I took some time to redesign the beginnings of the interior room somewhat. Are these wall panels more suitable? Mostly it is finished, just need copy some meshes around, stretch a few lines... - - - - -

Quote - need help, guys! i found a way to draw a ground plan with realistic measurements, but now i need to know roughly how many houses and other objects must be planned.
maybe we shoud start with one street/corner with water on the other side and build on from there?

 
That sounds good.
If there is to be a canal, start maybe where the canal and the other waterfront make a corner.
May as well lay out the whole block.

---

A question I have is what are the poly counts of this supposed to be?
Are these to be high detail models?

the wall panels look good to me. is it possible to vary the dimensions of the high and the low parts?
as for polycounts, i have not the foggiest. i know too little of 3d progs. as said, the only prog i can manage is sketchup which works good for houses and interiors and i can manage very high detail although i found out that i had to draw some parts separately and combine them in a final drawing as the prog reacted very, very slowly if i did not. a little cottage i drew in detail, including pantiles (instead of a texture) proved too much to handle. don't know how to work around that yet.

Do you mean have parts of the ceiling higher than others, split level floors, that sort of thing?
Or do you mean the lines not be so straight?
Can do either of those.

that sounds good - but what i meant was the dimensions of the panels like in the image.

I can do that.
I've never seen that done before. I don't know where something like that would be used.
I've seen panel width variation commonly (where needed to fit existing wall dimensions); but never height. I've always seen the wainscote panels to be uniform height, unless they need to be cut down to accomodate a step in the floor. Then it is the bottom that gets cut off and the top trim strip remains at the same height; as close as possible.
I have never worked on buildings as old as those in Europe, though. Colonial American, mostly in the Cape Cod region, is the oldest that I've worked with. There could be be style differences too; I'm just going by memory of what I've seen personally over the years.

sorry, i did not make clear what i wanted to say. when i look at your panels they seemed very small to me and somewhat low. here panels are/were handled in the way you mentioned too, but the panels themselves are more like the first one in my image and i wanted to know if you could handle that without having to redraw everything. (remember, i don't know much about your prog)

Sure, if you think it would be more authentic looking. It would be lower polygon count too. The pilaster panels will  have to stay relatively narrow like they are now.
It isn't really like drawing (I can't draw at all); it's placing points, lines and faces in 3D space to form the shapes. The more points (vertexs), the smoother the curved lines and faces can be made; but each vertex must connected by lines to other vertexs to make four-sided polygons (quads). More polys = better detail. More polys = longer render times & more memory needed.

The top trim of the panels is 32 in (81.28 cm) from the floor. The bottom of the window trim is 37.5 in (95.25 cm) from the floor. The ceiling will be 105.5 in (267.97 cm) high. I haven't yet decided on length/width of the room.
Any measurement is relatively easy to change; but I would rather change it early on than when there are many more verts to move around.

yes, i already thought so (about changing measurements) that is why i tried to make clear what i meant, it would be a pitty to do have to do a lot of work only to have to change it.
in old houses very often the paneling is rather high (even up to 1 1/2 metres (5 ft), but i have to check. the rooms in those old houses are higher - guess 11 or 12 ft. have to check that too. the hight you mention is that of modern houses.

I'd like to have one of those older houses.
I am 6'8" tall and my interior doors are 6'7" high. It is not a good arrangement.

---

If you come up with some pictures of how the panels look around the windows. I've never seen wainscote higher than the lower trim of the windows. Not sure how it would be put on. I'll look around too.

the rooms were higher, but sadly for you the doors were very often the same height :sad:
i will try to find images, which is not very easy. but don't worry, the height you drew was the most common. higher ones were most of the times in pubs.

I looked around for some interior ref pics, didn't have any luuck. Everything I found was very extravagant examples. Found some floor plans for 'canal houses', those will come in handy in the future. - - - - - In the meantime, I made a china closet this morning. 5386 quad polys. There are parts of the model mapped as 'carvings', but I didn't put any maps on them for this picture (because I haven't made the maps yet ). I am going to use classic mouldings: egg & dart on the toppiece; acanthus on the vertical 'pilasters'; and beed & reel for the little trim strips on the doors. EDIT - didn't make the door and drawer hardware yet either. If that seems suitable 'Victorian' enough, I'll make the whole set: china closet, serving table (or a server w/ stand mirror), dining table (a 4 place semi rectangular w/ drop leaf to make 6 places), and the chairs. I have mirror/picture frames galore, and could make some lighting fixtures too. W/ an oriental rug, that would be most of the props needed for a semi-formal dining room. Maybe a centerpiece for the table.

this looks great to me! in the meantime i am working on a ground plan - met some difficulties but i think i solved most of them. i will post some pics later.
i wonder how to do it. can someone draw a complete building and can the interior be added? remember, i am just starting! if we draw detailed buildings with interiors, the number of buildings we can manage will be limited, i think, which means we hardly need a ground plan. or do we draw more buildings with just one furnished?

Just one full house interior. And if there are some public buildings or warehouses or something, interiors for them too; if somebody wants them made. For most of the houses, just enough interior to be visible from the outside, so that there appears to be something going on inside. Even planes with pictures stuck up against the windows would work fine.

IMO:
Putting a high poly? interior in each building is overkill.
I think it would be best to make rooms seperately that can be used as needed, instead of a whole house interior as one model.
Props are seperate also...Bare rooms and people put what props into them that they want too; same way a character is. You have the base character and add clothes, hair, etc. to it as you see fit.
Only rooms that might not be that way are the kitchen and the bathroom, because of all the built-in cabinetry and appliances. Fireplaces could be a problem too, I suppose; but didn't most every room have a fireplace to begin with in 1800s.

Picture frame: 15 polygons.

beautiful frame (sadly the image has ro be different :-)

this image shows the idea i had for the ground plan. i think it is too big to get covered. had a lot of problems to get the scale right, but managed in the end.

i placed a row of buildings along the canal (borrowed from google) which are to scale. these buildings are actually only square blocks with photo texture on it for the greater part. i could make an image of these buildings with dimensions on it, which gives everybody a good idea what these houses were like. there are lots of other facades too, of course, but the dimensions can be taken from the one i can make if everyone agrees, of course.

i know the last buildings are not within the time frame - you can see from it however how they mistreat a beautiful town sometimes. (this is the canal with the 'anne frank house')

Quote - beautiful frame (sadly the image has ro be different :-)

Idea is that the image is a plane behind a glass plane. There should something for a default; but anybody can put any image they want on it; as long as it is the right dimensions. They could also use shaders to make the surface canvas, glossy photo, whatever.

Quote - ...if everyone agrees, of course.

'Everyone' looks like you, me, and ConnieKat. :biggrin:
Looks good. More than I had expected for a previsualization/ground plan.
What are the dimensions of the 'plots' for the buildings?

Wow, you guys have done so much for a few days I haven't been paying attention!  Awesome!  I have some catching up to do :) 

as we are with only 4 people (i hope franonthedge is still in) i think the ground plan is too big for us to handle - i will draw a smaller one with the right dimensions.

@dvlenk6 - for your furniture and walls we need a rather big building, i think, as this is all rather 'posh' :-) -

i found drawings of the house i lived in from when i was 2 till 9 years  old (it was built in 1880) and i think that could be incorporated, but i will need help to draw it in a way that it could be used with your progs.

as for the lock and the bridge i will have to go somewhere to take pictures i think because i could not find any good drawings up till now, but i am working on it.

the drawing of the houses above with dimensions will follow too, but it will take a little time.

in this image i made the part where we lived red - we did not have the whole house, but just one floor where we lived with 7 people - very cramped! and we had 1/3 of the attic where 3 children slept.

The ref pics have more carvings on them than this. I don't know how much should be really be on there in the first place. They are supposed to be 'antique brass', need some shader work.

very impressive! sadly i do not know very much about furniture, but i think it will fit in. in the meantime i made a sketch with measurements of the row of buildings i borrowed from google. this one is not very clear but i have a better one if needed. your furniture would very well fit in with the corner house on the left or in the high black building, i think.

I'm just going to make an interior on the canal house floor plan I found. It will not need to be attached to any house in particular. It can just be a stand-alone set.
How long are the sides of the houses?
Some of those look very modern to me, for some reason. I don't know enough about Dutch historical architecture to change it authentically.
Are there pictures anywhere of a house or two that are in the same state as they were historically?
Something to draw style from.

these houses are historically right - of course there are more types of facades, will try to get an image showing the some of them.
i am still working on a drawing in which the length of the sides of the houses is shown.

Attached Link: http://www.bmz.amsterdam.nl/adam/index_e.html

this is a very good site about aechitecture in amsterdam with lots of photgraphs and drawings to give you an idea.

I'm back.  I've not really understood much of what you've all been saying though, so I don't know how much help I can be.

I've done some adjustments to Cobham Mill's covered Bridge, and my mother found an old book with a photo of the post mill that used to stand next to our house, plus a photo in an old newspaper cutting of the mill in rather better condition, but both of these show only one view of the mill, only one side of it - like all the mill images online. 

I've got this week off though, so I may have a bit of time to model stuff, although I also need to rescue my website - at long last.

@franontheedge - did you read my suggestion for a windmill (page4) i think that you could make one like that (without the building) which would fit in quite well in the piece that we are going to make. however, make sure to rescue your website :-)

Wow, you guys have done sooo much!  
I've finally finished the Victorian shoes I had promissed, they're being beta tested, now i can spend a bit more time here :)

here's the final render of the shoe... in case anyone is curious

Attached Link: my shoes

these shoes look good to me - better than mine :lol:

That's a nice job, ConnieCat8.
Those look really sharp. The lacing is very nicely done.

this is a map with some dimensions - the photograpic surfaces and the 2 white surfaces is where houses can be built. there is plenty of room to change things, this is just a starting point. houses and warehouses can be built everywhere - in these old towns they often lived under or over a warehouse. houses overlooking the river were very often big ones as the merchants loved the view :-). on the quay there often was a windmill too. what do you think? from the photographic parts you can also take measurements of the houses and the way they were built, a bit messy and we have to keep that in check so that separately built houses fit together - perhaps it is a good idea to give a place and dimensions when starting a building. any ideas?

Wow. You've been busy, koosievantutte.
Where do you think we should start?
At the 'bridge (movable)' spot?

Maybe we should wait and see what the boss (Conniekat8) has to say.

I've been pre-occupied with other things lately; but plan on getting back into it shortly.

starting from the bridge seems a very good idea to me - that way we can build to two sides and keep it together.  the groundplan can be followed roughly and adjustments can be made as needed.
hope to hear from the boss soon

Attached Link: http://www.bmz.amsterdam.nl/adam/index_e.html

this link is a very good one to see the most important things about old dutch houses, types of facades, some interior and so on, it is in english.

One of the most charming things I noticed about these historic homes is the way in which they are not all perfectly level, square, or plumb. They are almost organic the way that they blend together, and seemingly lean on each other for support. A modeler would have to introduce such flaws and quirks to their design so it looked more like the prototype; something which has weathered the passage of hundreds of years, and the changes wrought by slowly-shifting soil.

As the project advances it will probably come down to modelers to pick, or volunteer to model individual buildings. When a modeler completes a building model they could send a polygonal
profile, or model to use as a  template to a modeler working on the building next door. This might  help to recreate that "organic" flow from house to house.

I normally make my models clean and pristine. If I want to twist lines around, and the like, I do that with modifiers at render time. One of the main reasons for that is the modifiers are easily undone, the modelled deformities aren't. It's a lot easier for me to work from a clean base model than one that is already deformed.
Likewise, bevelled and chamferred edges multiply poly counts pretty steeply, and they aren't always needed. It is pretty hard to get rid of a modelled chamfer, but one right click -> delete to get rid of bevel modifier(s).
I don't know how much of those can be transferred out of Max. I think most of it can be, if I collapse the modifer stack and xforms before exporting; but there is no going back once you collapse (well, there's a couple undos, but I don't think they don't get saved with the files.)

---

Not quite sure what you mean about organic. Do you mean that the roof lines and fronts aren't all on the same levels? or...

"Not quite sure what you mean about organic. Do you mean that the roof lines and fronts aren't all on the same levels? or..."  My observation was purely subjective, so you may not see things the same way. The row of canal houses above has many lines that diverge from the perfect horizontal and vertical, 'til they are slightly diagonal.  Some have a slight angle of lean, and sometimes individual windows, doors and cornices have a different angle than the building they are on. There is no gap between the bldgs and they fit together almost like living cells.

@danamo - thanks for the input - you are right about the 'organic' look. this, however, will be very difficult to achieve when collaborating. the only way to do this in this case is when somebody draws 3 or 4 houses at the same time as a unit and takes care that the ends are straight and square so that an other builder knows where to start. difference in depth and height are not a problem at all and leaning forward of some houses, which is very common, is no problem anyway.

an other possibility: slight differences could also be corrected when drawing the last house in a row, or by adding a porch somewhere in between. very small alleys could do the same (these old towns have alleys as small as 1,5 to 2 metres)

in sketchup, which is the only 3d prog i can use the possibilty of getting a mellowed look is for the greater part only in the textures.

> *Quote - One of the most charming things I noticed about these historic homes is the way in which they are not all perfectly level, square, or plumb. They are almost organic the way that they blend together, and seemingly lean on each other for support. A modeler would have to introduce such flaws and quirks to their design so it looked more like the prototype; something which has weathered the passage of hundreds of years, and the changes wrought by slowly-shifting soil.*

Oh I know exactly what you mean Danamo, like the image above? - you can see a slight bump in the middle of the roof line, where some sagging has occured with age.

Quote - @franontheedge - did you read my suggestion for a windmill (page4) i think that you could make one like that (without the building) which would fit in quite well in the piece that we are going to make. however, make sure to rescue your website :-)

I've looked back at it, and if it means I have to install sketch-up to do this then it would take me many months to learn a new piece of software - if it turns out to be one I can get along with.  I find I compare everything to Wings3d - my normal modeller (and free) to the detriment of other programs.

I'm not really following the info you supplied about google earth - I've tried to get google earth but there seems to be some sort of problem with it, and although I tried to unblock pop up windows for that site - I discovered that it isn't actually blocked - so it's not that....
There doesn't seem to be anything I can do about it.

I checked about the exports. They work fine as long as the modifier stack is collapsed before exporting. Anyway, this is the way I do things (probably not the way anybody else does them): The top render is the base model. Everything is neat and clean, CG perfect. It is 272 quad. polygons and took 27 seconds to render (because I used a skylight and Final Gathering.) I could make it as low as 11 polygons, but there is no way then to deform it. The bottom render is after some modifiers were added. It is 1086 quad. polygons and took 40 seconds to render.

Quote - ...the only way to do this in this case is when somebody draws 3 or 4 houses at the same time as a unit and takes care that the ends are straight and square so that an other builder knows where to start...

I think one modeller could send the end bits on to the next modeller and that would enough to give the second modeller a starting point and be able to match up the ends. I Also think it would not be a good idea to model any 'hidden' sides, just wasted polys; unless the buildings where going to be stand-alones that could be used individually.

@franonthedge: i don't want to force anyone to use sketchup - it is just that it is so simple that even i mastered it in a few days. one thing is that it is, from what i see from other modelers rather basic, althoug i found lots of possibilities after a while. btw i use the free version of sketchup.

@dvlenk: looks good - i will try to find out if i can do the same thing in sketchup (never tried yet)

as the sides of these houses almost exclusively are closed in by the other houses nothing special has to be done - even if houses are separated by e.g. a small alley, it would be bricks all the way up with perhaps a small window somewhere and a little door - not much modeling needed. this, i think could be added if necessary. the important things are front and back.

at the moment i am trying to find more detailed drawings of a movable bridge and, if nobody objects i will start with  that one.

hope the boss will turn up soon

@franontheedge: i forgot something: you could take the measurements from this drawing and use it in your own 3d prog. sketchup has a tape measure which makes it very easy.

"I think one modeller could send the end bits on to the next modeller and that would enough to give the second modeller a starting point and be able to match up the ends. I Also think it would not be a good idea to model any 'hidden' sides, just wasted polys; unless the buildings where going to be stand-alones that could be used individually." - This is basically the same thought I was trying to convey when I mentioned the idea of one artist completing a model and sending a "template" or outline to the artist doing the building next to it. Glad to see we're basically on the same page.

The idea is that various applications can be used, as long as the end product is an OBJ.
So, wings, silo, hexagon, sketchup, any of them will work... I was thinking, we let each person work in whatever application they're comfortable with, as long as the end product is an OBJ.

Personally I'll be using a combination of Hexagon and Max, and perhaps deep paint when it's time to texture.

I think when we create the base map, we should put down simple boxes first for each house, to the rough dimension of each house, that would be out base plan.
That way, when someone picks a house to model, they will know that when they get outside of the box, they are likely to encroach into another house.
Some may do that on purpose to give things more character ;)

Irregulatities could be built in after the houses are fitted back together.. for example in max, bend, noise, twist, melt and various geometry tweaking filters could be added on several houses at once, that way the will lean together, as if they are eroding and weathering together... or they may be bent and twisted to look like 'toontown' houses.

Further irregularities could be created with bump and displacement maps.

If all of the buildings are to be deformed together like that (and that is a good idea); they will have to be relatively close to the same mesh resolution. I mean if you deform a hi-poly model and a lo poly model with the same deformers, the hi poly will be much more distorted than the lo poly one.
I still think it would best for the individual modeller to add some irregularities on there own because:
a) Some specific irregularities are better, IMO, than strictly noise irregularities and;
b) It will add character to the individual structures and;
c) If the structures already have some wear and tear on them, they won't need as much deforming, and that will give some breathing space for the mesh resolutions.

Exactly!

Once the 'box' is detrermined, I don't think we have to go all the way to it's limits. That should allow room for deformations. 

Also, I think each one of us will ultimately have a copy of the master model, that way we can make individual tweaks to serve the scene we want to make with it. It may be a little bit of work nudging the buildiongs around to serve the scene idea, but not too bad.
I agree about the resolution!

You guys shouls see this: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1452385
A group of people did a reconstruction of old Lisabon - Pretty slick :)
(Maybe we can entice in sharing some modelling experinces with us)