CGTalk > Work in Progress and Critique > WIP/Critique: 3D
Login register
Thread Closed share thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread »  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-26-2013, 01:24 PM   #1
HBS
New Member
portfolio
Hidayat Saad
Leading Consultancy
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
Space Exploration & manned space program.

Hi,it has been quite sometimes since I post anything here.

Since last 2 year (On & Off affair due to some other work) I have been working on some kind of visualization of "Future manned space exploration" mainly inspired by real-life space program such as NASA' "Apollo Program" which successfully put a man on the moon before the end of 60's,& the STS or Space Shuttle Program.

The visual is more like what would happen if mankind continue with the exploration of historic Apollo lunar exploration program & how the space frontier hardware such as the Space Shuttle & Space agencies combined to work through next epic challenge:To further the manned space exploration endeavour to the other habitable planet such as Mars & its moon,& the lunar outpost construction as another mankind next possible settlement other than Planet Earth.

So here is some of already finished render & scenes.The tool I use is 3dsmax 9,Mental Ray,Zbrush for some organic & sculpting process,& PS7 for final post production touch-up of the image.






















Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Old 01-26-2013, 05:40 PM   #2
AJ1
User
 
AJ1's Avatar
CGTalk Forum Leader
portfolio
A J
Indiana, USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,810
Hey man,

This looks like an interesting project, but it might help you to do some more reading on the rockets and how they were used.

Did you take the Space Shuttle and throw in on top of a Saturn 5?

Those two white cylinders on the sides of the liquid tank on the shuttle are the solid rocket boosters, and are meant to be fired at sea level. But by the looks of things, they would burn holes in the first stage of your Saturn.

The shuttle was only meant for low earth orbit. Taking it to the moon would be like driving your family car to the north pole.

I also don't think the Apollo lunar orbiter and lander would've fit in the cargo bay of the shuttle.

It might help your project to design some new vehicles, or look at some other concepts from NASA.

-AJ
__________________
 
Old 01-26-2013, 06:47 PM   #3
HBS
New Member
portfolio
Hidayat Saad
Leading Consultancy
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
Thanks for the reply,AJ1

Actually all the render are selected randomly from last year render from my archieve.

The STS was used for big cargo deployment on the moon,& for construction of lunar outpost.
My concept for this new STS was to use the Shuttle-Saturn configuration like NASA had planned earlier when the STS program was approved by congress.

Just like the SaturnV moonrocket,the interstage between the SRB & SSME(my concept had 4 small RS-26 engine & 1 J-2 engine which be used for engine restart sequence during lunar orbiting Trans-Earth injection.) would keep the safety range for the Saturn S-1C's staging sequences.

The setup for my concept is like this:

-Saturn V S-1C ignited to achieve the speed needed for Space Shuttle stack sequence.

-S-1C jettisoned,SRB ignited.The speed carried from the S-1C would be used to achieve the STS orbital speed to put the Shuttle for trans-lunar coast flight.
Interstage between the S-1C & Shuttle stack would keep the safety distance between SRB ignition & S-1C staging process.

-SRB jettisoned,while the 4 SSME engine would be fired to achieved the specific orbit parking.

-SSME shut down as it reach its orbit parking on earth,the single J-2 engine would be started to slingshot the Orbiter vehicle to reach moon orbit.The flight to the moon would be a little bit slow due to extra weight carried by the orbiter & its payload.(expect the 4-5 days flight to the moon compared to the Apollo spacecraft which taken 3 days to reach moon orbit)

The LM(Lunar/Landing module & The Apollo styled spacecraft on the picture are totally different kind of mission & crew exploration vehicle.

STS would be used to ferrying big load such as permanent habitational module,& other habitable equipment & extra crew if needed ,while the small CSM would be used for manned lunar surface mission.
 
Old 01-26-2013, 07:17 PM   #4
HBS
New Member
portfolio
Hidayat Saad
Leading Consultancy
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
So some other old render of the space program......Randomly selected.From exploring the lunar surface,the concept & some other related render regarding the space program itself.













Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Old 01-26-2013, 07:17 PM   #5
AJ1
User
 
AJ1's Avatar
CGTalk Forum Leader
portfolio
A J
Indiana, USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,810
Cool man. Looks like you've done some research.

Obviously I'm no rocket scientist, but It might make it more realistic if you removed the SRB. I really don't think they would want to light those things mid flight.

The Shuttle couldn't reach the moon, so you might want to pass of your shuttle as some kind of modified version if you want to make it realistic. I think it would need more fuel for a moon shot, so maybe you can make it larger, stronger, and more modular looking.

-AJ
__________________
 
Old 01-26-2013, 07:37 PM   #6
HBS
New Member
portfolio
Hidayat Saad
Leading Consultancy
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ1
Cool man. Looks like you've done some research.

Obviously I'm no rocket scientist, but It might make it more realistic if you removed the SRB. I really don't think they would want to light those things mid flight.

The Shuttle couldn't reach the moon, so you might want to pass of your shuttle as some kind of modified version if you want to make it realistic. I think it would need more fuel for a moon shot, so maybe you can make it larger, stronger, and more modular looking.

-AJ


Yup.I have done most of the research since the day I know that moon landing was the greatest achievement that mankind has ever done for now.(I used to be a hoax believer thanks to FOX primetime crap until I make my own research & I never thought that the day I make the research I cant help but to love the space science!)

I have some concept for the shuttle itself,since one of great aspect using the shuttle orbiter is the ability to carry massive payload like modular habitat module to built the ISS,& the same time putting much of human aspect to work through it.

(Many said,even some of the scientific community,that for that kind of ambitious project,robotic capabilities are more than enough to do that without human intervention.But the effect of that kind of thinking has put the ambitious program like Apollo to the sad end,only to be replaced by space orbiter that taxiing the astronaut to the earth orbit while making only little bit of leap in the previous success that Apollo has achieved,& yes the space program in earth orbit can be easily replaced by humanoid or some kind of robotic entity to do all the scientific experiment but we simply wouldnt venture as far" as that due to the fact,many people still believe that human presences in outer space is as importance as our origin itself,& robotic exploration simply cant replace that matter of fact)

One of earlier concept of my own STS is this,the air breathing,ram-air external tank that collected cold air during hypersonic flight to keep the oxygen for engine restart during trans-lunar flight:




Uploaded with ImageShack.us
& as to concerned about the project not to strayed far away from today realities & possibilities,I expected the F-1 engine on the Apollo booster to be upgraded to closed-loop cycle as opposed to the real Apollo F-1 engine which utilized the open-loop cycle to dump the excess fuel burn.(Closed cycle rocket engine has been successfully made by joint-agreement between NASA & OKB(US-Russia) by using Soviet N-1 moonrocket engine,then it was mated on US space launch vehicle such as Atlas V.

Space Shuttle 3 ME(Main Engine,RS-26) also incorporated some sort of of closed cycle engine design to improved the overall efficiency,size & packaging,also with a little bit of power increases as the design criteria of engine that permit very high turbine pressure.
 
Old 01-26-2013, 07:50 PM   #7
AJ1
User
 
AJ1's Avatar
CGTalk Forum Leader
portfolio
A J
Indiana, USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,810
Have you thought about how your going to present this?

I think something like this would work well for presenting your idea. Just a single large image that shows the earth, moon, and the various stages of your mission.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f...oFlightPath.jpg

http://hirealexford.com/slides/apollo131.jpg

-AJ
__________________
 
Old 01-26-2013, 08:03 PM   #8
leigh
blahblah
 
leigh's Avatar
CGSociety Staff
portfolio
Leigh van der Byl
A cog in the wheel
Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 29,776
I applaud you for your passion regarding the space exploration industry and the STS missions, but instead of posting loads of renders of what look like WIP models, you should really be focusing on improving each asset. Right now, all of your models just look like rough first pass blocked out models, as opposed to actual completed assets. Stop wasting time lighting and rendering and doing unnecessary post work like DOF on these, and rather focus on actually getting the models to look good. The way you're working now is a very destructive one, in terms of productivity and efficiency, and people who work this way generally end up never actually finishing the project.

For a start, I think you need to pay closer attention to your references because there are noticeable issues with the designs, unless you've intentionally altered them. The same goes for your textures, but you should get the models right first.

Perhaps I'm very picky as I'm a huge NASA fan and also recently completed an 18 month stint on a project where we recreated numerous NASA assets photorealistically, but someone with your enthusiasm should really also be spending a bit more time ensuring a greater degree of accuracy and attention to detail.

I also find your choice of the STS for lunar missions a bit odd as the shuttles aren't really designed for such operations. Perhaps this is a chance to get creative and invent a new vehicle for this purpose.
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 01-26-2013, 08:05 PM   #9
HBS
New Member
portfolio
Hidayat Saad
Leading Consultancy
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ1
Have you thought about how your going to present this?

I think something like this would work well for presenting your idea. Just a single large image that shows the earth, moon, and the various stages of your mission.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f...oFlightPath.jpg

http://hirealexford.com/slides/apollo131.jpg

-AJ


Woww....that was awesome references ! Thanks man for that !

Do you have the larger version of it ?Love to give it a try....

Anyway here is some simple see-through render of the Next Gen crew exploration vehicle that based on Apollo/Orion.



I would remade some of it probably the LM as I already had the complete model now.
Anyway here is some other of the related render...




Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Old 01-26-2013, 08:07 PM   #10
AJ1
User
 
AJ1's Avatar
CGTalk Forum Leader
portfolio
A J
Indiana, USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,810
On another note, have you ever been here?

I've used a few of these for personal project before.

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/3d_resources/models.html
__________________
 
Old 01-26-2013, 08:14 PM   #11
HBS
New Member
portfolio
Hidayat Saad
Leading Consultancy
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by leigh
I applaud you for your passion regarding the space exploration industry and the STS missions, but instead of posting loads of renders of what look like WIP models, you should really be focusing on improving each asset. Right now, all of your models just look like rough first pass blocked out models, as opposed to actual completed assets. Stop wasting time lighting and rendering and doing unnecessary post work like DOF on these, and rather focus on actually getting the models to look good. The way you're working now is a very destructive one, in terms of productivity and efficiency, and people who work this way generally end up never actually finishing the project.

For a start, I think you need to pay closer attention to your references because there are noticeable issues with the designs, unless you've intentionally altered them. The same goes for your textures, but you should get the models right first.

Perhaps I'm very picky as I'm a huge NASA fan and also recently completed an 18 month stint on a project where we recreated numerous NASA assets photorealistically, but someone with your enthusiasm should really also be spending a bit more time ensuring a greater degree of accuracy and attention to detail.

I also find your choice of the STS for lunar missions a bit odd as the shuttles aren't really designed for such operations. Perhaps this is a chance to get creative and invent a new vehicle for this purpose.


Most of work done with my underpower laptop & desktop PC.For now I didnt have extra $$$$ to get me a new,powerful system to make my dream happened,although it still better than nothing to had everything reduced in term of fine,in-depth details.

Perhaps when the budget for new workstation are achievable for me,I going to go even more details for each object.But for now I cant really do much about it.

For the STS,yup I design most of it as brand new vehicle altogether,including new system & mission sequencing so the reusable vehicle can be used for lunar mission(To carry heavy payload,crew changing station & orbiting lunar outpost/spacelab that can be reusable by mean of surviving the re-entry)

I had a several concept to replaced the Lunar Shuttle in my mind as well,but I need to refined the key element of ensuring the sequencing are as real as possible since Delta-V is always the major concern for such heavy payload.
 
Old 01-26-2013, 08:37 PM   #12
leigh
blahblah
 
leigh's Avatar
CGSociety Staff
portfolio
Leigh van der Byl
A cog in the wheel
Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 29,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by HBS
Most of work done with my underpower laptop & desktop PC.For now I didnt have extra $$$$ to get me a new,powerful system to make my dream happened,although it still better than nothing to had everything reduced in term of fine,in-depth details.


Oh come on now, that's a poor excuse! When I first started working in VFX, we worked on dual Pentium II 350Mhz machines with 500Mb RAM and 128Mb graphics cards, and we made stuff more detailed and realistic than this. The trick is to optimise your work to avoid excessively high overall poly counts and only use very high res textures for close up objects.

Trust me, it's better to work slower, taking things one step at a time, ensuring that each asset looks amazing, than just pumping out a load of half-done models just so you can get renders out. Use this time to work on each model on its own, which will take a long time (on the show I recently worked on, some of the NASA modules took weeks, even months, to fully model - and this was by pro modellers in one of the world's top VFX studios), so that hopefully once you have the budget for a more powerful machine capable of handling the rendering, you'll have a collection of high-spec assets to use. Seriously, don't worry about rendering and stuff for now - just focus on the models. You don't need a super crazy high end machine to model ;-)
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 01-26-2013, 08:58 PM   #13
HBS
New Member
portfolio
Hidayat Saad
Leading Consultancy
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by leigh
Oh come on now, that's a poor excuse! When I first started working in VFX, we worked on dual Pentium II 350Mhz machines with 500Mb RAM and 128Mb graphics cards, and we made stuff more detailed and realistic than this. The trick is to optimise your work to avoid excessively high overall poly counts and only use very high res textures for close up objects.

Trust me, it's better to work slower, taking things one step at a time, ensuring that each asset looks amazing, than just pumping out a load of half-done models just so you can get renders out. Use this time to work on each model on its own, which will take a long time (on the show I recently worked on, some of the NASA modules took weeks, even months, to fully model - and this was by pro modellers in one of the world's top VFX studios), so that hopefully once you have the budget for a more powerful machine capable of handling the rendering, you'll have a collection of high-spec assets to use. Seriously, don't worry about rendering and stuff for now - just focus on the models. You don't need a super crazy high end machine to model ;-)


I didnt have a great paid job for now so I guess that would taking sometimes too....

Oh yes,thanks for the advice,I would love to go to KSC some of these day if budget was not a concern.

Actually,most of these are old rendering image that taken from archieved files.
The process became quite fast probably due to the fact that some of the item that I can recycled from my old work,too.( I worked with other thing since 2002 & I found out on my archieve that some of that are looking quite good to assist the built process)

For now,I didnt thinking about making animation out of it,but just a couple of render to be put on my portfolio or making it as visual book about space exploration.

(Due to the low spec PC,most of the model needed a seperate render & layering work since model such like the LM,STS,& CSM,which I had to make the detailed engine,interior & instrument are crashing my laptop everytime I making one full render)

But as for image wise...here is also the old render that at first not really related to the project itself,but the model has been recycled few time due to the usabilty of the subject.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Old 01-26-2013, 09:07 PM   #14
AJ1
User
 
AJ1's Avatar
CGTalk Forum Leader
portfolio
A J
Indiana, USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,810
Hey man,

I agree with Leigh about organizing this project a little better, and getting the models knocked out first.

A good place to start might be a set of storyboards that show the different stages of your mission, from launch to return. From looking at your above renders, things are all over the place, and its hard to figure out what your trying to communicate.

-AJ
__________________
 
Old 01-26-2013, 09:07 PM   #15
CGTalk Moderation
Lord of the posts
CGTalk Forum Leader
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,066,481
Thread automatically closed

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.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
Thread Closed share thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.