What makes a model "high poly"???



  • @eclark1849 Actually, that style would look good in leather or fabric, so don't limit yourself to just leather textures.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    Hi Poly versus Low Poly is an interesting discussion.

    Prime rule is : Do not see your item as a "stand alone" but see the whole picture.

    Recap:
    PE and V4 are around 70.000
    Roxy around 22.000
    Pauline around 35.000
    G8 around 16.000

    Later figures (Roxie, G7, G8) all dropped in polycount from the V3, V4, Miki4.

    In a basic scene:

    • Figure

    • Hair => most render engines do not "choke" on the figures, but on the hair.

    • Shoes or boots => 20.000 poly shoes on a 20.000 poly figure?

    • Clothing ( be it dress, shirt, blouses, pants) => See where this is going?

    • Props

    • And a house or room also with props to put the figure in.

    Look for the balance between the lot.

    At best : a handbag could have double the vertex count on a hand.
    The rest of the detail goes in a Bump, Displacement and or Normal map.

    Maintaining the balance between the figures and the "add-ons" (hair, clothing and props) is a fine art only the best modelers pay attention to.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    This site gives a good demo on the balance between polygon modeling and maps used.
    You can click on any figure and turn it around to see what the mesh and maps do.
    Mesh and maps

    Blender also has the tools to bake down textures from a Hi to a Low poly model.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    And here another good example of what to put in a mesh and what in the maps.
    Mesh or maps

    Always remember :
    It is texture you see, it is texture and material room setup you render.
    The mesh is just the coathanger to hang the textures on.

    Keeping the meshes and the textures in balance is the true art of a scene builder.



  • @vilters looks like "just" a game character to me. So disproved to me . Good textures are not enough to convince me.



  • @masterstroke If displacement maps are supported, there is no difference to a high-poly object.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @masterstroke
    Tja , some game characters are better looking then what Poser or DS or Clone us all, will ever produce in the next decade or so.

    Sometimes, it is better to look UP to Game characters. The time to look DOWN at Game Characters is far behind us.

    The modern game Industry, has the time, the money and the tech for some fantastic productions.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    Too many polygons, is when the program crashes because there are too many in the scene....



  • @vilters the big "tell" that I see in low-poly game characters used for animation outside the high-framerate games themselves (where the human eye is hard pressed to focus on such rapidly changing detail), such as SFM and MMD, are that unless their rendering uses micro-polygon displacement, you can always see the sharp profiles of the low density polygon mesh on the tangent polygons, which looks dreadful.

    Just like Poser renders which use bump instead of displacement, you don't get any change in the profile shape of the rendered mesh where the polys are parallel to the line of sight. Until we get micro-polygon displacement in SuperFly, actual polygon mesh density is the only substitute, unfortunately. When SMS does deliver that, eventually, it will potentially be another game changer, where figure mesh density can be exchanged for detailed displacement maps.

    Of course, hand-in-hand with more detailed maps is memory usage, so the tradeoffs between poly-count and texture storage will always exist, until Poser can do automatic Z-depth decimation/subdivision, only dealing with the level of detail required by the sharpness of focus at a particular distance from the camera. More subdivision for sharp focus, and less subdivision, none, or even decimation for out-of-focus, background figures/scenery.



  • @anomalaus said in What makes a model "high poly"???:

    Just like Poser renders which use bump instead of displacement, you don't get any change in the profile shape of the rendered mesh where the polys are parallel to the line of sight. Until we get micro-polygon displacement in SuperFly, actual polygon mesh density is the only substitute, unfortunately. When SMS does deliver that, eventually, it will potentially be another game changer, where figure mesh density can be exchanged for detailed displacement maps.

    This. Agreed.



  • @anomalaus A good modeled low-res character can be subdivided in Poser until micro-polygon displacement is available in Superfly. So no need to make heavy high density objects.



  • @adp said in What makes a model "high poly"???:

    A good modeled low-res character can be subdivided in Poser until micro-polygon displacement is available in Superfly. So no need to make heavy high density objects.

    However, it's not only figures that could benefit from micropolygon displacement.

    I've got a whole bunch of fabrics that I scanned, and one thing I really would love to see is micropolygon displacement. A micropolygon displacement map would add a lot more realism, even by adding a wee bit of displacement to enhance the warps and wefts in the threads of the fabric, so that when you see the sides of the clothing (the faces that are perpendicular to the camera), you don't see "flat" ... you see the fabric exactly the way it appears from the front. To get that amount of fine detail, you'd need to subdivide the mesh so much that it would appear pure black in wireframe view.

    Another thing. Fine embroidered clothing. LOTS of different threads. Micropolygon displacement adds realism across the board. I could go on and on with examples of how micropolygon displacement could benefit clothing and props.

    The lack of micropolygon displacement in Poser is what made me invest in Octane Render to begin with.



  • @Deecey said in What makes a model "high poly"???:

    The lack of micropolygon displacement in Poser is what made me invest in Octane Render to begin with.

    Correction: The lack of micropolygon displacement in SUPERFLY ...



  • @Deecey Adding a real edge/border to fabric needs a few additional polygons (3 per corner-polygon) and is easy to make. And it looks and behaves better in dynamic simulations (clothroom). Because you can define the edge-polygons to behave like real fabric at the edges (stiffer then the rest, more weight, holding form).



  • @adp

    Yes I add a hem to my clothing. But that isn't what I'm talking about ... I will work up some renders to show you what I mean



  • OK ... first some disclaimers. I used a larger fabric scale, and a higher displacement scale on the following image, just to show the effect I'm talking about with how displacement affects the edges on clothing that are perpendicular to the camera.

    The left side shows bump only. The bumpiness looks ok with the polygons that are directly facing the camera, but when you get to the edge of the clothing (the edge that is facing perpendicular to the camera), it's perfectly flat.

    The right side shows a displacement map added (and it's set a little high just to show the difference). The "bumpiness" of the fabric now shows up around the edge of the image.

    0_1529692017010_disp.png

    In proper use, the displacement wouldn't be set as high, but it would add to the realism of the fabric. All it needs, really, is a little tweak but it really does make a difference with closeup renders.

    But to achieve that same look with subdivision .... yikes.



  • @Deecey No question that micro displacement is nice to have. But most people use both: High poly density and dispacement.



  • @Deecey said in What makes a model "high poly"???:

    OK ... first some disclaimers. I used a larger fabric scale, and a higher displacement scale on the following image, just to show the effect I'm talking about with how displacement affects the edges on clothing that are perpendicular to the camera.

    The left side shows bump only. The bumpiness looks ok with the polygons that are directly facing the camera, but when you get to the edge of the clothing (the edge that is facing perpendicular to the camera), it's perfectly flat.

    The right side shows a displacement map added (and it's set a little high just to show the difference). The "bumpiness" of the fabric now shows up around the edge of the image.

    0_1529692017010_disp.png

    In proper use, the displacement wouldn't be set as high, but it would add to the realism of the fabric. All it needs, really, is a little tweak but it really does make a difference with closeup renders.

    But to achieve that same look with subdivision .... yikes.

    It does INDEED make all the difference. And not only in closeups, although that's obviously where it's most noticeable. Also in full body renders. It looks ever so slightly OFF when there's no displacement on the edges of clothes.
    Probably not enough to consciously notice. But the "something's off" feeling.



  • @adp in my case, that's purely because I have so much invested in a character (V4) developed before any of the contemporary platforms supported subdivision. A decimated V4 with subdivision might be a huge workflow performance improvement, provided that the decimation algorithm is smart enough to only take vertices from where they aren't needed for morph accuracy. (Not happening any time soon, if ever)

    @Deecey the one thing I was waiting for you to list as being vastly improved by micro-polygon displacement, before you went TL;DR, is transmapped hair. With @bagginsbill 's BBSF hair shader providing specular highlights responsive to actual scene lighting, AND, micro-facet displacement, I would be in heaven again, as I used to be in FireFly before SuperFly came along. A good hair strand bump map or transmap applied as displacement lets the realism of good hair props leap out of their renders in close-ups.



  • @anomalaus

    Yes forgot about adding hair. My bad, and good point.