Gron Battleship - Page 2

Slynky · #11 September 22nd, 2003, 04:47 AM

I think the models look good. I hesitate to make suggestive comments but...

Not sure how well the detail will show up in smaller portraits. It's excellent detail and I hate to see it lost. Especially on the "silver" portions.

As to the hull plating, I'm not sure it's working as good as it should. These are for a shipset, right? When "shrunk" (is that a word?) down, I wonder how it will look. Sometimes, in smaller images, that detail will be lost. I wonder if a more solid color would be better.

How about posting some the same size as shipset sizes so we can "really" see how they look?

(I don't mean to be, hmmmmm, too critical...I'm just one person giving an opinion...the two designs you have shown are nice and sleek...I LIKE sleek!)

Tigbit · #12 September 22nd, 2003, 05:32 AM

Surprizingly enough the effect is not muted all that much in the portraits. It is the minis that need a bit of work to pull off. That may be just a matter of repositioning the area lights.

That BB needs a bit of extra light on the side, though.

[ September 22, 2003, 04:34: Message edited by: Tigbit ]

Slynky · #13 September 22nd, 2003, 07:30 AM

Well, that certainly DID make a difference. I take back what I said. Well, partly. The DN looks fantastic! Like you hinted at, though, the minis need a bit of work.

Personally, I don't worry about the minis too much. The larger portraits look OK...obviously, the DN looks best and the details stand out pretty well.

NOW, here's my take on things...which is a weird point of view, I must confess:

To me, the object of a kewl shipset is to let it be seen. The only problem is that the opponents that one faces sees mostly the minis. THAT, in my humble opinion, is where the best appreciation of a shipset is realized...when looking at them on the tactical display (and so forth).

SO, if I had the talent to make a shipset (which I don't), I'd try to make the minis look good as possible. After all, THAT'S what you want the opponents to fear when they see it.

Just one guy's opinion.

Having said that, it's HARD to put much detail in mini portraits. I think you have a good start, though. As you said, perhaps a bit of different lighting to bring out the detail a bit more.

NICE work! I envy your imagination and technical ability.

Tigbit · #14 September 22nd, 2003, 05:27 PM

Thanks to everyone who commented.

The real trick here is coming up with enough of a variety of hull designs so that they are destinguishable on the minis. Thats the mistake I made with the first gron, some of the ships are harder to distinguish than I like. As for the detail, I really wanted to take the time on this. There are some realy nice looking sets out there and I no longer feel that my first three measure up anymore. Those three were done with Truespace 4, a nice prog and all but limited in some ways (that and it kinda blew up on me and never worked again). These current ones are being done on Lightwave 7.0 Final, which is a more powerful tool. It's taken me nearly a year to learn to use it well enough to do these.

narf poit chez BOOM · #15 September 22nd, 2003, 05:39 PM

nice. sharklike. Narf like much.

Cirvol · #16 September 22nd, 2003, 06:18 PM

cool, lightwave 7.0 final eh?

have you ever played with autocad to do these?
how about using what fyron uses?

i keep playing around with different packages to figure out which one is best for making awesome shipsets... so far its pretty hard

add any additional experience you have on the subject if you can

Fyron · #17 September 23rd, 2003, 12:33 AM

Quote:

how about using what fyron uses?

Fyron has made a ship set? I think you must have me confused with someone else. I have never made a ship for SE4, as I am no good at it.

narf poit chez BOOM · #18 September 23rd, 2003, 02:42 AM

i think he means atrocities.

if it's any consolation, i sometimes confuse your new avatar with his on a quick glance.

Tigbit · #19 September 23rd, 2003, 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cirvol:
how about using what fyron uses?

Because I have no idea what Fyron uses and have no interest in installing and learning another prog when LW works for me and does all I want. Please don't take this part of my reply in a negative way, as this is the easiest way to answer your question. I realy do not mean it in the negative way it is likely to appear to others.

As for which one to use...

I cannot really judge as I have only used 3 of them and the very first is not worthy of mention that is how lame it was, Truespace 4 crashed and will never work on my system again so I cannot even remember how bad it was. I am currently using LW and like it. I am still learning how to use it and I am having fun doing the things I am doing with it. I give it raves at this point in time... mind you I also gave Truespace raves when I was using it. I am sorry I was not much use here.