danbickell

Wow, Arnold is back? I remember the hype around that several years ago, but never heard it was finished or being used these days. Guess I'm out of touch, but the only renderer we're ever concerned with in game development is whatever engine we're currently using.

Max is better for modelling these days, though Maya is still superior for rigging and animation. Even though I was strongly in the Maya camp for years, I was actually using quite a number of scripts and tools that I had a tools programmer I worked with create for me to get a number of standard Max tools that Maya didn't have (to ease the transition for my team when we switched software). I didn't even remember this until I re-installed Maya out-of-the-box, and realized all my custom tools were missing, and I felt practically helpless without them.

I do plan to at least do the S head, and FAST packs. To round out the DYRL collection, I would like to do VT-1 and VE-1 too. Of course, there was that one GBP-1J in DRYL...

If I can ever get those finished, I would certainly like to make a TV version as well, and then I'd just have to do the TV A and J heads. Of course, then I'd want to a VF-1D, and GBP armor as well.

I need to win the lottery, so I can just spend all my time modelling Macross stuff. Then I'll do it all, with TV and DYRL SDF-1s to go with them!

Everything up to this point was modelled in Maya 8.5. I will most likely continue in Max though, just because that's what I'm currently using at work ( so I have the current version of Max at home now). I really preferred Maya to Max, like 5+ years ago when I had to switch to Maya at work. Switching to the current Max over the last year, I'm actually liking Max better again now.

No NURBS or sub-d at all. Everything is poly.

As far as renderers, I have no plans at all. I've always been a production artist, so I never really mess with that stuff, to be honest. Everything so far has just been using good old Mental Ray, in either Maya or Max. I'm always open to suggestions...

Oh wow, I didn't notice that on the front page! My name ends with 2 Ls, BTW, but I'm not fussed about it.

Externally, most of the DYRL changes are on the nose.

The canopy is bubbled out, and the canopy frame has some differences. Here's a quick image I put together while discussing the canopy variants in another thread some time ago:

The A head got some revisions for DYRL as well (different proportions, extended sensor piece, added detail). The "backpack" vent (facing rear in fighter, up in battroid) was revised as well. That's about it, off the top of my head. There are small details that were added or revised (panel lines and such) in the more detailed sketches, too.

The other big differences are all internal, such as the cockpit and main landing gear.

Wow i just started doing the same exact thing a few days ago, I had only intended to make the cockpit though. After seeing this...i dont think i have the will to finish it. Ah well i can always do a diff Valk....anyone have any requests? Pref something classic and something i can find tons of internal line work on.

Aw, don't get discouraged... make a better one! This is hardly my first time around at the subject. Over the years, the awesome talent here has improved on the subject over and over again, and that just motivates me to give it another shot.

I'd love to see somebody do a definitive version of the TV VF-1 cockpit. It is completely different, much loved, and there is plenty of reference.

The true RPF currently resides at www.thereplicapropform.com and it is perfectly safe there now. The hackers did have access at one point before the security breach was understood, but that has been taken care of.

Prior to that, they did get the complete database up until late December 2011. Anybody who is a member there might want to review and change their passwords, if they happened to use the same password in multiple places.

The hackers have up spoof sites at www.therpf.com and also www.the-rpf.com . They are running a campaign to fool members into staying at their domain to keep traffic up to get the ad revenue, and probably to ransom the domain back to the proper owner.

The Facebook page, and Art Andrews (the owner) are good places to get updates and confirmations. The page is here: http://www.facebook.com/#!/therpf

However, the hackers have spoofed the Facebook page as well: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/The-Replica-Prop-Forum/321458777885579 . Members have been trying to report this page, and warn people away from it.

A number of RPF members have been mounting a campaign on the spoofed domain to warn members and direct them to the right place. There has also been a lot of warning threads and general trolling of the spoofed site, to try to make it obvious that something is wrong. Most of it gets cleaned up and covered up, but we have reclaimed a good number of the members who missed all the news. Wolverines!!

Traffic at the spoofed site is getting very low at this point, and I would recommend steering clear of their until it dies, the hacker gives up, and we will hopefully get the domain back.

So, please carry on at www.thereplicapropforum.com as usual. Review and change passwords as needed, and review the email address attached to your account as well (many people did not get the official emails explaining the issues because of this).

Ok...

I got Maya re-installed, dusted off the model, and put together some wireframe renders:

Maya is somewhat limited (at least to my knowledge, anyway) when it comes to doing wireframe renders. So, I exported to OBJ and got the model into Max, so see what I could come up with there:

Thanks guys!

My old computer died, and I replaced it some months ago, but haven't got around to installing Maya yet on the new machine. I've been using Max exclusively at work for the past year, so I just haven't got around to it.

I'll see if I can get Maya installed, or maybe I've got export to a Max-friendly format. The wireframe is indeed quite dense in places. You might be surprised, though. I've been stuck in the mindset of optimized game models for so long that old habits die hard. There isn't a bunch of subdivisions where they aren't needed, like I typically see in most people's high poly work.

Things are getting less busy at the office, so hopefully I should have time to get the VF-1 off the back-burner. I'm certainly in the mood to get back to it!

Yeah, I want updates too!!

Seeing the great work Doktor Gonzo and Aztek have been showing has me really motivated, but I'm just lacking the time for it. I'm very busy at the office these days.

Maybe I can squeeze in some time before the weekend ends... At the very least, I'll try to come up with some new renders.

Sorry, this one has to be slow-roasted to perfection.

Looks like my girlfriend will be out-of-town for a chunk of next week, so I should be able to make some progress between the weekend and the free nights I'll have.

Although, what I'm working on right now isn't all that exciting. I've been refining the cross-section of the panel line cuts on the nose so they are rounded and shade a lot nicer. It's a PITA, but it does look better.

I still need to work out the details on the base of the neck and head transformation parts, and this stuff has to be made-up, unfortunately. There are nice details on some of the DYRL sketches, but they won't actually work with the transformation. I've borrowed the setup from the Yamato 1/60 V2 for this, which positions the head very nicely in fighter and battroid, but the mechanics of it doesn't match any of the lineart. I'll do my best to make it cool...

I'll be tackling the back of the nose section and head cavity as well, based on the details in some of the transformation sketches and the VF-1D detached nose section lineart. Fortunately, that stuff looks like it will match up quite well.

Thanks! Yeah, this one is certainly taking a lot of time. I've mostly made progress in spurts when I've had free time, and I'm busy again at the office these days.

Actually, I don't have any front/rear image planes. I've only had the sides, top, and bottom from the Hasegawa 1/48 J/A kit instructions, and haven't got my hands on the S kit yet. If anybody has the S kit, I would love some scans!

I've played around with the front/rear views from VF-1 Master Files and TIA Macross Plus, just to compare where parts were landing, but that's about it. The vertical space that the arms will occupy is the only real mystery that plans would help with, but I will likely not follow this very precisely from the Hasegawa version anyway (too fighter-centric), and use arm proportions more similar to the Yamato 1/60 V2 (which the Hasegawa 1/48 leg proportions seem to leave plenty of room for).

All the work so far is pure poly. No nurbs, no sub-d. I'm pretty old-school like that, although my recent forays into Zbrush have been making me wish I had taken the sub-d approach. At this point, the existing geometry is so cut-up and complicated that I can't do much else with it. I've gone back to earlier pre-detailed versions to convert to sub-d for Zbrush, but I guess I'm just not good enough with Zbrush yet to get results that I like better. It might be slow going, but I greatly prefer the clean and tidy results I get with old-fashioned poly work, at least inside Maya for renders. I'd have some faceting issues if I wanted to do larger scale 3d printing of this stuff, though, so I'm still trying to explore different options.

I really like the Macross The First D head update too. The D head in general has always been a bit of a mystery to me. I don't get why there would be 2 eye units in the first place, when the head can only look one direction at a time, and theoretically would only be controlled by one or the other person. It makes a little more sense if each optic unit was articulated somehow (to provide individual view directions, within a limited arc based on the head position), but the optic units on the other variants are clearly fixed.

I would certainly like to do the 2 seaters, but I will probably do the DYRL VT and VE version first. I don't think I will get around to doing a D until I do a TV version cockpit and nose to base it on.

Amazing. That is some fantastic interpretation of the eye detail sketches and the overall head. Can't wait to see the other head variants.

Tipatat

Thanks! Your models helped motivate me to step up my game. I had been jonesing to do the eye that way all along, and you beat me to the punch. Cheers!

That head looks awesome! It appears like there's a lens behind a retractable cover, down in the corner if I'm looking at this right.

I can't wait to see more, this is going to be the best VF-1 CG model ever.

Yeah, that secondary lens with a clam-shell cover is an interesting feature, that shows up in both the detail sketches that were done for the A and S heads for DYRL, and also in another DYRL sketch (busts of S and A battroids, with Claudia sitting on top of Roy's S head and Misa and Minmei fighting over Hikaru's A). It is shown with the clam-shell open and closed, but it is consistently there, with the same placement, and I would assume the other models have them as well.

Thank you!

Ok, I think I've made enough progress on the DYRL VF-1A head to merit posting. My Zbrush experimentation has been interesting and informative, but I'm nowhere close to getting the sort of results I was hoping for. Perhaps I can get there eventually, but it will be a real trick to get intricate hard-surface modelling as clean as I'm aiming for, so back to good old Maya!

I've always loved the A head, especially the updated DYRL version. The shape is a little tricky, and it seems that most interpretations of it are often quite wrong. Mine is primarily based on the Hasegawa 1/48, which is pretty good, despite trying to do double-duty as both TV and DYRL versions (with or without the eye extension). They did a great job, but there are more differences than the eye extension they overlooked. Yamato did a nice job with the 1/60 V2 versions, with completely different models for TV and DYRL (though the proportions of the DYRL version is weighted a bit much to the front, much like one of the models in Vol. 2 of the VF-1 Master File).

I've always wanted to take a shot at replicating the eye detail, but I saved it for last to keep myself motivated. This is based soley on the Kawamori detail sketches. There's certainly some interpretation going on, but I tried to keep it as close as possible to what was designed, and resisted the urge to make up my own details as much as I could manage.

Here are various shots without the ambient occlusion, but with some color, and the glass parts in the eye:

Lastly, here's the head in context with the nose:

While I have the basic geometry setup for the transformation mechanism (based on the Yamato 1/60 V2), it hasn't been detailed yet. That, and the details on the back of the nose and the head cavity under the nose are next up!

That's really interesting, Dan. I've always been interested in 3d CG and printing myself. One thing I've always wanted to do was to be able to make well-detailed renditions of some of the rarer planes, like the VF-11MAXL, the stock VF-11D, or the different Advanced Valkyries. I'll have to look into Zbrush sometime, but I really should learn modeling in general. I've actually been slowly working on a top view of the VF-19F/S just for that purpose.

Speaking of 1/24th scale VF-1s, have you seen this?

Yeah, I've been watching the progress on that 1/24 VF-1, and I certainly give him an A for effort! I've done my share of scratch building, molding and casting, and I know how much hard work that is. Plenty of people seem to be excited about it, and I hope he is able to produce some kits and sell them. One of the nice things about scratch building is that it isn't nearly as expensive as 3d printing, so hopefully he can offer kits at a reasonable price.

The tricky thing with larger scale models is that the larger scale SHOULD afford better detail than a smaller scale model of the same subject, but they usually don't. Historically, a lot of 1/32 scale aircraft kits are simply scaled up versions of pre-existing 1/48 or 1/72 kits, and it shows. Hasegawa did a great job with their 1/48 VF-1 because it isn't derivative of their 1/72 kits. They mastered a new model from scratch, and besides the proportional differences I keep harping on, they used the scale for more detail, with more realistic scale on the size and depth of the panel lines and rivets, and the thickness (or thinness) of the parts.

A 1/24 scale model should be able to have double the detail quality of a 1/48, ideally, and that is what I would be targeting. A panel line, scribed into a physical model with a panel scriber, will tend to be much too big and deep to be realistic for modern aircraft tolerances, even at 1/24 scale. Even at 0.5mm (width and depth), that would scale up to 12mm at 1/1 scale (half an inch), which is much too large. The largest panel lines on my CG model so far are 4mm (panels with hinges), down to 2.5mm for the smaller ones. CG modeling makes this easy to control. Trying to scribe such details on a physical model at 1/24 scale would mean they would need to be 0.1 to 0.16 mm, which would be quite a feat to pull off!

Sorry, nothing much new to show. I've done a little work on the A head, but that's about it.

My boss wants me to learn Zbrush, so my spare time has been sucked up with that. Hard for an old dog to learn new tricks like this, but I'm starting to see some light at the end of the tunnel. I hadn't paid much attention to Zbrush since I last evaluated an early version years ago, and there is a lot of new stuff that makes it much better suited for hard-surface mechanical models than it used to be.

I will probably start importing pieces of my VF-1 model into Zbrush, retopologize them, and detail them. I'll probably start with the seat cushion, get some nice cloth details on that, and then move on to the rest of the seat to see what I can do. I'm thinking I can stick to Maya for the major modelling, and do all the detailing in Zbrush. All the panel lines and such should be much easier to do in Zbrush, compared to the way I've been doing it so far. Likewise for rivet details and such.

One of the things that really impresses me about Zbrush is the ways you can edit topology. I'm thinking this is the perfect road for making extremely detailed models that are much more suitable for 3D printing, which is ultimately what I would like to do with this VF-1 model. I've always wanted to produce a large scale cockpit model, maybe 1/24 or 1/32 scale models of the whole thing, or maybe detail parts (cockpit, etc.) for the Hasegawa 1/48.

I will be sure to post progress, as soon as I have something worth posting!

Ok, so what is going on with the bottom of the feet in the #2 picture in that ad?

Thanks for your input, Doktor Gonzo! Your VF-1 model has been one of the best around for many years, and I have a number of your renders among my reference. Those orthos are very appreciated, and will certainly be studied and compared to other interpretations. The fighter front ortho is of particular interest to me, and it confirms some thoughts I've had regarding your interpretation, specifically the more circular cross section of nose (much like the original ortho lineart, TV era), rather than the more triangular/trapezoidal cross section (wider and flatter at the bottom) direction that some of the more modern interpretations have moved to.

Studying the many interprations of the VF-1 design is a big part of the fun of working on a project like this, for me. I would probably have a lot more of the model worked out by now if I spent less time comparing and scrutinizing the details of all the available artwork, models, and toys. I think patience has certainly come with age for me, though, and I am very happy to have such a wealth of work that has been done by all the artists and craftsman before me availble to learn from.

As far as the schooling discussion, I have never had any formal training. There really wasn't much availble when I was in college 20 years ago, and I was studying bio-chem anyway. CG art was merely a hobby of mine back then, and I learned by doing. I have never had a class, and never read any books relating to the subject. I'm coming up on 16 years in game development soon, and everything I know has come from self-learning and experience working alongside other artists (many of which, especially the older folks, also never had any related formal education).

Very interesting comparison, I don't think I've seen all of those together at once before.

I am liking the newer Hasegawa model, but I loath the look of the Yamato 1/60 v2 (and I say that having two of them). The contours of the nose and canopy just look atrocious.

With the Master File one, you can trace back where it comes from, it's just an up-detailed version of the one from This is Animation: Macross Plus. You can compare it to this one. http://www.macross2.net/m3/sdfmacross/vf-1a-valkyrie/schematic-vf1a.gif It fits closer with the production art from the show, which shows a very skinny and flat-looking VF-1. http://www.macross2.net/m3/sdfmacross/vf-1a-valkyrie/vf-1a-fullyarmed-fightermultipleviews.gif Notice the intake trunks stay flat, instead of coming down like the Hasegawa ones.

I totally agree about the the nose contours on the Yamato V2. The limitations of a transformable toy, using thick plastic, and trying to do a cockpit interior and working landing gear in that scale, they sacrificed the contour and made it look "fat". The overall proportions, however, worked out quite well for making it look good in all 3 modes, even if the details aren't ideal. No other transforming toy or model gets this as well, in my opinion.

The Hasegawa 1/48 matches these proportions quite well, without sacrificing the proper contours, and this is why I like it so much.

I also agree that the VF-1 Master File / M+ TIA plans do match the original TV art very well. The problem, for me, is that it doesn't transform well, and requires the "anime magic" of the show to re-scale and re-proportion everything to look good in the other modes. I throw-up in my mouth a little every time I see the VF-1 Master File plans of what those proportions translate to in gerwalk and battroid.

Again, I think they have nailed the proportional changes on the Hasegawa 1/48 so that it will look great in battroid and gerwalk, and I absolutely love how it looks in fighter as well. I don't care for the old flattened fighter look, and much prefer this taller profile that evokes the Su-27, to me.

I also really like the lower intakes, which seems to be a nod to other modern fighters such as the F-16, F-18E, and F-22 where the intake is not flush with the fuselage. It looks good, is realistic, keeps it straight with the larger legs, and allows more space for the arms to be the proper size as well. It also creates much-needed extra room for the mechanism to swing the legs down for battroid. I think it is a genius solution to a number of problems with the original design, and I embrace it.

I love fighter mode as much as anybody, and will always sacrifice the other modes for fighter, but I want to do that as little as possible. Hasegawa did a really nice job re-designing their model, and it was my excitement over seeing this on the plans included with the model kit that got me motivated to start this CG model project. I love their new proportions, but it still has problems with a number of details not matching between the TV and DYRL versions of the VF-1.

Here is a study I put together, comparing various fighter side plans:

The blue and red boxes are all identical, and matching the Hasegawa 1/48.

You can clearly see how close it comes to the Yamato 1/60 V2 proportions. Likewise, you can see how much skinnier the legs are on the Hase 1/72 (and the angle problem), and also on the VF-1 Master File version (based on the M+:TIAS plans), which is also much flatter top to bottom. We know how poorly the latter transforms to battroid and gerwalk.

Hey i was thinking of doing my own VF-1 model, do you know if this hasegawa model you are using as reference looks good at battroid mode????

One of the reasons I decided on the Hasegawa 1/48 as the basis for my model is the proportions of the legs, which are larger and beefier than on previous models (and the odd leg angle of their 1/72 models has been fixed), and should look excellent in battroid mode.

It seems that the Hasegawa 1/48 proportions are very similar all-around to the Yamato 1/60 V2, which is my favorite of the transforming toys and models for looking good in all 3 modes. My biggest planned deviation from the Hasegawa 1/48 would be the arms, which will more closely match the Yamato 1/60 V2, but even those aren't too far off between the 2.

i just showed the 1st page pics to my dad (who is a Career BF Goodrich Landing Gear techrep guy) commented about the pics. He said that 1) the brace too small/thin [i didnt try to explain things like SWAG or other overtechnolgy methods to reenforce airframe components during transformation sequences] and 2) the launch bar is a bit too short... you should model it in the upright position when the Valkyrie is taxiing (since he said if the launch bar droops and catchs something, you either bend it [Pilot goes Opps to the CAG MO] or sping the aircraft around REALLY fast [Oh sh*t]. you really should look up aircraft landing gear configs to see ideas what the bar would like in taxi position since, unlike any aircraft build after perhaps VF-4, they still used more modern catapult shuttle designs...

Good information, and we're on the same page.

Of course, the brace should certainly be much beefier, and was drawn much bigger in the lineart. Unfortunately, the lineart configuration doesn't actually fit inside the bay when retracted. That's why this one is offset to the side, a triple piston (instead of double), and smaller in diameter. This is what will actually fit, and work mechanically.

The launch bar is straight from the lineart. There is a little bit more room to lengthen it (before it won't clear the front door anymore), though. The lineart catapult shuttle design hitches to the bar pretty high off the deck, though. Of course, it would not be in that position for taxi! That position is simply part of my animation test, which goes from fully retracted to fully extended, so the cat bar swings all the way down through its complete arc.

I actually used to work with an artist named Jason Lewis, 10+ years ago. I think I do recall that he was a Macross fan as well (and was always admiring my Club-M 1/48 Strike model that I had in the office). I wonder if it is the same guy? I haven't been in touch with him for years now, but somebody just mentioned him at a dinner I was at on Friday, and apparently he is living in the Seattle area these days. I'll see if I can get in touch with him...

Finally had some free time today, so I got the rest of the panels cut in to the nose. I've got to get to bed, so I'll let the pics do the talking:

Really needs ambient occlusion at this point, to do it justice:

LOVE the visor detail! You certainly beat me to the punch on that. Excellent work!

i'm floored at your work (especially the nose gear). I worked Support Equipment in my time in the Navy but i always liked watching the airframes doing lift checks on Hornets & Hawkeyes (my dad did contractor level work as a 'gear man' so i had more than a little reason to want to know more about AC landing gear systems).

Just looking at those beautiful CGI of the enterior bays... breath taking. I especially applaud the venier details since they retro'd their purpose a few years ago...

Thanks! I'm really happy to hear from a guy with your background. I put a lot of thought into the nose gear, and used plenty of reference from Navy birds. A lot is borrowed from the F-14 (which is quite apparently what the original design is based on, and what they referenced for added details in the VF-1 Master Files), but I wanted to modernize it more, and used F-18 gear as reference for that.

I made the decision to modernize it further with a few Macross conventions I decided to adopt, since "overtechnology" should come into play. I left out any sort of fuse box/ electrical maintenance parts you would find in the gear bays, since their electrical systems should be advanced beyond that. Likewise, there are no actuators for things like the catapult bar, since small and powerful self-contained servos are clearly used all over for transformation related mechanics. Some of that should spill over into the design of the landing gear, along with smaller components due to stronger materials. I think it is a common (but understandable) mistake to want to fill in all the details EXACTLY like modern AC. Some things should carry over, though, hence the hydraulic system and details like tie-down rings.

As far as the rivets in the gear bay (that seem to be popular!), I actually went through a few revisions on those. I figured that the outer skin would mostly likely be composite rather than sheet metal, and smooth, with the exception of a few flush-fit fasteners for access under panels. The gear bays might be metal though, and part of the frame work, with conventional rivets. My first pass had more than twice as many rivets, and they were bigger (was looking too much at Tomcats for reference), but I decided that material advances would allow for smaller, stronger rivets, and went for a tighter, cleaner look (more like the Hornet).

I really appreciate all the kind words! I'm motivated to get some more work done on this project, as soon as I can get some free time.