Qubicle Competition Discussion Thread. Cycle 2, Week 1 - The Underground!

And this is what it actually looks like:

So I decided to take a crack at this even with my disadvantages like not being able to run Qubicle. Nevertheless I made a model entirely out of cubes in blender and have submitted that, if it breaks a rule I didn’t know tell me and I’ll try and fix it if possible but I checked the rule thread and other than not actually using qubicle I think it’s alright. It’s a bit dull anyway with the plain walls but nyeh, I think it’s alright for a first shot.

Why can’t you run Qubicle, did you punch your computer again?!

Well, I wasn’t anticipating an entry being submitted that didn’t use Qubicle, and didn’t prepare for this eventuality, we’ll be entering DEFCON 1 shortly, may @SteveAdamo have mercy on us all.

In all seriousness though, I’m not really sure how to proceed … we did say no post-processing effects, of which I imagine blender would fall in … but then you constructed the image in blender … so … yer …

The entry is fine for now, we’ll have a meeting of the elder council to decide :stuck_out_tongue:

It’s an issue with OpenGL caused by me missing an unknown thing that I need to make the Mac/Windows 7 hybrid work. I know it’s possible I just haven’t figured out what magic I need to do to make it work yet.

I might be able to make it so there isn’t any lighting or anything but I’m not sure and I’d have to look through the settings so I’m not sure.

I found a bunch of relevant options and removing lighting completely isn’t feasible. What I can do is remove most of the lighting, transparency, reflections, and glowing at the cost of making everything fuzzy. It’s basically one of these two (They’re 6 different shots of the same thing to give a better idea)

danger will Robinson… danger!

if the scene has no lighting effects and other options that are available via the platform, (be it blender, etc.) but not qubicle, i dont really see a problem with a submission… thoughts?

Qubicle has lighting, that’s how you have voxels that appear to be different colors on two sides which is absolutely essential to being able to see. What qubicle doesn’t have is lighting sources which unfortunately causes horrible visual artifacts if I try.

Also here’s what happens when you turn off lighting, It becomes incredibly difficult to detect boundries.

How about this? It has uniformly distributed white lights to avoid the noise while still illuminating the scene, it does leave white spots on the walls though as can be seen. It also skips the cool stuff like fire, reflective metals, and translucent crystals.

Also for anyone interested I made heavy use of the remesh modifier set to blocks, it’s basically a tweakable, real-time voxeliser.

1 Like

It would probably help if I was better versed in Qubicle, I’ll call on my experts to weigh in with their thoughts. @voxel_pirate @TobiasSabathius @Froggy @Agon.

1 Like

my gut says this is probably OK, but i agree with @Geoffers747 in wanting some more expert opinions… :smile:

About the lighting: I haven’t tried this but I guess a single sun-lamp with disabled shadows should be the closest match to Qubicle’s lighting. If the dark side of the models gets too dark then raise the ambient light (probably has to be done on the materials, but if you’re lucky the lamp or renderer has a setting).

About the rules: The rule about no post processing is there so that people who bought Qubicle shouldn’t get an advantage by exporting models. Since this is done entirely in Blender, which is a free program that anyone can use, I think its ok. The last version, that “skips the cool stuff”, should definitely be ok. :slight_smile:

For future submissions done in Blender we should probably set up some rules though.
Example: No perspective, no shadows, no reflections, no transparent or glowing materials, one sun-lamp (if that works), all voxels should be aligned with the x-,y-,z-axis of the scene and appear to be in the same grid.

Also, props to @Xavion for mimicking Qubicle in another program. That sort of stuff can get really painful. :thumbsup:

Edit: Really wanted to make a submission for this week but haven’t had the time. I have a nice image in my head. Maybe I find the time tomorrow. Otherwise it goes on my list of Qubicle-art-to-do. :smile:

Edited the submission to be that latest one I showed here as apparently thats fine.

Suns don’t work as an option because instead of acting like the sun does the act like the sun does to earth, what that means is that they send in light from a single direction just like the sun would to here. The problem with that is when you’re indoors for example and can’t see 50%+ of your scene because it’s not where the suns pointing, it also can’t do things like go around corners very well so I’d suggest sticking to low intensity white lamps without shadows as they send light in every direction and are fairly close to qubicle as scene in my latest picture (w.gif).

come on, you still have 20 hours to submit! :smile:

yes sir… edits are allowed up to the closing bell…

1 Like

cant wait to see who wins :smile:
but come @Agon do something in 20 hours i want to see it!

How is it that at the last second I get bumped? Not complaining ( I love both of the other submissions), just saying.

sorry, i’m not following… what happened?

I do not believe ( correct me if I’m wrong) that I had any support for my entry (based on likes) and the only other two entries, that came in at the last half of the week, got more likes, even though I was I almost guaranteed to get into the finals( at least). Sorry if I sound selfish about this, I just find it suprising.

im guessing you’re referring to this comment:

that was at the halfway point of this week’s competition, and the comment was made to draw people’s attention to the fact that there was only one entry… :wink:

the only folks guaranteed a spot in the finals, are those that place in any of the current cycles previous three weeks… i hope i cleared up any confusion!

Well here’s my guess as to why you didn’t any likes. It’s pixels, you can’t actually see any 3d things in your image in a way that makes them look 3d. Your post in this thread is much better in that way. Other suggestions might be to make it bigger, What’s it look like to the intrepid explorer that was explorationeticfying the cave? I think the major problem is that it looks kind of plain with too large voxels for the amount of content.

Ah, thank you. I’m glad to get some advice so that I may further improve my creations.

@SteveAdamo and @blackArcher52: Don’t get your hopes up. I have a busy day ahead of me.

@Xavion: Yes, it’s usually referred to as directional light. It’s the most basic type and most likely what Qubicle use. If you can’t see 50% because it gets too dark then the ambient light should help. It’s like the minimum light. I can still get hard to see if for example two walls and the ceiling are turned away from the light so they all just use the ambient light, but you can change the direction of the light for those images. If we have the rule about no perspective then you wont be able to see more then two walls and either the floor or the ceiling, so you only have to worry about getting the light right for three sides at a time.
Not sure what you mean with go around corners. If you mean that the light doesn’t bounce, then no, probably not, but it doesn’t in Qubicle either.

The big question is how much you need to mimic Qubicle to make it fair, but that’s not up to me to decide. Good work either way. :slight_smile: