UB-88 Photogrammetry Model (Stern Section)

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

beldridg

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
791
Reaction score
1,612
Location
Southern California, USA
# of dives
500 - 999
In the ongoing project to build a detailed model of the UB-88 WW1 German submarine, I conducted two more dives on Saturday to work on the stern section. I had previously posted about the forward section progress.

The sub is in 190 feet of water so the typical dive is 4-5 minutes of descent, 20 minutes on the wreck and then about 30-45 minutes of deco depending upon your dive profile and gradient factors.

The stern section came out pretty good. I purposefully didn't try to get the end of the stern torpedo tubes or the ghost net. That will likely be the last dive to finish the model.

Here is link to my blog post on the stern section:

UB-88 Photogrammetry Project – Dives 6 & 7

And a link to the free Sketchfab model which can be downloaded:

UB88 Stern Section - Download Free 3D model by Brett Eldridge (@beldridg) [903f9b6]

Here is a screenshot of the stern deck (note the hole in the deck which is where you can enter the sub):

Aft-Texture-4.png


I'm currently working on combining the forward and stern sections and then at some point will try to put the finishing touches on the final model with the stern torpedo tube.

Enjoy,

- brett
 
I have not found PG to be that great for final model quality. Where it excels is in creating a model that you can bring into Blender (or similar) and then decimate or simplify. At the same time you can get rid of extraneous things -- like your net -- that you don't want in the final model. If you bake in things like normals and textures from your PG model you can get a much cleaner, lower-poly final model that is also way easier to render.
 
I have not found PG to be that great for final model quality. Where it excels is in creating a model that you can bring into Blender (or similar) and then decimate or simplify. At the same time you can get rid of extraneous things -- like your net -- that you don't want in the final model. If you bake in things like normals and textures from your PG model you can get a much cleaner, lower-poly final model that is also way easier to render.

Thanks for the reply & feedback. I'll have to try using Blender.

- brett
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom