Forum Groups
  All forums
    Help & Feedback
      Questions
      Work in progress
      Finished Art
      Non-Max related
    Community
      Offtopic
      News
    Hardware
    Photography


Featured Threads
  inspiration alert!!!
(36 replies)
  Indespensible MaxScripts, Plugins and 3rd Party Tools
(37 replies)
  The allmighty FREE Resources Thread !
(17 replies)
  spam alert!!!
(4886 replies)
  Maxforums member photo gallery index
(114 replies)
  Maxforums Member Tutorials
(89 replies)
  three cheers to maxforums...
(240 replies)
  101 Things you didnt know in Max...
(198 replies)
  A Face tutorial from MDB101 :D
(95 replies)
  Maxforums.org Members Gallery
(516 replies)
  SON OF POST YOURSELF
(637 replies)
  Dub's Maxscript Tutorial Index
(119 replies)

Maxunderground news unavailable

polygon crazy
show user profile  Lazmo67
Just wondering how much having a polygon heavy model affects rendering time?

I'm working on a concept type car and have gone into a fair bit of detail on the wheels, discs and calipers alone. This is just for my own amusement and I don't have a particularly powerful pc with only an average video card but I was wondering what are the key factors affecting rendering times? Is going turbo smooth mental a bad thing? is lighting or maps a bigger factor?

I'm worried that if I carry on at the same rate then i won't actually be able to render it in my lifetime!

Is there a magic mix that keeps detail but doesn't tie up the pc for evermore? or is this just a Max holy grail?

before you ask a separate render farm or upgrade isn't an option unless a planned trip to Vegas works out better than anticipated! lol

I do like the idea of a detailed model though.

Probably a really dumb question but is there a way of saving a quick render setup and a high res render setup?

read 588 times
7/18/2012 1:38:40 PM (last edit: 7/18/2012 1:38:40 PM)
show user profile  advance-software
> Is there a magic mix that keeps detail but doesn't tie up the pc for evermore?

see normal mapping.
read 582 times
7/18/2012 1:50:16 PM (last edit: 7/18/2012 1:50:16 PM)
show user profile  horizon
There is a preset option at the bottom of the render dialog (f10), you can save/load parts of settings you want.


read 555 times
7/18/2012 7:33:55 PM (last edit: 7/18/2012 7:33:55 PM)
show user profile  Lazmo67
Ok. i confess the only thing I know about normal maps is from watching the turtle tutorial and I grasp the basic concept. This is, maybe, my 10th model and only my second in max so it's a bit of a learning curve.

i found this tutorial
http://www.mapcore.org/viewtopic.php?t=6806

which I thought explains it pretty well but i'm not sure about putting it into practice though?? How is it going to help me here apart from creating a more realistic bump map for the tyre info (which i downloaded) (took me hours, and several attempts, to model the tread correctly btw!)

here's the wheel

this is roughly 15000 polys is that way too many?? I want to do a nice high res car and don't really want to scrimp on detail but am I wasting my time!????

as always thanks for the input.
read 549 times
7/18/2012 7:51:14 PM (last edit: 7/18/2012 7:51:14 PM)
show user profile  Dr. Jim
No....that is not remotely an insane amount of poly's...you didn't even model the treads....;-)

But seriously,....other's here who work with heavier scenes know better than I,.....but a high quality car could have several hundred thousand poly's and be way fine.......

Where's Bolts?

Edit: There is also efficiency in modelling and use of instances and suck as well. I notice that your rotor face appears to be completely flat, yet has a TON of poly's.
read 547 times
7/18/2012 7:54:39 PM (last edit: 7/18/2012 7:56:06 PM)
show user profile  advance-software
you're right. normal mapping will only help with surface detail.

when you have actual discrete geometry like that it's got to be modelled somehow.

depending on what you're doing you can swap in/out different models - a low res/blocky one when it's far away where you couldn't see the detail anyway & a smoother more realistic one up close. turbo smooth can kind of do some of this but its no replacement for hand tuned models.

also that's looking like a good example of where curved surface (nurbs) modelling could come in handy as it *should* auto-tesselate the detail so smooth when needed & more blocky (less detail) when not. that said - no idea how well nurbs work in max for standard use. I expect the ha ha ha ... hmmmm response so go with what the pros say. no-one seems to use curved surfaces around here. probably a reason for it.

also check out the multi-res modifier
read 540 times
7/18/2012 8:13:12 PM (last edit: 7/18/2012 8:56:26 PM)
show user profile  Lazmo67
thanks for the tips.

Treads are modelled. you just can't see them very well on on those images. No bolt because it's a race hub nut. Making it up, mostly as I go along anyway! wanted to do a concept car for 2 reasons. 1. no one could tell me I got it wrong and 2. just curious to see if I could design one!

Glad I haven't done anything too stupid. The Rotor (discs over here old chap, English despite the Max flag) are flat but wasn't sure how to model. I did the 3 circles as cylinders without caps extruded then joined to 2 bigger cylinders. probably not good but the best way I could see to retain the edges on the disc!?? I did use instances for the rivets and nuts.

not sure about how efficiently it's modelled. Not very i'm guessing. as i've used turbo smooth alot! 2 iterations! might try to tone that down. now you've mentioned it.

Would normals be better than the bump for the tyre info? in fact are bump maps redundant??

Might try the different models method, see how it goes and i'll check out the multi res modifier link before I carry on tomorrow.

As always, great tips guys!! getting there slowly!!


read 497 times
7/18/2012 10:09:38 PM (last edit: 7/18/2012 10:09:38 PM)
show user profile  advance-software
normal maps encode changes in surface direction, bump maps encode changes in surface height.

you can do both simultanously in parallax occlusion mapping but that's probably more than you need to know for now. you can look up a demo if you're interested.

wouldn't worry about the fancy tricks for now. get your modelling skills down. learn to model optimally - ie. minimum number of polys to achieve any given shape to whatever degree of accuracy you're aiming at.

the good thing about tsmooth & similar techniques is you can tweak them to refine/remove detail so not saying don't use, more use with care.

read 477 times
7/19/2012 9:09:19 AM (last edit: 7/19/2012 9:23:15 AM)
show user profile  Mr_Stabby
the only thing poly count affects is your viewport performance, it wont matter one bit when it comes to actually rendering stuff (well ok it matters but the amount is miniature compared to the time sinked into shaders).

When your fps in viewport starts chopping a lot or drops below a usable level - thats where you'll know you have reached the limit for your card :p you can try it out, just make a sphere and start putting layers of turbosmooth on it. If it starts chopping hit 7 (dont have it open before since the thing itself consumes performance) and check out the poly count, thats the target you can aim for.

read 452 times
7/20/2012 3:16:18 AM (last edit: 7/20/2012 3:16:18 AM)
#Maxforums IRC
Open chat window


Support Maxforums.org