I’ve received further feedback about my creative and technical model from Matt during class today – the overall opinion of the piece is that it’s finished, but there are some parts of it that could be improved and I would like to work on the constructive criticism I received.
For my preproduction:
Range of research images to inform your design – great variety with loads of zoomed in areas of different parts to see all the detail. Good concept art to support your final design. Great use of measurments. High to low baking plan works well and is well considered.
And for my production:
Low poly model has a great silhouttette. Strong topology throughout. Your high poly model is good and well considered, however, it would have been nice to see some sculpting such as some dents in the metal / general wear and tear. You could get away with one less map for the emissive yellow phone. If its one colour you only need one pixel technically. You can have emmissive maps within other maps – they work like a mask so you mask out no emissive elements with black. Presentation is nice. Maybe have AO, Low poly with normal map, low poly wireframe and then 1/2 beauty renders and smaller texure maps. Maybe includem ore beauty renders within the project but not on this sheet.
The material I provided for my review was as follows:
I do plan on revisiting some of the suggestions Matt gave – I’ve already merged two of the texture maps together (for the neon phone signs and the main box) which now has had an emissive added to it via Substance Painter. I’ll do some updating of my images materials as per the criticism, which hopefully will improve the overall presentation of the creative and technical model.