Page 1 of 3

M4A1 model *Updated*

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:28 pm
by Samio
A couple of you said the model needed alot of details even if I'm going to skin it so....that's what I did. Here it is with more attention to detail put into it. Hope you like it.

Image

Here's the before post.
I need to practice texturing details and bump mapping but for all of my models I modeled the details down to every screw so there wasn't much to put in the texture. So I decided to make a weapon which doesn't have many modeled details. The M4A1 has alot of opportunities to put nice little details in the texture. I want to know what you guys think of the model first. :)

Image

Image

P.S. I got a little site up to keep my models organized and have a nice link to send people who wana see my work. :wink: www.samio.cjb.net

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:32 pm
by Patrickssj6
Boum!!!WOW!!!SICK!!!Totally cool

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:39 pm
by BEEF!!!
Damnnnn that looks real hawt.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:48 pm
by Katarn
that is positively the worst m4a1 i have ever seen. I'm going to tell you how to fix it.

Don't use that aimpoint, it's really ugly, use the default iron sights, they are cool and make the model look much better. The telescopic part of the stock is too small in diameter/radius, make it larger. The top of the receiver is a round extrusion, not box straight up. The foregrip has no detail, try to do something with it, if not ribs. The clip is just fugly, redo it (with detail). The other part of the stock is better, albeit way too thin. Try making the triangle foresights accurate, rather than just cosmetic.
Why would you make a weapon without any modeled details? I'm not feeling that. The illusion of depth and detail that can be put in the model can't be subsituted with a texture. Ever. Always make completed models and textures look their best. It gives better self-satisfaction.

Don't take any of the insults in this personally, all business.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:03 pm
by Samio
My texturing skills are nowhere near as good as my modeling skills so I'm trying to focus more on skinning than modeling. Usually when I work with teams, the skinner is always mad that I modeled too many details and they don't have much to add. I see what you mean about the self-satisfaction part but I'm confindent about my modeling (basically, I'm not a noob). But my skinning sucks mainly because I'm new to it. I would rather be an amazing modeler and skinner than an extremely amazing modeler......if that makes any sense.

Here is a ref pic I used to get scaling and such right.

Image

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:05 pm
by Katarn
if you are a good enough modeler, the skin doesn't have to be good for people to be impressed. Details aren't supposed to be skinned tho. It's only if it is too small and/or polylimits are coming into play with that detail being modeled.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:10 pm
by Samio
If I get good at skinning tough details and make them look just as good as if they were modeled (using bump mapping) then imagine how good I will be modeling small details that are 10 times easier. Modeling all the details I left out in this model is a challenge, and I hope to learn alot while facing it.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:16 pm
by Katarn
maybe you should stick to modeling well before trying to skin well. The technique in skinning is to get the texture, lighting, contrast, dodges and burns correct, not for details.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:20 pm
by Samio
Ok, maybe you'r right.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:22 pm
by Katarn
i know my stuff and put up compelling arguments.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:26 pm
by machopenguin001
Fah-Reaking, Nice.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:28 pm
by Samio
Never said you didn't know your stuff, and I never knew we were arguing. I thought maybe you didn't see that my plan was to use this model to practice skinning and I just thought I should share the model with you guys anyway. You seem to understand that but think I should get better at modeling before I start skinning. You gave your opinion on what I should do and I'll keep that in mind. This isn't a vs. showdown or anything, just two modelers helping eachother out.

Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:57 pm
by Katarn
compelling argument=debate It wasn't really an argument, but a clash of opinions

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:08 pm
by Samio
I updated it in the first post.

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:12 pm
by Darkstorm995
so how many Triangles.

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:33 pm
by Samio
3216 faces :?

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:19 pm
by Katarn
heh, i doubt that it's 3216. You probably are using max 6 and are in editable poly. If you are, then it is counting polygons, convert it to editable mesh and then do a polygon count.

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:33 pm
by Exdeath7
Nice attention to detail. Though one thing that eats at me is the prefire tab. The little tab on the left side of the gun , It should mold into the gun and shouldn't be just a flat out cylinder pushing through the mesh.

Other than that it is very nice , Good job. That is going to be a bitch to unwrap.

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:34 pm
by Samio
In editable patch it's 4322 vertices, 7887 faces. I know, pretty high.

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:03 pm
by Katarn
Samio wrote:In editable patch it's 4322 vertices, 7887 faces. I know, pretty high.
So it's actual polycount is 7887 faces.