Hey all,

This model is a sci-fi stealth fighter, currently a WIP. Without further ado, here's some pics!

I myself have noted that the cockpit isn't perfect and needs work, but for some reason, I still feel the base texture of the model is off, especially in the close up shot of the cockpit, I'm not sure why.

I'd love to hear thoughts and feedback!

Thanks!

Anyone?

The base texture looks fine. Whether it's "off" or not depends on what the rest of the game looks like and what you're going for. 

Why are there parts like the nose cone and ailerons that are black? 

18 hours ago, 0r0d said:

Why are there parts like the nose cone and ailerons that are black? 

That's me trying to add a bit of visual variety. Curious about your thoughts on it.

18 hours ago, 0r0d said:

The base texture looks fine. Whether it's "off" or not depends on what the rest of the game looks like and what you're going for.

I'm trying to go for a stealth aircraft. I've been trying to get the specularity just right, and I think I've got it dialed in. Just that one close up shot of the cockpit looked off, and I'm not entirely sure why that is.

To give you an idea, the project has this other model in it:

This model is finalized, and it's meant to be a bit retro looking, since in the universe, it's older tech in some ways. The F-71 is meant to be bleeding edge tech for the universe in terms of stealth tech amongst other things.

1 hour ago, deltaKshatriya said:

That's me trying to add a bit of visual variety. Curious about your thoughts on it.

Yeah, variety is a good thing, but the black areas just look like they are untextured, and black shiny untextured areas just tend to look plasticky.  

The model geometry themselves look fine, especially the second one has good detail.  But what I look for in art design for things like this are things like 1) does the overall model feel like it fits the style I want and makes sense as a whole and 2) do the details make sense in-universe and feel like they were put there for a reason by the creator of the item?  

Without the context of the actual game, I can only go on what I see in the images.  The first model seems fine except for those black areas. The second model has some things that dont look right... why is the nose flat?  That's going to be very un-aerodynamic.  Is there a specific explanation why the aircraft engineers made it that way, or did you just design it like that for aesthetic reasons with no fictional explanation?  If the latter, then come up with a fictional explanation for it.  The engine as well... they look like they're missing protective cover plates.  This is a military aircraft so it makes sense that they're be armored or at least covered for protection.   Lastly the cockpit canopy is made of unpainted metal, while the rest of the surfaces are painted.  Why?  This seems to be inspired by WWII fighters, and in those the canopy was almost always painted the same color as the rest of the plane.

So, the design needs to be consistent and make sense in the fictional universe, even down to the details.  It's a bit nitpicky, but it's the details that make the difference between an ok design and a great one.  A professional spends time thinking about and making sure all the details fit. 

Hi DeltaKshatriya, I saw this on the front page, sorry it's taken me a while to sit down and write this. I've only done "some" 3D modelling, but I've done a lot of fictional airplane design. Note that I naturally lean on realism when I design stuff, so that's how I tend to think about designs.

First, it looks like a great start. I'm sorry if this seems overly critical. Creating art is a constant learning process and hopefully this helps.

The overall impression for me is kind of retro-futuristic, like something that would be futuristic in a WW2 context. In fact it looks a lot like the Horten Ho 229, not sure if that's intentional. 

Other first impression is that it looks more like a bomber or a drone than a true fighter. The biggest reason for that is the really long wings that aren't swept back very much. Generally speaking, sharper the wing sweep, the faster something is, or at least looks. If you look at modern fighters, they almost all have delta or trapezoidal wings with much, much sharper sweep. Fighters also usually have more, bigger control surfaces proportionally. Maybe a canard up front could help?

You mentioned issues with the cockpit... So I think the cockpit is way too far back. Generally they are much closer to the nose (so the pilot has some downward visibility). Moving it forward will also help with the fighter "look". They are also usually a little longer, too, proportionally.

The curve of the nose looks off, too much like a flattened cylinder. It lacks geometrical complexity, like there aren't really compound curves. And it doesn't really look that, um, fierce? You could try adding chines ( see attached example), which are the edges on stealth aircraft that basically are the dividing line between radar waves being deflected up or down. They look pretty neat too, in my opinion, and would help "sell" it as a stealth fighter. 

Your panel lines look a little haphazard to me, you should take a look at some more real-world examples or even concept art. They usually are where parts connect, so having them floating in the middle looks kind of off. For example, check out the major panels on an F-22:

More on the modelling side, the panel lines on the front fuselage (in front of the cockpit) look out of place, and a little too normal-mappy, like it's obvious they are not geometry.

The tail looks a little goofy to me, it reminds me of a platypus. It might work better to cut it shorter, make it more angular, and maybe add some control surfaces, maybe even a V-tail or something.

Note: If you want to get even more realistic, I would look into "planform alignment," or how on stealth aircraft the flight surface edges and panel lines are all designed to be parallel or perpendicular as much as possible. This is why panels on things like the B-2 and F-117 have that distinct diamond look, and I see you emulated that in the big panel lines on the back. Adding those jaggy edges to the nose cone specifically I think would be pretty neat to try.

Some of the geometry/features don't seem well integrated into the overall "look." Namely, the engine pods look almost like an afterthought, and it looks like they pretty roughly clipping into the body of the aircraft. The panel lines on the wing seem to be like partly covered up, too, like they don't make sense. Not to get too much more into "realism" stuff, but the podded engines look very dated, since stealth aircraft try to "bury" their engines as much as possible. Regardless, the exhaust just coming out onto the fuselage looks very strange (like there should be scorch marks).

The vents on top look out of place, too, also like they are stuck on, rather than part of the jet.

Colors and stuff: The camo looks okay, but be careful trying to figure out camo too early in the design process. It tends to cover up things that look wrong (which is the whole point of camo), which can hurt the final design. When I draw planes, I always add camo last for this reason (and it's really easy to change compared to everything else). In this specific context, it might be better to stick with dark gray, or some other more subtle scheme. People will immediately jump to "stealth!" when they see dark gray or black, like the classic SR-71 (note the chines again):

0r0d noted the black areas, which is related to the overall color. Right now they are a little too constrasty, like they are drawing more attention than you really want (other than the cockpit, which should be a focal point). You might try experimenting with panels of subtely different colors or finishes/reflectivity (gloss, matte, flat), which you can kind of see in the F-22 photo above.

Okay, so that's a lot and I'm going to stop... and I see you have a new one, too. I guess my overall would be there are quite a few things I would experiment with to make it look "stealthier" and optionally more "realistic" (realism may or may not be important to you).

51 minutes ago, 0r0d said:

Yeah, variety is a good thing, but the black areas just look like they are untextured, and black shiny untextured areas just tend to look plasticky.

That texture will need to change altogether then...probably I'll go with gray.

52 minutes ago, 0r0d said:

he second model has some things that dont look right... why is the nose flat?  That's going to be very un-aerodynamic.  Is there a specific explanation why the aircraft engineers made it that way, or did you just design it like that for aesthetic reasons with no fictional explanation?  If the latter, then come up with a fictional explanation for it.  The engine as well... they look like they're missing protective cover plates.  This is a military aircraft so it makes sense that they're be armored or at least covered for protection.

Yea there is a reason for that, it's part of the universe's sci-fi engine system. The front is primarily based off of the F-86 actually as well.

53 minutes ago, 0r0d said:

Lastly the cockpit canopy is made of unpainted metal, while the rest of the surfaces are painted.  Why?  This seems to be inspired by WWII fighters, and in those the canopy was almost always painted the same color as the rest of the plane.

Yea it's pretty heavily inspired by World War 2 aircraft and a mix of 1950s style as well. I'll change up the canopy. 

Mainly I wanted to give people an idea of the overall art style for the project by posting this model as well (this aircraft is the Garud Mk. 1)

I am mainly looking for critique on the F-71 Talon (the first one posted)

54 minutes ago, 0r0d said:

So, the design needs to be consistent and make sense in the fictional universe, even down to the details.  It's a bit nitpicky, but it's the details that make the difference between an ok design and a great one.  A professional spends time thinking about and making sure all the details fit. 

Nitpicking is what I came here for!

31 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

Hi DeltaKshatriya, I saw this on the front page, sorry it's taken me a while to sit down and write this.

No worries at all friend!

32 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

I've only done "some" 3D modelling, but I've done a lot of fictional airplane design. Note that I naturally lean on realism when I design stuff, so that's how I tend to think about designs.

The F-71 Talon is to be a more realistic styled aircraft, so that's totally fine!

32 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

The overall impression for me is kind of retro-futuristic, like something that would be futuristic in a WW2 context. In fact it looks a lot like the Horten Ho 229, not sure if that's intentional. 

Good eye, that's one of the underlying sources for this aircraft actually. That's a solid eye for that.

33 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

Other first impression is that it looks more like a bomber or a drone than a true fighter. The biggest reason for that is the really long wings that aren't swept back very much. Generally speaking, sharper the wing sweep, the faster something is, or at least looks. If you look at modern fighters, they almost all have delta or trapezoidal wings with much, much sharper sweep. Fighters also usually have more, bigger control surfaces proportionally. Maybe a canard up front could help?

The major reason for that is that the sources are the Ho-229, and the B2 Spirit, where the B2 is a bomber basically. I will try adding a canard up front to see how it looks!

34 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

You mentioned issues with the cockpit... So I think the cockpit is way too far back. Generally they are much closer to the nose (so the pilot has some downward visibility). Moving it forward will also help with the fighter "look". They are also usually a little longer, too, proportionally.

37 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

The curve of the nose looks off, too much like a flattened cylinder. It lacks geometrical complexity, like there aren't really compound curves. And it doesn't really look that, um, fierce? You could try adding chines ( see attached example), which are the edges on stealth aircraft that basically are the dividing line between radar waves being deflected up or down. They look pretty neat too, in my opinion, and would help "sell" it as a stealth fighter. 

Hmm, this honestly sounds a lot like the nose in general needs remodeling work. Well there go the UVs...ah well, life of a modeler haha. The chimes should be easy to add in though, just a question of hardening some edges.

38 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

Your panel lines look a little haphazard to me, you should take a look at some more real-world examples or even concept art. They usually are where parts connect, so having them floating in the middle looks kind of off. For example, check out the major panels on an F-22:

The panel lines were basically me trying to add more detail. This was a very rough first try at it. This model I had a far less clear vision than the Garud Mk. 1, and it shows (I think). I'll need to replan them honestly.

40 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

The tail looks a little goofy to me, it reminds me of a platypus. It might work better to cut it shorter, make it more angular, and maybe add some control surfaces, maybe even a V-tail or something.

I think I was aiming for an Ho-229 like tail there, but looks like it'll need to be redone.

40 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

Note: If you want to get even more realistic, I would look into "planform alignment," or how on stealth aircraft the flight surface edges and panel lines are all designed to be parallel or perpendicular as much as possible. This is why panels on things like the B-2 and F-117 have that distinct diamond look, and I see you emulated that in the big panel lines on the back. Adding those jaggy edges to the nose cone specifically I think would be pretty neat to try.

I am curious to see how that looks with panel lines. I feel that adding more jagged edges will stray very far from the original idea I had for the aircraft itself.

41 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

Some of the geometry/features don't seem well integrated into the overall "look." Namely, the engine pods look almost like an afterthought, and it looks like they pretty roughly clipping into the body of the aircraft.

I've found it very difficult to integrate the engines into the aircraft. Again, my major source, the Ho-229, has similar engines, but I, for whatever reason, have found it very very difficult to integrate them well. I'm not sure what specifically I'm still missing here.

43 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

Not to get too much more into "realism" stuff, but the podded engines look very dated, since stealth aircraft try to "bury" their engines as much as possible.

I'm not very concerned about this specifically (not to disregard your criticism, as it is very good advice). The aircraft is meant to look retro, so I figured a retro look isn't that big of a deal.

44 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

The vents on top look out of place, too, also like they are stuck on, rather than part of the jet.

Hehe, that was me looking too closely at Wolfenstein 2's rendition of the Ho-229. I should add that this was another source for me.

46 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

You might try experimenting with panels of subtely different colors or finishes/reflectivity (gloss, matte, flat), which you can kind of see in the F-22 photo above.

Ok, this actually really solved a mystery for me. I've been trying for a while to get a good base texture on the model, but could never figure out what was "off". I see what it is. The F-22 doesn't have one baseline reflectivity/specularity does it? It's varied across panel lines, meaning I'll have to also similarly vary base textures across the aircraft. It finally makes sense!

48 minutes ago, Prinz Eugn said:

and I see you have a new one, too.

I'm not as interested in getting feedback on that, since it's more just to give people a reference of the universe than anything else.

Thanks all for the very helpful feedback! I'll post updates soon hopefully so that we can start the process again!

Right so I just did a quick and dirty test, no UVs even changed, so it's really rough, but I wanted an idea of what people think of the changes I'm thinking of:

The thing that's bugging me is that it doesn't look very well balanced. To have a long nose cone like that you'd surely need a longer tail. If you haven't already, search for "flying wing" for similar real-world designs. I think just a little adjustment to the proportions, along with Prinz Eugn's insight about the cockpit shape will go a long way.

I must say, I really like that you've textured the ailerons, the engines and the nose cone differently from the rest of the aircraft, it's as though the sections of the plane that stick out at sharp angles have been given a coat of radar-absorbing paint, or something like that.

2 hours ago, OandO said:

The thing that's bugging me is that it doesn't look very well balanced. To have a long nose cone like that you'd surely need a longer tail. If you haven't already, search for "flying wing" for similar real-world designs. I think just a little adjustment to the proportions, along with Prinz Eugn's insight about the cockpit shape will go a long way

It's a very quick and dirty change, I'm still working on fixing it up a bit. What I'm curious about is do you think this looks better compared to what it was previously?

2 hours ago, OandO said:

I must say, I really like that you've textured the ailerons, the engines and the nose cone differently from the rest of the aircraft, it's as though the sections of the plane that stick out at sharp angles have been given a coat of radar-absorbing paint, or something like that.

It's interesting you say that. I'm curious then if I should keep the texturing as is?