[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/3/ - 3DCG


View post   

File: 976 KB, 300x400, 1420440858371.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
477134 No.477134 [Reply] [Original]

What would be the best way to achieve a super low poly look like this in Max? I have the low poly model, but if I want that (lack of) lighting, that aliasing, basically that 'retro' rendered finish?

>> No.477148

>>477134
To create that flat lighting, use a single ambient light. You can use a direct light or plane image to generate the shadow(s).

>> No.477149

>>477148
>To create that flat lighting, use a single ambient light.
You don't understand what an "ambient light" is, do you?

>>You can use a direct light or plane image to generate the shadow(s).
A "direct" light. My head hurts just reading this. Urbad

>> No.477155

give the material max ambient colour and zero diffuse. The texture will always appear as it would in photoshop and the model will still cast shadows as normal.

>> No.477179

unlit and no texture filtering. that shadow has geometry and is part of the texture. nb

>> No.477187

>>477149
>You don't understand what an "ambient light" is, do you?

Yes. That's what it's called in my rendering program of choice.

>A "direct" light. My head hurts just reading this. Urbad
Yes. Again, it's called a direct light.

>> No.477188
File: 259 KB, 1280x720, okay.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
477188

>>477187
Ambient + Direct light.

>> No.477189

In max I believe they're called skylight and directional light, respectively

>> No.477190

>>477187
>>477188

It has nothing to do with lighting you fucking casuals. It's in the material.

>> No.477199

>>477190
The materials is obviously a necessary component to achieving a low-poly look.

>> No.477200

>>477199
are you completely retarded?

>> No.477201

It's a handpainted model with point filtering textures and a shadeless/fullbright material.
Has nothing to do with ambient lights or directional light.

>> No.477213

>>477199
>the amount of polys of the model depend on the material
Jesus, listen to yourself

>> No.477221

just make a low poly thing then use a 256x256 texture map

>> No.477222

>>477221
Another retard giving the wrong advice. If you don't know wtf you're talking about then gtfo.

>> No.477229
File: 121 KB, 616x388, AAA_lighters_perspective.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
477229

Some shaders clearly react to dynamic lights. These are the eyeballs and fishbowl for direct specular reflection. How do I know this?

1) Multiple specular highlights in the shiny areas that matches the shadow direction.
2)There is a shadow in the scene.

Everyone else ITT is trollin

>> No.477230

>>477229
The shadow is a mesh; it doesn't match the shape of the model at all.
>Some shaders clearly react to dynamic lights
What dynamic lights?
If there were specular highlights in the gif they would change based on the surface angle relative to the camera as it rotates, and clearly they aren't moving at all.
You're using lighting consistency in baked textures as evidence of shaded highlights. Fucking idiot.

Only troll in here is you, or you're just a complete moron like all the others in this thread shitposting.

>> No.477231

>>477229
>This post gave me cancer.

/3/... plz stawp...

>> No.477232

>>477230
>>477231

You know he's right.

>> No.477234

>>477232
>>477229
samefag

>> No.477251

>>477134
I want this "retro" low-poly 3D fad to end.

>> No.477279

>>477149
>>477190
>>477200
>>477213
>>477222
>>477231
>>477234
ITT: Reasons why /3/ is the worst board on 4chan.

>> No.477285

>>477279
Exactly, people that don't know what they're talking about should just shut up.

>> No.477287

>>477285
The assholes should follow suit as well.

>> No.477318

>>477279
>people disagree with me because i'm wrong
>worst board on 4chan

Achieving this look literally has nothing to do with lighting. If your material is 100% ambient, with spec/reflection disabled, such as OPs pic, it doesn't matter what lighting conditions it's under; it will always appear as flat and unshaded unshaded.

>> No.477321

>>477318
This is the worst board on 4chan because trying to help someone usually results in people calling others an idiot while they contribute nothing else to the conversation. That's not to say I expect people to be nice, but I think they should at least be constructive.

>> No.477323

>>477134
>3D Max
You can easily archive this, however i'd recommend switching to Maya.

>> No.477350

>>477323
OP asked how to do something in Max, and did probaby read the rules and not ask which program is superior. Yet this anon comes out of nowhere and tells OP to switch program. How the fuck is switching program going to solve OP's problem? If you can't help OP in his program of choice then dont fucking comment, you piece of trash. It's not even a valid piece of shilling, it's just anon talking out his ass again. Maya, Max, Blender - who fucking cares? You're worse than religious missionairies. It is people like you who make /3/ the shittiest board on the site.
>umad
Yes I am fucking pissed that this place, which could have so much potential for aspiring modellers and artists, is so full of morons who think their whatever choice of software is the best and shills it at every given thread. Fuck you and fuck your shit. Anon out.

>> No.477351

>>477350
We need active Nazi mods who will van anyone who starts or participates in an obvious flame war.

>> No.477399

Out of interest does anyone know how to achieve this look in blender? I imagine this involves disabling texture filtering but how about the flatshading?

>> No.477423

>>477399

I'm not sure about the shadow but on the ground, but this looks 100% textured. Including the speculars on the eyes and the character's hat thing. The bottle probably has a transparent material on it.

>> No.477424

>>477423
If the bottle had a transparent material you would've seen the arm and the boy trough it, it's clearly inverted normals so we see the inside rather the outside of it.

And yes there is nothing going on with the shader, that is 100% flat-lit texture.

>> No.477426

SET THE MATERIALS TO 100% SELF-ILLUMINATION

SET AA TO NONE

SET TEXTURE FILTERING TO NONE

>> No.477428

>>477424
>you would've seen the arm and the boy trough it

I meant to write 'body', but 'boy' kinda works I suppose, even if it makes me sound a bit retarded.

>> No.477471

so, to sum things up, What the fuck?
Did OP question got answered?

>> No.477472

>>477471
It would be impossible to know for sure without an animated clip

>> No.477475

>>477471
I fucking answered it in the first 5 posts.
It doesn't matter what fucking lights you use.
Make a fucking lambert, set the ambient colour to max, set the diffuse to min. Turn filtering off on your texture, and use a pixel art texture. Turn filtering and AA off in your render settings.

This is such basic shit, the level of retardation in this thread is embarrassing.

>> No.477476

>>477475
....and yet you keep posting here.
Classic CUNT.

>> No.477477

>>477475
>Make a fucking lambert,
why make a lambert at all, you dont need NdotL. Just make a constant shader.

>Turn filtering off on your texture
Textures always have to be filtered, either linearlly, nearest pixel, or anisotropically.

>This is such basic shit, the level of retardation in this thread is embarrassing.
You're the only one embarrassing themselves.

>> No.477633

>>477134
>I want that (lack of) lighting,
use world based ambient occlusion.
i come from blender and have never touched max so i'm not sure if it's the same thing in that prog or not but that how it's achieved in blender.

just one check box in the world tab.

>> No.477635

>>477633
>use AO
>image has no AO

been lurking this thread for like 3 days. Shit's hilarious.

>> No.477658

Some people posting in this thread are amazing. They must be all like "I don't know anything, but I'm gonna type this post"
Then they type it and inspects it's content and be all like "I don't know what the words I typed even is supposed to mean but I'm so gonna press that send button"

Here's an idea: If you're not absolutely sure you know what you're talking about, refrain from posting. You just generate meaningless noise for anyone interested
in the answer will have to filter trough. The correct answer have been posted several times ITT, but how's a newbie supposed to know who's full of shit and who isn't?

Here's a list of correct awnsers ITT:

>>477190
>>477201
>>477230
>>477318
>>477424
>>477426 - This one is especially correct.
>>477475