First Attempt At Flora

Here is my first attempt at modeling some flora. To save time I used a modified version of a Half-Life 2 Episode 2 texture. I won't be using this model for anything, its just practice as I'd like to model various weedy growth and some Eucalyptus trees for Night Terror. Let me know what you guys think.

---

Aaron's Stuff

Looks good to me. I'd use it.

Looks good indeed.

I always found that modeling nature (especially trees) is among the most difficult things to do.

Looks pretty darn good to me!

I think I would have set each layer row a little closer together and rounded off the corners so that it minimizes the chances of seeing the straight-on side view of the thinness of the polygons.

But other than that, I don't see why you wouldn't use it. Maybe create your own skin to make it completely yours.

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

Nice one Aaron. I'd use it too, are you gonna release it? ( And how much $ for an arbutus tree )

Ah thanks guys.

"reaper47" said:
I always found that modeling nature (especially trees) is among the most difficult things to do.

Yeah I reckon, but this was actually quite easy to do.

What I did was create a rectangular prism length 128, height 64, width 1 with 4 horizontal/vertical "segments" so each face was cut 4 times horizontally and vertically. Once I removed the polygons on the sides (leaving only the front and back face), I essentially had the equivalent of two displacement surfaces back to back. I moved the vertexes around a bit to make it bumpy and applied the UV map to it. I then duplicated that object and moved/rotated it.

That was for the main part, I did that same process to the grass like growth on the sides of the model except I duplicated it more times and the rectangular prism was alot smaller (I think it was height 48, length 16, width 1).

"Riven" said:
I think I would have set each layer row a little closer together and rounded off the corners so that it minimizes the chances of seeing the straight-on side view of the thinness of the polygons.

Ah, good idea, I'll be sure to do that next time.

"Riven" said:
Maybe create your own skin to make it completely yours.

Yeah for sure, the next one I make I'll use my own texture. I actually started to make my own texture but it was taking along time and I wasn't concerned what texture I used for this practice model. If I had a better source photo it would have been much quicker, I think I'll take my own photo next time.

"haymaker" said:
are you gonna release it?

Well I wasn't going to but I guess I could upload it as a download here.

"haymaker" said:
And how much $ for an arbutus tree

Hehe, I don't think I'm quite close to modeling a decent tree yet but when I am I guess I could make a free one for you. But if you want one now you can always buy one from somewhere like Turbo Squid and compile it for the Source engine.

---

Aaron's Stuff

Looks good - What modeling program did you use?

Looks like 3DS MAX from the looks of his taskbar programs in the first image.

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

Riven said:
Looks like 3DS MAX from the looks of his taskbar programs in the first image.

Yep, 3ds Max 9.

I made a new one yesterday. It's basically the same thing except longer and taller and more bushier plus I added flowers. I'll upload it as a download here some time tonight.

---

Aaron's Stuff

I might be getting old, but a polycount of 460 strikes me as a little high for a model like this?

reaper47 said:
I might be getting old, but a polycount of 460 strikes me as a little high for a model like this?

High poly indeed, for such a simple model, if you look closely he has modeled a couple\\bunch of small little leaves, which is nice, but i really think you might wanna optimize it a little.

Also what version of max are you using, just wondering :>

EDIT: Hey, uh, do you by any tiny chance have any experience texturing cars?

reaper47 said:
I might be getting old, but a polycount of 460 strikes me as a little high for a model like this?

Perhaps, but considering that computers are more powerful now than what they where in 2004 and the fact this model is 325 units long and 110 high, I'm not terribly uncomfortable with the polycount.

I've optimized the model as much as possible and the majority of polygons actually come from those side shoots. I think I might actually decrease the amount of polygons on the side shoots (the mapping equivalent of decreasing the 'power' of a displacement) because the side shoots look flat anyway.

"yodalman" said:
Also what version of max are you using, just wondering :>

I'm using 3ds Max 9, I don't think it's the latest version anymore. After 3ds Max 9, they started naming them in years eg. 3ds Max 2009.

"yodalman" said:
Hey, uh, do you by any tiny chance have any experience texturing cars?

I don't, I think I could texture a car though.

---

Aaron's Stuff

aaron_da_killa said:
I think I might actually decrease the amount of polygons on the side shoots (the mapping equivalent of decreasing the 'power' of a displacement) because the side shoots look flat anyway.

Yea, that's what I meant.

reaper47 said:

aaron_da_killa said:
I think I might actually decrease the amount of polygons on the side shoots (the mapping equivalent of decreasing the 'power' of a displacement) because the side shoots look flat anyway.

Yea, that's what I meant.

Ah righto.

What do you guys think about the flowers? Should they stay?

---

Aaron's Stuff

Flowers are a good addition. I don't see a reason why you should get rid of them.

BTW, what resolution are you using for that texture?

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202

The texture is 512x512. Here it is.

---

Aaron's Stuff

aaron_da_killa said:
What do you guys think about the flowers? Should they stay?

I like the flowers.

Generally, though, I'd take a real-world photograph of a nature scenery (some scrubs etc) and rebuild it quite accurately. Not just mixing random pictures of leafs with an alpha channel (to be fair, I don't know whether you did that ).

It's the kind of little detail you notice subconsciously. If you have doubts about the flower (as I, on some level, have as well), you're probably thinking "does a plant like that have flowers"? Flowers that big?

If you have a natural reference you always have the a perfect look-up and don't have to worry.

reaper47 said:
Not just mixing random pictures of leafs with an alpha channel (to be fair, I don't know whether you did that ).

Basically what I did was browse CG Textures and Google for a decent photo I could make into a texture and when I realized it was taking too long I decided to open up the various gcf files I had containing materials and found a Half-Life 2 Episode 2 texture that was similar to what I wanted and I used that.

For the second iteration of the model, I thought I'd just toss in the flowers for something different. The model isn't really based on any particular plant in real life although I should really get my act together and model a real plant.

For this practice model, I was alot more focused on the model itself and not on the texture but as I'm starting to think I might actually be able to make something usable I'm starting to think about the texture more.

"reaper47" said:
It's the kind of little detail you notice subconsciously. If you have doubts about the flower (as I, on some level, have as well), you're probably thinking "does a plant like that have flowers"? Flowers that big?

If you have a natural reference you always have the a perfect look-up and don't have to worry.

My thoughts exactly.

---

Aaron's Stuff

reaper47 said:
If you have a natural reference you always have the a perfect look-up and don't have to worry.

Very good point Reap! -I second that!

---

Blog: www.playingarchitecture.net
LinkedIn: Eric Lancon
Twitter:@Riven202