#28 - Summary - Jedi Starfighter
I will now summarise the whole process of creating the Jedi star fighter, focusing on the main issues that are left, and clarifying things that have been done deliberately, so that there is a clear reason for everything done throughout the process. I will also surmise how successful I feel the model is overall.
It could be argued that the main body of the model does not have that much detail, especially near the front where it is all flat, but this is because the actual model is flat, and all of the shapes seen on images of the star fighter are in fact painted on, or textured. When I come to texture this model, it will suddenly seem far more detailed, but there are currently no physical differences in the models geometry, as far as I am aware. Bear in mind that for things like the raised area in the middle of the ship, on the top face, I had to judge myself where it should be because the two schematics I have are different. As for the cockpit, it will become quite clear upon viewing the model in the work space that it is not that round, and is only just the right shape. This is also intentional because the cockpit will be translucent, so there is no need to add in too many polygons. The cockpit will be sufficiently round for the animation, and as for the base, it fits in between the main body and the back section quite smoothly.
To be clear, throughout this whole process I have been matching the shape of the star fighter to the top view schematic, and then trying to match it with the side view as much as possible without disturbing the accuracy from the top view. For things such as the position of the engines, they look totally wrong from the side view schematic, but are in fact correct on the top view schematic. There is a top view image attached to the side view schematic, but by the time I had actually imported the side view schematic the model was already too far gone using the top view schematic. Nonetheless, I feel that the model has turned out to be just the right shape. Also bear in mind that I have not been able to use a schematic for the front or back views of the star fighter, so have had to use my own judgement for these perspectives almost entirely. Again, I am confident that there are no geometric differences between this model and the average star fighter as seen across Google, but it is possible.
Remember I had a few problems earlier in the modelling process where I had extruded many faces on the top to different positions, and they were overlapping each other, and I was left with many unwanted edges and vertices. I am confident that all of these extra edges are in fact gone, both inside and outside the model, and the remaining faces are in a useful state for editing, in that they are the right shape. However, it is possible that some really obscure ones remain, and are definitely not visible if they do. Otherwise, more or less all of the main problems I had when creating this model have been solved. The cockpit was a nightmare for vertices, but they have all been target welded together and the cockpit is left in a reasonably accurate shape, suitable for the requirements of the animation. Of course, if a viewer has the opinion that some attachments such as the engines or the landers are in the wrong place, that is valid as I had to place them myself, but if that is the case they are positioned close enough to the real thing regardless. I had the issue with the faces being reversed in some places, especially on objects created from bezier curves, but I did manage to find a way to reverse them back without ruining the rest of the object.
To conclude, I feel that I have overcome all of the problems that I encountered, and the entire model is accurate and detailed, given the difficulties I faced with the lack of schematics. I checked the face count and it is not even at 4000 so I do not feel it necessary to go back and delete any. I don't think I would be able to anyway. I am happy with the way it looks, and although some people may disagree with the exact positioning of some elements, it is still a valid model in my opinion, and it is in the required state for the animation I have planned.
It could be argued that the main body of the model does not have that much detail, especially near the front where it is all flat, but this is because the actual model is flat, and all of the shapes seen on images of the star fighter are in fact painted on, or textured. When I come to texture this model, it will suddenly seem far more detailed, but there are currently no physical differences in the models geometry, as far as I am aware. Bear in mind that for things like the raised area in the middle of the ship, on the top face, I had to judge myself where it should be because the two schematics I have are different. As for the cockpit, it will become quite clear upon viewing the model in the work space that it is not that round, and is only just the right shape. This is also intentional because the cockpit will be translucent, so there is no need to add in too many polygons. The cockpit will be sufficiently round for the animation, and as for the base, it fits in between the main body and the back section quite smoothly.
To be clear, throughout this whole process I have been matching the shape of the star fighter to the top view schematic, and then trying to match it with the side view as much as possible without disturbing the accuracy from the top view. For things such as the position of the engines, they look totally wrong from the side view schematic, but are in fact correct on the top view schematic. There is a top view image attached to the side view schematic, but by the time I had actually imported the side view schematic the model was already too far gone using the top view schematic. Nonetheless, I feel that the model has turned out to be just the right shape. Also bear in mind that I have not been able to use a schematic for the front or back views of the star fighter, so have had to use my own judgement for these perspectives almost entirely. Again, I am confident that there are no geometric differences between this model and the average star fighter as seen across Google, but it is possible.
Remember I had a few problems earlier in the modelling process where I had extruded many faces on the top to different positions, and they were overlapping each other, and I was left with many unwanted edges and vertices. I am confident that all of these extra edges are in fact gone, both inside and outside the model, and the remaining faces are in a useful state for editing, in that they are the right shape. However, it is possible that some really obscure ones remain, and are definitely not visible if they do. Otherwise, more or less all of the main problems I had when creating this model have been solved. The cockpit was a nightmare for vertices, but they have all been target welded together and the cockpit is left in a reasonably accurate shape, suitable for the requirements of the animation. Of course, if a viewer has the opinion that some attachments such as the engines or the landers are in the wrong place, that is valid as I had to place them myself, but if that is the case they are positioned close enough to the real thing regardless. I had the issue with the faces being reversed in some places, especially on objects created from bezier curves, but I did manage to find a way to reverse them back without ruining the rest of the object.
To conclude, I feel that I have overcome all of the problems that I encountered, and the entire model is accurate and detailed, given the difficulties I faced with the lack of schematics. I checked the face count and it is not even at 4000 so I do not feel it necessary to go back and delete any. I don't think I would be able to anyway. I am happy with the way it looks, and although some people may disagree with the exact positioning of some elements, it is still a valid model in my opinion, and it is in the required state for the animation I have planned.
Comments
Post a Comment