|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Forum Rules | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#52 (permalink) |
|
Artist
![]() 73
- 6
|
Welcome raphadont!
Id be interested to see how you lit your final render, because its really dark and dosent look like your spec map is really getting much work. I think maps look alright and if you worked on the lighting for that render, It would really help the image. Hope this helps- |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 (permalink) |
|
Founder of Statspaddling
|
Wvahn: Looking good, perhaps a little bulky due to the normals. but overall it's good. Might've wanted to make the metal caps less grainy and have a bit more edge definition though
![]() JStrey: Great use of normals! The blue areas came out as a bit too desaturated, but.. I guess that's about it. Good job ![]() Grandmasta-Ed: I don't mean to bitch, but.. ![]() Your render is supposed to be 800x600 or 600x800 px. You're only allowed 90 minutes to texture, you said a few hours, but as it says 90 minutes I guess I'll let it pass, and, you watermarked a texture that no one's likely to steal, even if they were they'd only be able to get small pieces out of it. Instead it'd be better if you left them unmarked so that people may actually properly see them ![]() Ye, sorry, I got up on the wrong side of the bed this mornin'... with a beepin' phone next to me. But other than what's been mentioned above, it's a pretty neat entry. Might be a little bland and onecolored in some places, but overall it's good ![]() Raphadont: Well, I'm not sure what to crit about this one. It seems you're fairly new, and just as when I were my textures also looked the same. Don't get me wrong though, they're not bad ![]() It's just that something's missing really. I think you might've gone a bit too straightforward on the photosourcing. You might want to edit your photosourced images a bit more and paint in extra details. But, other than that it's good! Cheers!
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#58 (permalink) | |
|
Artist
![]() 73
- 6
|
Quote:
Love these challenges, cant wait for the next one. Funkdelic- Wheres your entry man, you know you wana do one! Great work guys, this is turning into a very nice thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#59 (permalink) |
|
Founder of Statspaddling
|
Steelhazard: There, back again, so let's start with the crits. I'm rather tired right now and actually accidentally turned off my computer instead of shutting IE down as I left, so they might come out as a bit half-arsed, but I'll try my best
![]() And well, where to begin.. there were actually one thing you got wrong it seems. Your texture is a 1024x1024, while this unwrap is designed for a 2:1 ratio as mentioned in the first post. That means that your model has twice the amount of detail in some directions, which might come out as quite odd. It also means that any photosourced image you placed in your map will either be stretched or compressed, though it was hardly noticable on the model ![]() The main problem with this texture though was the lack of contrast. The whole mailbox and support-beams almost looks the same allover, and have no special edge-definition/damage. It also looks like your mailbox is rather old and withered while the wood looks somewhat fine in comparison. I think you did a good job on the wood though and it looks neat with well distributed damage and wither. So overall I think this could've been a very good piece if it weren't for the metal which needs some more work ![]() Oh, and I almost forgot about the normals there. And don't worry, there's nothing really wrong with them, instead, I think they're mighty fine, although, while being nitpicky I would prolly have increased the strenght of the decoration thingy on the sides, as they don't come out to well on the model at the moment.. But that's just a minor thing ![]() Cheers!
__________________
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks | |||
Digg
|
del.icio.us
|
StumbleUpon
|
Google
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |