1970 Ford Torino Cobra

I dug up a bunch of pictures over the weekend, and today I started modeling. Here’s where I am after a few hours. Topology is a little messy in places, so suggestions would be appreciated.






And one more wire: (3 image max!? Seriously? :no:)


Surely your workflow is different than mine, but have you considered modeling a “spline cage” off your reference images before starting with the polygon mesh? It will help your modeling.

This is an example of what I mean, on a car I worked on a few weeks ago:


I got the idea from this very good step-to-step car modeling tutorial linked below. It makes sense, it really changed the way I model my cars:

http://www.thomasbaron.net/modeling-a-car-a-high-end-detailed-tutorial/

I considered that, but the blueprint drawings I found have some consistency errors, forcing me to base things on what looks right more often than I would like.

I’ll be following this :slight_smile:
Looks like a nice job so far, although it’s hard to see the details. Like that section under the door on the left, not sure how that works out. Around the wheels I guess it’s a matter of how the lines flow on the actual car, do they really break the face loop that goes around?
Keep it up!

Do they really break the face loop that goes around?
Yep. See http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/1970_ford_torino_cobra_sportsroof_chiolero.jpg

Finished off the large body panels. Next up: front and rear.




Also, as you can see, I switched to a clay material and a more revealing light setup.

And the wires:






Nice modeling sofar! But it makes hard to see the real polyflow when you are using subdivision in your wire “renders”.

looking great so far, makes a nice change to see a classic instead of a supercar being modelled :slight_smile:

Nice modeling sofar! But it makes hard to see the real polyflow when you are using subdivision in your wire “renders”.

But if I don’t, it’s hard to see clearly where I have multiple edge loops close together, of where I resorted to a tri to increase resolution.

looking great so far, makes a nice change to see a classic instead of a supercar being modelled :slight_smile:

Thanks, I wanted to do something less common. Plus, it’s a pretty awesome looking car.

sure does :slight_smile: are you going to give it the starsky and hutch makeover? :wink:

Quick turntable




What do you think of this? It’s the cleanest topology I could find.


are you going to give it the starsky and hutch makeover?

I had never heard of the show before. However, the answer is a definitive no, because that was a '74 Gran Torino, whereas I am modeling a '70 Torino Cobra. Slight difference there. :wink:

good turntable, model is coming along great, what was the render time on that turn table?
oh damn, all i could remember was that they had a torino, its been a very long time since i saw that program lol :slight_smile:

Well… we cant see how it looks unsubdivited so it´s hard to comment if is it any good. Please, show us the unsubdivited wire from that same area. It´seems like there is a small pinch in those corners.

Hood details, air scoop, grill, headlights, bumper details.



Happy now? I don’t see what good that does. It’s how it subdivides that counts.


Ya, I could totally see how it was layed out even when it was subdivided.
That being said, I would try remove the middle face on each side of the rectangular faceloop. This will allow your to get rid of the triangles around the faceloop. You can add edeloops close to the corners if you you need to make the corner sharper.

Also: I have heard that topology has a great influence on how materials appears. So even though it might look good subdivided with the default material, it might not look good with other materials.

Well, with the number of edge loops around it, and the number of edge loops required per corner (3 per corner, to define a 90° turn), this is the minimum number of triangles I could manage. If I collapsed the triangles, the rectangle would become an oval.

Rear details.


If you want to see wires for a specific part, just ask. (And since there’s some disagreement, specify subdivided or unsubdivided.)

The hole area topology is really messy but if it makes good results for you, then thats OK. I tried some paint overs but it´s problematic area since I cant see the whole fender. You know your model better anyways. :smiley:

I´ve just learned by my modeling experience (modeling since 2004) that when you have nicely flowing, clean and good looking wire-topology you will have a very clean subdivited mesh and reflections. All those tri´s might cause problems. I usually model game-spec models so tri´s are acceptable.

The model itself looks clean to me. But it´s not very accurate when I compare it to real car. Most of the errors are at the windshield shape, front end and bumper. How accurate are you planning to do it? I can do some paint overs if you want to point out the errors? The car has some tricky shapes that are hard to reblicate.



Lots of work today, but I may not be able to do much for the next few days.

Again, too many parts to realistically screencap wires. Ask for parts you want to see, and I will do my best to oblige.


The hole area topology is really messy but if it makes good results for you, then thats OK. I tried some paint overs but it´s problematic area since I cant see the whole fender.
Here’s a wider view. I know the topology is messy. (Although, you know, the sheet metal on a car from the 70s isn’t perfectly smooth. :D)


The model itself looks clean to me. But it´s not very accurate when I compare it to real car. Most of the errors are at the windshield shape, front end and bumper. How accurate are you planning to do it? I can do some paint overs if you want to point out the errors?
I want it to be visually close, but it doesn’t have to be perfect. I would like your opinions, since I had to do a significant amount of guessing on the areas you mentioned, especially now, with the windows and trim in place.