how to create textures?

Thinking about improving the Artwork in Vega Strike, or making your own Mod? Submit your question and ideas in this forum.

Moderator: pyramid

Phlogios
Confed Special Operative
Confed Special Operative
Posts: 298
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by Phlogios »

This model IS the one-inch greeble.
"Enjoy the Choice" - A very wise man from Ottawa.
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Post by klauss »

I hate to be so negative, but I have to agree with chuck. Don't even think of criticizing his... harshness. He's too right for that.

Most people dream of contributing a NEW model they thought of themselves and try and do that. But VS already has tons of models. Some of poor quality that need to be remodelled (following the already existing concept), or some models need retexturing. In essence, as chuck said, very few people do what needs to be done.

Furthermore, that habit of coming up to the forum and saying "Look at this nice model I made!", has resulted in the utter lack of personality of the game's art. Right about now, the only race to have some sort of personality in their models are the rlaan, because they had like one or two models and then the rest were modelled based on those few.

What I'm saying is... listen to chuck. VS has many many many models. More than new models what VS needs is someone browsing the art task list and tackling the items. Maybe it's not as fun as designing a new ship from scratch. But far more useful.

BTW: don't ask me where's that task list. I'm not an art guy.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Post by Deus Siddis »

The Rlaan models actually look a little too repetitive (even for the Rlaan), and they don't look as alien as the Rlaan (Double Pun!). For instance the Rlaan are quadrilaterally symmetrical and yet their ships are bilaterially symmetrical like everyone else's craft. They also have those stupid pipes that connect their fins to the main body that makes them look like a prop for a made-for-scifi-channel-movie. Instead their look should be entirely organic, even though their ships are mostly not organic on the exterior.

The Aera have a good mix in the light craft size range. Variation that all looks like it was made by the same, somewhat alien looking faction. There might still be some confusion about how their larger vessels should look though.

The Humans are starting to go all over the place though even considering their factionalization, I think that is what you might be picking up on, Klauss. Ships like the Clydesdale, Mule, Goddard, Plowshare, Pacifier, Admonisher and Hyena are made by separate Human sub-factions, but all look very consistent in their design (albeit one that could user more obvious retro and lateral thrusters). The problem is most other Human ships don't look like these.
Breakable
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:19 pm

Post by Breakable »

A solution to the non-uniformity problem:
Lets all gather some $ together an hire a professional studio to create artwork for VS. Should not be a problem, just a few milion $ ;)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
Albert Einstein
loki1950
The Shepherd
Posts: 5841
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 8:37 pm
Location: Ottawa
Contact:

Post by loki1950 »

And six or seven months of waiting for them anyway :lol:


Enjoy the Choice :)
my box::HP Envy i5-6400 @2Q70GHzx4 8 Gb ram/1 Tb(Win10 64)/3 Tb Mint 19.2/GTX745 4Gb acer S243HL K222HQL
Q8200/Asus P5QDLX/8 Gb ram/WD 2Tb 2-500 G HD/GF GT640 2Gb Mint 17.3 64 bit Win 10 32 bit acer and Lenovo ideapad 320-15ARB Win 10/Mint 19.2
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Post by klauss »

Breakable wrote:A solution to the non-uniformity problem:
Lets all gather some $ together an hire a professional studio to create artwork for VS. Should not be a problem, just a few milion $ ;)
Don't dismiss criticism in that infantile way. Concept art, where it exists, is ignored by artists. Solve that, and make concept art where it doesn't exist, and you'll have a consistent look.

Now... I don't care if rlaan look as they should, but noone can argue that all rlaan ships look consistent. It may only be me, but I prefer a consistent (even if erroneous) look rather than an inconsistent (probably wrong anyway) look.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote:Don't dismiss criticism in that infantile way.
What about in a realistically infantile way:

I could also make you one model of a Rlaan dreadnaught at 100,000 triangles and 4096 x 4096 in-game texture, then create 1/4 LODs down to the sub-interceptor scale. And then you could re-use those LODs for the Rlaan battleship, cruiser, destroyer, frigate, corvette, bomber, assault, fighter and interceptor. Then, in addition to being entirely complete and shader compliant, the Rlaan fleet would be totally consistant! :D
Concept art, where it exists, is ignored by artists. Solve that, and make concept art where it doesn't exist, and you'll have a consistent look.
Only four craft have concept art, one of which, the Lemma, is not mentioned anywhere that I can find on the wiki or forum and the other, the Derivative, I am working on based on the concept art, I'm not ignoring it even though I don't usually work off of concept artwork. So there's only two concepts that folks can really build off of right now.

The other issue with working with concept sketches that I have become more aware of now that I have become involved, is they add another requirement to a list of competing requirements:

1) Poly Budget

2) Overdraw Avoidance

3) Technical Aesthetics (Minimal visible pixelization and unwanted facetedness.)

4) Nontechnical Aesthetics (The overall look communicates what the ship does and how that function 'feels'.)

+

5) Concept Sketch Compliance (How much the ship has in common with the concept art while taking into account the above requirements.)

#5 Becomes more of a problem when the Concept Artist(s) have limited or no experience with modern realtime 3d modeling and the budgetary limitations imposed by the project to keep system requirements down. The derivative concept for instance has alot of complexity for a ship of its size, not just in surface detail that is easily discarded but in its overall 'skeletal' design.
Now... I don't care if rlaan look as they should, but noone can argue that all rlaan ships look consistent. It may only be me, but I prefer a consistent (even if erroneous) look rather than an inconsistent (probably wrong anyway) look.
Well if they were inconsistent, I could pick whichever design I thought best fit them and that I liked aesthetically, and then start producing similar designs until that look became the standard. Then I'd petition you, jackS, Hellcat and ace123 to throw out the now inconsistent designs and force everyone to build off of my choice design. But that's because I'm an artist and we're basically evil. :twisted:

So in short, I'd prefer one really awesome ship to a small match set of okay or great ships. But ultimately, consistency without crossing the line into repetition is a must have for the major factions' content.

But I think a good example of what you are trying to say, if you agree, are the Aera Nicander, Aevant and Areus for the Aera or the Clydesdale, Mule, Goddard, Plowshare, Pacifier, Admonisher and Hyena for the Humans.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Well, for a project to exist it has to have people that decide the direction it takes, and contributors have a choice what project they want to contribute to, or to start their own project. Or even within a project, if you don't like the Rlaan style you can choose to work on some other race or faction. This is not to say that projects don't ever change directions based on contributor input, and if you were an artist that is in love with Rlaan concepts but think the style is not presently capturing the true spirit of the Rlaan, you might be able to convince some people to change it. Or if you thing there's not enough concept art you could offer to contribute concept art. But first you have to know what you're talking about, have a vision you're struggling with. You have to care.

I was talking about 99.9% of the artists who come in without the slightest care about the VS universe and start working on a ship and before they've even started on the modeling they think it's almost finished and want to see it adopted.

Hell, even when the great, legendary artists of vegastrike come around this board with a bit of time on their hands, they humbly ask what needs to be done. But 1000 newbies march in between wanting to shove their laughable first models down the throats of the modders, and never finish them anyways.

Anyways, this is not my mod, but if it was, I'd put a big all-capitals announcement in this forum saying NO NEW SHIPS, THANK YOU.
rigelan
Confed Special Operative
Confed Special Operative
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:58 am
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Post by rigelan »

Truthfully, I do agree with your statements, Chuck. And even through my two years of forum browsing, I've seen people come and go, and with models, little change. They are presented, and people are involved for a little while, and then they disappear. But this can't be the case with every single person!

I only wish I had more to offer . . .
AMD 4800 - NVIDIA 7600 - Slackware Linux 12.2
klauss
Elite
Elite
Posts: 7243
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: LS87, Buenos Aires, República Argentina

Post by klauss »

Deus Siddis wrote: Only four craft have concept art, one of which, the Lemma, is not mentioned anywhere that I can find on the wiki or forum and the other, the Derivative, I am working on based on the concept art, I'm not ignoring it even though I don't usually work off of concept artwork. So there's only two concepts that folks can really build off of right now.
You're working on the derivative?
Now I see how you'd take offense on my claim that everyone ignores concept sketches ;)

Ok... so not everyone. You must be like the second one in a list of dozens if not more.

And... only four?
You see the problem?
Lack of direction (which should be in the form of abundant concept sketches).
Deus Siddis wrote: The other issue with working with concept sketches that I have become more aware of now that I have become involved, is they add another requirement to a list of competing requirements:
Hey... you expect it to be easy?
If it was the case, everyone would go around making great games. It's not.
But concept isn't that much of a hinderance. It will guide you more than it will block you. If you have to deviate from the concept because of technical limitations is one thing. Deviating just for the sake of it (because, say, you like it X way) is another. The first is understandable and probably even unavoidable. The second is plain wrong.
Deus Siddis wrote: Well if they were inconsistent, I could pick whichever design I thought best fit them and that I liked aesthetically, and then start producing similar designs until that look became the standard. Then I'd petition you, jackS, Hellcat and ace123 to throw out the now inconsistent designs and force everyone to build off of my choice design. But that's because I'm an artist and we're basically evil. :twisted:
Yet you'd be right.
If the intended look gets 0 contributions and you get 1000, you win.
Deus Siddis wrote: So in short, I'd prefer one really awesome ship to a small match set of okay or great ships.
Seriously? I'm the exact opposite. To me, a fleet of unmatching gorgeous ships only adds up to a potpurri, or a showcase, not good art.
Deus Siddis wrote: But ultimately, consistency without crossing the line into repetition is a must have for the major factions' content.

But I think a good example of what you are trying to say, if you agree, are the Aera Nicander, Aevant and Areus for the Aera or the Clydesdale, Mule, Goddard, Plowshare, Pacifier, Admonisher and Hyena for the Humans.
Weeeeell, so we do agree.
Oíd mortales, el grito sagrado...
Call me "Menes, lord of Cats"
Wing Commander Universe
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Post by Deus Siddis »

klauss wrote:You're working on the derivative?
Now I see how you'd take offense on my claim that everyone ignores concept sketches ;)
Ok... so not everyone. You must be like the second one in a list of dozens if not more.
No I wasn't offended by that, I was just saying that there's not really much of any room for artists to work off of concept art, there's only two more available. My point was it isn't really anyone's fault for not using concept art when there is so very little of it available.
And... only four?
You see the problem?
Lack of direction (which should be in the form of abundant concept sketches).
Yes that is why I was bugging jackS about more verbal ship descriptions, I realized the available concept art would dry up quickly. Plus I want to speed up model creation as it is a hold up to ship creation which is a hold up to gameplay. The craft that are actually available for purchase are few and far in between in their functions.
Hey... you expect it to be easy?
If it was the case, everyone would go around making great games. It's not.
What is easy? I honestly have no clue, living in this relative universe of ours. But I do know that having more requirements is going to be less easy than less. So I expect it to be as hard as it needs to be, but not more.
But concept isn't that much of a hinderance. It will guide you more than it will block you. If you have to deviate from the concept because of technical limitations is one thing. Deviating just for the sake of it (because, say, you like it X way) is another. The first is understandable and probably even unavoidable. The second is plain wrong.
Well I don't really agree. I think making up a new style for ships within a race that already has a good, solid one is wrong. I think totally ignoring the layout description of the craft you are working on is wrong. But I think making good aesthetic choices that you feel good about and know how to work with does not a bad evolution from the concept make.

Take the next ship in the line of concepts from the derivative, the determinant. It is kind of ugly to me, but only because of two misplaced engines, slightly too long of a mid-section, a too forward swept wing, a cockpit that should be wider than taller and some unusually organic curves that should be conic sections. With those tweaks, the ship won't look massively different, but it could make a massive difference in my motivation to make it a reality. So then are those tweaks really bad?

(And now that I think about it, those changes to the determinant would make it more akin to the ancestor, which makes it even more consistent).
Yet you'd be right.
If the intended look gets 0 contributions and you get 1000, you win.
Except that I am thinking less draumatically that that. I like the Rlaan color scheme, both the official purple/dark-grey and the official purple/red/dark-grey versions. :wink:
I also especially like the round organic shapes contrasted by spines and some fins but no engines or other really recognizable features. In fact I love all these things about the Rlaan and how they fit into the larger universe of VS. I just don't like them being bilateral instead of quadrilateral, I don't like the metal pipes that attach the fins and I don't like how 'flat' the fins are, though without proper direction, for all I know those could be like that because of previous era GPU technical limitations.

So to summarize, I don't want to make VS my game, my way. But I'd like to be allowed to make not huge changes to what I'm contributing if it feels 'right'.
So in short, I'd prefer one really awesome ship to a small match set of okay or great ships.
Seriously? I'm the exact opposite. To me, a fleet of unmatching gorgeous ships only adds up to a potpurri, or a showcase, not good art.

Weeeeell, so we do agree.
Of course, it is mostly our priorities that are different. Probably because our different skills brings each of us closer to being able to change different things about our projects of interest.
Last edited by Deus Siddis on Fri Jul 04, 2008 2:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

klauss wrote:But concept isn't that much of a hinderance. It will guide you more than it will block you.
And this is sooooo true. There's nothing as hard in modeling as coming up with a new (AND good) concept. When we needed a corvette for WCU it took me days and days toying in Blender, to then give up and spend a week working on paper until finally the Cutter concept was born. The feeling for the ship was there all along, but nothing I was coming up with at the beginning did the feeling justice. Having concept art to work from is a mighty blessing. ANY constraints are blessings, in fact: There's nothing worse than sitting there gocking at Blender's edit screen with infinite possibilities...
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Post by Deus Siddis »

chuck_starchaser wrote:
klauss wrote:But concept isn't that much of a hinderance. It will guide you more than it will block you.
And this is sooooo true. There's nothing as hard in modeling as coming up with a new (AND good) concept. When we needed a corvette for WCU it took me days and days toying in Blender, to then give up and spend a week working on paper until finally the Cutter concept was born. The feeling for the ship was there all along, but nothing I was coming up with at the beginning did the feeling justice. Having concept art to work from is a mighty blessing. ANY constraints are blessings, in fact: There's nothing worse than sitting there gocking at Blender's edit screen with infinite possibilities...
Well I understand the feeling and agree to an extent. Part of what I like about making some contributions to VS, is I am only adding and improving an already established and thought out universe. But I also like to be a little creative and make things that feel like they fit to me, instead of following design orders exactly when they don't completely make aesthetic sense to me. I like being able to take some creative license and do not feel that is unreasonable for free work done on free time as a hobby.

So I appreciate the concepts and the direction. Alot. I just don't want them to be written in stone for volunteer contributors that are respectful and thoughtful to the universe of VS and its consistent design paradigms for factions and craft classes, in their creative alterations.
jackS
Minister of Information
Minister of Information
Posts: 1895
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 9:40 pm
Location: The land of tenure (and diaper changes)

Post by jackS »

Deus Siddis wrote:Then I'd petition you, jackS, Hellcat and ace123 to throw out the now inconsistent designs and force everyone to build off of my choice design. But that's because I'm an artist and we're basically evil. :twisted:
Similar thoughts have occurred to me on more than one occasion.... :-p

Certainly, the thought of a large, all caps sticky at the top of the Art forum requesting a moratorium on new modeling projects has frequently crossed my mind, and, less frequently, my lips, but there has generally been a lack of consensus among the powers that be as to whether that would actually be the right move to make.

But, long story short, I'm not going to make any bold moves here until I complete the long-lagging baby-steps I've already signed myself up for - namely, filling in the style guides.

Unfortunately, even the couple that I've scratched the surface of filling in according to the new template (such as http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/ ... uide:Aeran) aren't particularly useful yet in terms of artistic direction. I've got a lot of work to do on that front... unfortunately, I've also had and continue to have a lot of work to do on the "pays-the-bills" front (and this calendar year even more so than previous :-P ), so even with a re-prioritization, it may be a bit. Additionally, I don't have any real-time access to visual-medium artists at present to bounce my attempted descriptions off of (actually, most of the times I have some time to pay attention to VS these days, I don't have real-time access to much of anyone, but I digress (pay-the-bills-work can be annoying - but what's new?)), so I'll warn in advance that the textual descriptions of the aesthetics are almost certainly going to take a few iterations before they likely convey (to people who aren't already me) something more akin to the information I intended them to ... (writing about multiprocessor memory systems in a coherent (bad pun) fashion, unsurprisingly, isn't a very good way to keep in practice for writing about anything actually interesting)

Now, if anyone wants to volunteer to be the clarity/sanity-check artist for a particular style guide, I'd certainly welcome the help. I'm not an end-user consumer of these guides, so external validation will be very helpful indeed. If, in the course of ensuring that the style direction is both intelligible and vaguely pragmatic for modern 3D artistry, they want to help out with some initial concept art, then that'd be even better, but not required. Of course, most of the times someone has volunteered for similar tasks, they end up wandering off - but it doesn't cost me much to be optimistic, so I may as well be optimistic :).
jackS
Minister of Information
Minister of Information
Posts: 1895
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 9:40 pm
Location: The land of tenure (and diaper changes)

Post by jackS »

Deus Siddis wrote:
chuck_starchaser wrote:
klauss wrote:But concept isn't that much of a hinderance. It will guide you more than it will block you.
And this is sooooo true. There's nothing as hard in modeling as coming up with a new (AND good) concept. When we needed a corvette for WCU it took me days and days toying in Blender, to then give up and spend a week working on paper until finally the Cutter concept was born. The feeling for the ship was there all along, but nothing I was coming up with at the beginning did the feeling justice. Having concept art to work from is a mighty blessing. ANY constraints are blessings, in fact: There's nothing worse than sitting there gocking at Blender's edit screen with infinite possibilities...
Well I understand the feeling and agree to an extent. Part of what I like about making some contributions to VS, is I am only adding and improving an already established and thought out universe. But I also like to be a little creative and make things that feel like they fit to me, instead of following design orders exactly when they don't completely make aesthetic sense to me. I like being able to take some creative license and do not feel that is unreasonable for free work done on free time as a hobby.

So I appreciate the concepts and the direction. Alot. I just don't want them to be written in stone for volunteer contributors that are respectful and thoughtful to the universe of VS and its consistent design paradigms for factions and craft classes, in their creative alterations.
One of the things I really hope to eventually get out of the style guides, and it's something I realized isn't actually in the template currently is some notion of a "don't care/no standardization" category -- namely, areas or degrees to which we can make it explicit that the artist is free to do as they please. Perhaps both it, and it's opposite, the "must care" category should be added in to the template for what needs to be set down.
Deus Siddis
Elite
Elite
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:42 pm

Post by Deus Siddis »

jackS wrote:
Deus Siddis wrote:Then I'd petition you, jackS, Hellcat and ace123 to throw out the now inconsistent designs and force everyone to build off of my choice design. But that's because I'm an artist and we're basically evil. :twisted:
Similar thoughts have occurred to me on more than one occasion.... :-p

Certainly, the thought of a large, all caps sticky at the top of the Art forum requesting a moratorium on new modeling projects has frequently crossed my mind, and, less frequently, my lips, but there has generally been a lack of consensus among the powers that be as to whether that would actually be the right move to make.

But, long story short, I'm not going to make any bold moves here until I complete the long-lagging baby-steps I've already signed myself up for - namely, filling in the style guides.
True, beggars can't be choosers, such a move could turn out as unpopular as it was bold. What I was talking about was not legislative, more grass roots.

Basically, one artist might go and redo many of the ships in a fitting way and then say let's make this the standard for all future releases. It's a 'walk the talk' or 'actions speak louder than words' approach, the only kind that can really be trusted to get completed, because by the time it is adopted, the work is already largely complete.
Unfortunately, even the couple that I've scratched the surface of filling in according to the new template (such as http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/ ... uide:Aeran) aren't particularly useful yet in terms of artistic direction.
Enough said right there! It has been just a little while since I offered that suggestion of concentrating on the descriptions and already, after years of mostly vacuum, there are now several paragraphs of data on the wiki. That is great work, thank you! :D

We all have real life demands and understand that this is a hobby and has all the temporal limitations of such so there is no problem with that. But if you can keep regularly contributing information and direction to wiki like you just did there, which I'm guessing is a sizeable paragraph a week, things will become alot better on the content development end of the project for those who are serious about contributing.

When pages like that are filled out, if any artist still feels like he has a lack of understanding of the art direction in a particular area, he can ask a specific question regarding it and the answer can be applied to the relevant wiki page, instead of needing to ask a hundred questions.
Now, if anyone wants to volunteer to be the clarity/sanity-check artist for a particular style guide, I'd certainly welcome the help.
No problem, opinions are easy for me to produce. :D
One of the things I really hope to eventually get out of the style guides, and it's something I realized isn't actually in the template currently is some notion of a "don't care/no standardization" category -- namely, areas or degrees to which we can make it explicit that the artist is free to do as they please. Perhaps both it, and it's opposite, the "must care" category should be added in to the template for what needs to be set down.
That would be entirely awesome. A list for each race/faction and vehicle/station of what design elements are must have's, nice to have's and just suggestions would be very helpful. Both for optimization on the technical side and some of that creative freedom on the aesthetic. 8)
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

What I think is the pity about newbies trying to contribute ships is the fact that many of them could become worthy contributors if they tackled more realistic AND useful jobs at the beginning; but instead they disappoint themselves into permanent exile by trying to come up with ships right away.
Breakable
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:19 pm

Post by Breakable »

I would propose a process to include models to be:
1)Have quality requirements for low, medium and high quality.
2)Have very few requirements for low quality so all required places are filled with placeholders.
3)Mark ships that are added to svn as low/medium/high quality, in a way the vs engine can recognise.
4)Allow the ship engine to load ships of desired quality only (for example I want to play with medium-high).
5)Have comments in the wiki what requirements are not met for a specific model of a low/medium quality ship.
6)Ask artists to improve on those ships, to meet more requirements one at a time.

What do you think?
I see benefits:
a)Anyone can still contribute
b)You can play with whatever quality you want

Possible Drawback:
a)Noone wants to label his ship as low quality, altthough this can become a benefit if worded correctly
b)Some code required (minor)
c)Some maintenance work required (medium)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
Albert Einstein
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Well having quality standards sounds adventageous as a persuasion tool, perhaps; a "democratic approach", of giving "choices" that are mostly rethorical, as neither the mod nor the artists would want to be dealing with any quality other than "best". Problem is, it's a bit like tripling the specification work; and I'm not sure anybody really needs to be persuaded, as much as to have the experience and knowledge necessary.

I'd be more inclined to think that a number of very detailed tutorials in modeling and texturing, including stuff we've discussed recently, such as model optimization techniques; and some I'm thinking of right now, like a greebling tutorial, and a checklist of requirements such as retro thrusters for brakeing, heat radiators, and minimum implied construction standards that preclude such absurdities as a ship mesh being a single, smooth continuum; --plus better tools, such as a graphical mesher-- would tackle about half of the problem.

The other half of the problem, and the half that probably DOES require clever persuasion techniques, is how to convince newbies NOT to jump straight into modeling a ship, but to start with more modest and realistic goals, instead, so that they can build up their skills, and self-confidence gradually; --AND their sense of belonging, by seeing their small but hopefully useful contributions being used--; and how to convince artists in general to do the things that need to be done, such mesh refactorings, supplying normalmaps, specular textures, shininess maps, ambient occlusions... as opposed to whatever pops up in their minds.
rivalin
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:16 pm

Post by rivalin »

This might sound a bit odd, and people tend to instinctively think the opposite, but, aside from the obvious like decent concept art and design guides, what would help is to have more structure.

People think that potential contributors would turn around and run way if they can't just randomly do their own thing, that they'd feel too constrained. I think people actually like structure and order and a clear idea of what to do, and obviously the disorganised way of doing things right now is not anyones' ideal.

I think an official Vega Strike art devleopment team would be a good idea, it would help to get minor tasks done and give people a sense of progression and that doing minor donkey work was getting them there.



You would have, for example

Art Director

Senior Artists (senior texturers, senior modellers, senior concept artists etc)

Artists (texturers, modellers, renderers, concept artists etc)

Apprentice Artists (apprentice texturer, apprentice modeller etc)

People could join the dev team and basically work their way up. Right now there's no real reward for doing say, specular textures for someone else's ship, it will still be someone else's ship, and you won't get much thanks for your help anyway. If however, people joined as an apprentice artist, was assigned simple jobs like those to start, and felt like they were making progress and getting somewhere, they would have the motivation to keep working.

and no, a sourceforge page with a list of names is not the same as a real team, inactive artists should be credited, but should be put onto an inactive roster, so that people know what the current team actually consists of. There should be real organisation and ordering of priorities and assignments.

Of course there will be people who say "it's too much work" "it will scare people off" "we don't need to go that far" "it's overkill" . The current way of doing things has led to a frankly awful retention rate of artists, and the fact that it has been allowed to go on so long unchecked (and I'm not trying to be hostile here, just constructive) suggests a skew in the competences of the project leads towards the technical and away from the artistic, and it's wasting a lot of potential. However, VS isn't a democracy, so the people at the top can do, or continue not to do, whatever they want. :) Just two cents from one of the peons.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

EXCELLENT idea!

My only cautionary note is about the risk of bruising egos with titles like "Apprentice Artist". I think I would replace that with "Art Contributor", with a definition along the lines of "any artist who has contributed work that has been accepted and put into the game". An artist who has not yet reached that stage might as well get no title at all, than get a title they might consider humiliating.

We could even have a title of "Valued Contributor", defined as someone who has often contributed work ***that had been requested***, to put an extra incentive.

It might also help to split titles along the modeling and texturing natural divide, to hopefully induce some specialization; as I have a gut feeling that a lot of people with texturing skills are passing by here that never offer to contribute because they might think they need to know how to model first; and probably modelers without texturing skills would feel more confident to contribute if they knew that some texturer will probably do the 2D part of the job.

Perhaps a user group "Art Forum Users" could be created, and the art forum be locked from posting new threads by anyone other than this group. Newbies would then have to request membership, and when they do so they are told to first read x, y, z documents and wiki pages, some of which would adress the matter of the "New Ship Syndrome".
Turbo
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:54 am
Location: TX, USA
Contact:

Post by Turbo »

This is going a lot of places, all of them interesting.
jackS wrote: But, long story short, I'm not going to make any bold moves here until I complete the long-lagging baby-steps I've already signed myself up for - namely, filling in the style guides. Unfortunately, even the couple that I've scratched the surface of filling in according to the new template (such as http://vegastrike.sourceforge.net/wiki/ ... uide:Aeran) aren't particularly useful yet in terms of artistic direction.

Now, if anyone wants to volunteer to be the clarity/sanity-check artist for a particular style guide, I'd certainly welcome the help. I'm not an end-user consumer of these guides, so external validation will be very helpful indeed.
Do you want feedback on the art styles to be posted in the Wiki, as a PM, or posted in a thread (or threads) in Artwork and Content Vetting for comment? If you latter, please start the thead and move this post there.

I don't know that I have the time to be *the* artstyle commentator, but I can be *an* artstyle commentator. I've made a few dozen contributions to various game mods with models, textures, video, and/or audio, which should give me enough experience to make meaningful comments. You be the judge -- for the Aera art style guide, I have the following suggestions and/or reactions:
  • * The list of questions, followed by the list of answers, is awkward to read. Once the question is answered, remove it and just leave the answer with its summary of the question.

    * Origin, Physical, and Mental: these sections tell us what the are like and kinds of worlds they will prefer to settle. If someone wants to build an Aeran concourse, this will tell me what I will see out the window, some ideas about the furnishings that might fit their physiology, what an Aeran bartender might look like, etc. Bottom line is that I like the level of detail here.

    * Cultural: I suggest you include a description of their writing, and how often they use it. Humans, for example, put labels all over their craft: "Danger," "Rescue," "Remove before flight," "Lift Point," "Grade X fuel only," and so on. Do the Aera do something similar? Depending on the faction, a good concourse design would include signs in multiple languages as well as pictoral (such as modern-day international road signs vs. traditional US road signs). The artists can't make signs without knowing what Aera script might look like. For the human factions, maybe there is a font that they prefer. For all we know, someone in here knows how to make custom fonts for the major alien races.

    * Appearance: the description of the "extensions" is not clear. The first time I read it, I was thinking you meant a half-ovoid and my reaction was, "What? The Aera ships don't have those." Then I looked at the Nicander again and realized that those wing-like things were the extensions to which you referred. Thus, recommend you say "wing-like extensions" to clarify.

    * Technological tells me that the Aera like orbital structure, so do we need models for defensive platforms, from satellite-sized orbital defense platforms down to automated gun/beam mines? I would also expect to find many refineries, medical stations, commerce stations, and relay stations in a system settled by Aera.

    * Weapons: There is huge array of weapons in VS, so the level of detail here is insufficient. I recommend a links to the weapons or types of systems the Aera prefer.

    * Canonical examples have links to two fighters, but why not show the picture right there? Recommend an explanation of any examples that exist in-game but are not listed as canonical, such as the Aerus, and why.
    Where applicable, we need the faction logo graphics, or at least a link to them.
Turbo
jackS
Minister of Information
Minister of Information
Posts: 1895
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2003 9:40 pm
Location: The land of tenure (and diaper changes)

Post by jackS »

Thanks Turbo :)

Commentary like that is very useful indeed - I'll certainly be making a note of the above comments.
lee
Confed Special Operative
Confed Special Operative
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 2:17 pm

Post by lee »

rivalin wrote: I think people actually like structure and order and a clear idea of what to do, and obviously the disorganised way of doing things right now is not anyones' ideal.
Indeed --- it's hard to impossible to figure out what work may be wanted. Yes, there are pages on the wiki to that, but looking at them, you never know if the page is outdated or if someone is working or going to work on something. So what people do is that they go ahead and make something they are interested in. If they make something because they want it to be included in the game, they'll just be disappointed if it isn't.

In my case, I played around with modeling something, and I did so before --- and each time I did, I learned a bit more. From there, how far I get depends on how much I'm interested and on how much time I can spend on it and how easy or how difficult it is to find out how to do something. Besides that, I'm not an artist and maybe don't have any of the talent needed for it at all.

Your idea would probably have to involve teaching people how to do something --- as in telling them where they can find good instructions/guides on what they want to do. When they have done something, take a look at it and tell them how to improve. That way, both sides would benefit from the process: People would learn something and the game might end up with improved ships.

And it's not about being scared about having to work on it. Without working, you won't learn.
Debian testing
NVIDIA-Linux-x86-173.08-pkg1.run
Turbo
ISO Party Member
ISO Party Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:54 am
Location: TX, USA
Contact:

Post by Turbo »

jackS wrote:Commentary like that is very useful indeed
Good deal. Hopefully others will comment also.

If I come up with any practical solutions (writing for example) I'll start a thread in this forum.

Turbo
Post Reply