.

The main fuselage is mostly straight but for some reason you have about a hundred edge loops all the way from the nose to the tail, where only about 25 would do with no difference in visual quality. The same goes for the edge lines running lengthwise. You could safely remove four fifths of those. The cross section is very simple. It even has flat vertical planes.

Every flat are like the wings or the back should not have a subdivided mesh at all.

TBH I don't even think subdividing is even a good idea for this thing. If you need to get the smooth shape, then one subdivision from a very low-res mesh would be enough, with a lot of cleaning up after it. In your place I'd stick to the "box modelling" method, rather than organic. The shape is simple enough to allow it. Box modelling would also let you intrude a cargo bay and cut away the doors more easily.

If you're making the wings into separate parts, you'll do well to plan your edge flow ahead of time. As it is right now the edge flow will cause a lot of very ugly lighting/smoothing artefacts if you were to simply cut the wings off along a straight line parallel to the fuselage.

You'll also need to plan your edge flow to divide control surfaces, and possibly to cut away gear bays inside for the same reason as above.

I can't think of anything else right now. As you can see you have a bit of work ahead of you. You should adjust your expectations. The shape looks great, but your workflow needs some adjustment.

It's way too early for that question. Take your time. What's the rush? You can do it quick or you can do it right.

Thanks for all the help. I didn't want to sound annoyed, so maybe I should have measured better my words.

I can more or less see where you're going with the edge loops, so I'll try to improve that. But for the topology and the edge flow, I don't have any idea. Do you know any tutorial (basic) on that, so I can improve that?

[CaptainKipard]

I don't have any links. Every edge flow is particular to every model. it's not something I learned from tutorials, I learned it by doing. Basically you should create edges where you're going to cut the model up into parts. They have to be straight along a single plane.

If you don't know what edge flow and topology means you'll need to google these concepts.