View Full Version : Prop Critique: Jaguar Throne
11 November 2007, 05:24 PM
Hey guys. I'd like to get some critiques on this prop. It is for the Goldeneye Source mod using the Source Engine. 1594 tris and 1024 diffuse, normal, specular. It will be placed in an abandoned/overgrown Aztec temple.
11 November 2007, 06:28 PM
Hmm, aren't thrones supposed to be grand structures suitable for people of power? Unfortunately this looks more like a park bench with something on the end. You need to study the structures of thrones and especially the structure of a Jaguars head.
11 November 2007, 06:34 PM
Well, thats what the actual statue looks like. I was given a photograph of the actual statue for reference, so I don't have any control over that.
11 November 2007, 07:00 PM
nice prop, but i think 1500 tris are too much for that level of detail. wireframe?
11 November 2007, 07:06 PM
I can see this being in some kind of temple, it certainly has that kind of style to my eye, as you would expect from modeling from ref. Just did a quick google search and found http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/7/71/350px-Jaguar_throne.jpg, and I'd say the model nails that pretty damn well, so as far as that goes I'd say the model was a winner.
Could you post some wires and the texture flats though, the textures look like they may be a little low res for 1024s
11 November 2007, 02:11 AM
I redid the uvs and texture. Here is the latest version.
11 November 2007, 07:40 AM
Looks fine, but i think the head is needing a too huge amount of polygons.
11 November 2007, 07:44 AM
Looks fine, but i think the head is needing a too huge amount of polygons.Agreed. You could probably halve the number of polygons in the head with no noticeable effect upon the silhouette.
11 November 2007, 01:05 AM
I took about 400 tris off the original 1600 and updated the wireframe image to show the new one. Its 1186 now, do you think thats still too high for a next gen engine?
11 November 2007, 07:01 AM
The point why i said "too much polys" was NOT an performance issue. The point was that you just don't need so much polygons for the head. When you use the polys wisely, you will geht the same good looking head like before - but with less polygon. And i think there are a lot of polys/edges you dont need.
11 November 2007, 08:18 PM
Yea you're right. I was able to bring it down to 750 tris.
11 November 2007, 08:21 PM
Updated the render and wireframe images posted above. Hit refresh if you see the old ones.
11 November 2007, 09:17 PM
well done. i think it looks like before but with a lot of less tris :D great :D
11 November 2007, 09:20 PM
While I agree that it "looks" like the picture... sometimes reality is just boring. In this case, your model is accurate, but it's boring. If this was in the level, I wouldn't give it more than 2 seconds of my attention. You can keep with the accuracy of the model, but still glamorize it a bit. Add some more jewels to it, or grass/moss, I dunno. Anything to spice it up. Make the jewels sparkle or glow.
11 November 2007, 10:09 PM
Neil is absolutly right. First of all: check the silhouette of your model. Thats one of the most importants things - an interesting shape! So i have a look of my example picture below. I took your model and colored it black - your silhouette is very straight and a bit boring - to perfect for such an old ancient cool creature.
Maybe you should spend some more intersections to it to make the silhouette more intersting, i did a fake in photoshop for you how it could look like.
11 November 2007, 05:11 AM
The new texture looks much better. I think the specular on the inset jade pieces (the green circles) would probably be higher. Right now it's like they have no spec at all.
I second the notion of making the silhouette more irregular. You could use some of the tris you saved earlier to make some cuts and notch/chip it here and there.
Finally...the cat's head reminds me of Scratchy from the Simpsons. It looks like it's smiling.
11 November 2007, 05:11 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.