Many artists have commented to me that their 3D models in CheckMate Pro v1 already meet the CheckMate Pro v2 standard. That’s great news, and we want you to have that later certification date along with the shiny new badge for all your models.
To submit your Pro v1 models for Pro v2, you can do one of two things:
Reupload your native file in the product to automatically trigger a reinspection for Pro v2.
Or, if you have a lot of models to submit, open a support ticket with the subject “Upgrade Pro v1 to v2″ and list the product IDs you want to upgrade. We will manually trigger a reinspection on our end.
Please note that any 3D models you submit for Pro v2 in this way will go through a full inspection for the new specification.
One of the most common questions we get about the CheckMate Pro v2 standard is about poles. A pole is a set of edges coming into a single vertex, the way edges are arranged around a vertex at the top of a sphere primitive.
A pole at the tip of a sphere primitive.
In CheckMate Pro v2, we don’t allow poles with 6 or more edges on curved surfaces. The reason for this requirement is that such poles can cause problems in renderings. The renderer interprets the pole as a sharp point, causing a break in highlights and textures. Such rendering problems are usually evident only from certain angles, so you might not see why we make this requirement. However, we want CheckMate Pro v2 models to work perfectly for customers no matter which angle they choose for a rendering.
In general, we allow poles with 6 or more edges on flat pie-shaped topology such as a the cap of a cylinder. On other kinds of flat topology, there is usually a better way to route the edges than to have a pole, so such geometry fails CheckMate Pro v2 for poor topology.
If your 3D model has poles with six or more edges on a curved surface or in an area that could have better topology, there are several easy ways to change the geometry to meet the specification. These changes won’t affect the overall shape of the geometry, but will avoid any possible problems with poles.
Solution 1: Flatten the Pole Surface
Poles are allowed on flat pie-shaped surfaces. If you are using a sphere for an eyeball, you can easily flatten the tip so the pole is on a flat surface.
Poles with more than 6 edges on a curved surface cause a sharp point in the geometry.
Pole surfaces are flattened. This geometry is acceptable for CheckMate Pro v2.
Solution 2: Reroute the edges
If your topology has poles on a surface that is not a round cap, you can usually find another way to route the edges. Sometimes this will require more edges, but that’s okay. If a guarantee of no artifacts from poles means the poly count is a little higher, customers don’t mind. They also like to be able to select a series or “loop” of edges with tools within their 3D software.
Six-sided pole on a surface
No 6-sided poles and more ease of selecting edge loops around the holes.
There are often several ways to reroute edges. The example above is just one. Considering the ease of selecting edge loops can often point the way to ways to reroute your edge loops.
When you submit your 3D model for CheckMate Pro v2, our inspectors will assist you in improving your geometry by pointing out areas that should be fixed, and suggesting alternate ways to route your edges.
Since we released CheckMate Pro v2 on June 15, many artists have risen to the challenge and improved their 3D models to meet the updated specification. We’ve also heard from some artists with questions about how certain 3D models could possibly fit the new requirements.
We take these questions seriously. Every week, the CheckMate team reviews these concerns and looks for ways to refine the specification to achieve the goal of “better 3D models on TurboSquid” and make it possible for models in every category to be certified. Based on your questions, we’ve added refinements to the specification for certain types of objects.
We are also working on training videos and articles to help you meet the requirements, and to give our inspectors tools for helping you meet them.
Because of your feedback, we’ve added these points to the specification:
One-sided planes representing leaves do not have to be subdividable.
Edge flow and subdividability are not necessary on small, insignificant objects. Screws, bolts, rivets, wires, and other pieces that are very small in comparison with the overall model size can be created with any poly modeling method.
Closeup wireframes are required. If the topology of detailed areas isn’t easy to see in the full view of the model, you must provide closeup wireframes of those detailed areas. This will apply to the majority of CheckMate Pro v2 models.
One-sided thin objects with opacity maps do not have to be subdividable. For example, in a 3D model of a tree, if the leaves are small planes with texture/opacity maps applied, these planes do not have to be subdividable. Note that if the same leaves are created as boxes with opacity maps, this rules does not apply for CheckMate Pro v2, as these are not one-sided objects. If the boxes are thick, the sides of the object will be invisible, which is not good quality. If the boxes are shaped to fit the leaf shape, they should be subdividable. Note that this point applies only to objects which are very thin in real life and which can be reasonably be represented with a one-sided object, such as leaves, decals, paper, etc.
The model cannot include openings (borders) in the geometry that cause parts of the model to become see-through. An example might be a slice or crack where two parts of a hard surface come together, as with a cell phone or motorcycle. If we can zoom in and look through the crack to see the universe beyond, this is a fail. This is a common problem with subdividable models that don’t have sufficient holding edges where two parts meet.
The percentage of triangles (three-sided faces) is not a deciding point on realtime models. Realtime models have to have the most efficient geometry possible, so understandably there are a high percentage of triangles.
Guidelines for Meeting the Pro v2 Specification
These next points are not in the specification, but are just guidelines for artists.
If you’re having trouble making the edge flow work on your model, consider breaking it into separate objects. Look at how the real-world object is made. If the real-world object is constructed of separate pieces, then you should probably model it that way, too. In years past, we learned to model objects as all one piece, and how exciting it was to learn techniques that made this possible! But this approach is not always the best way to make 3D models in 2013.
Don’t mix subdividable objects and realtime objects in the same model. Decide on one objective for your entire model, and go that way only.
3D text almost always has to be edited before it can meet the Pro v2 requirements. Whether you edit the underlying shape or the 3D model itself, you can (and should) make better geometry out of the default text your 3D program produces. Add chamfered edges so the customer can subdivide the text. If you think the text doesn’t need to be subdividable because the customer will never render a close-up, then consider using a texture, decal, or normal map instead.
Try for the best topology possible. Our inspectors are trained to look for this point specifically: “Is there any obvious way to make the topology better?” If so, the inspector will advise you on how to do this. Our goal is to make your models so good that customers won’t be able to resist them.
CheckMate Pro v2 topology
We expect that subdividable models will have more geometry than the minimum necessary to make the shape. There is no problem with adding extra edges to create good edge flow. On the other hand, excessive geometry is not allowed. Try for the minimum necessary for good edge flow. Our inspectors will help you achieve this.
If you really like modeling with the minimum polys necessary without regard for edge flow, then make realtime models.
If you have to subdivide the model more than 2-3 times to get a smooth rendering at 1200×1200, then you probably need more detail in the base mesh.
Subdividable vs. Realtime
Several artists have suggested that we split the Pro v2 specification into two completely separate specifications, one for subdividable and one for realtime. We have considered doing so, but there are still far more similarities between the two than there are differences. Both require clean geometry (no isolated vertices, etc.), real world scale, excellent textures, accurate product information, and so on. If, at some point in the future, we find that there’s far more divergence in the specifications for these two types of models, we will of course split the specification. But for now, we find that one specification with exceptions for realtime models works best.
I’ll have more answers to questions about architectural models and edge flow in future blog posts, and we’ll have more edge flow training videos soon. In the meantime, I hope this helps answer your questions about CheckMate Pro v2.
We are always looking for ways to improve the CheckMate certification process. Often, the only thing that prevents a model from being certified is a small error, like a spelling mistake or typo. In cases like these, it would often just be easier for TurboSquid to make a quick fix to the product.
Beginning Wednesday, August 22nd, TurboSquid will begin fixing small mistakes in the product preview for models submitted to CheckMate including:
Correction of spelling and capitalization mistakes in the title and/or description, as well as punctuation errors
Updates to the polygon and vertex counts (if they are almost correct)
Addition of any missing keywords that could help with search results
What we won’t be changing is any of the presentation content – only obvious errors that will result in added time to the inspection process.
For those artists not interested in allowing TurboSquid to make small fixes to their products can opt out of the program. Simply open a support ticket with the subject “Opt out of CheckMate Fixes” and select the category of “Certification” and you will be removed from the service.
We do feel think that this will help to speed up the certification process for many, and we look forward to inspecting your future submissions!
We’ve long had a requirement for CheckMate Pro that all texture paths be stripped out of the 3D model file. We’ve now added the same requirement to CheckMate Lite:
2.1.4 No texture paths referenced by model. Any texture paths must be stripped from model file. See Texture References.
And we’ve added this requirement to both CheckMate Pro and Lite:
188.8.131.52 Each archive must be a flat file structure with no folders or subfolders. See Texture References.
We’ve added these requirements because of the many Support calls, tickets, and chats that we get about this issue. Many customers, especially those new to 3D, get confused when they see unfamiliar folder path in a texture reference. Experienced customers, who replace or change textures on more than 50% of the 3D models they purchase, like all the bitmaps in a single folder so they can easily do a visual scan through the images.
We’ve discussed this issue with many TurboSquid artists, and got some useful suggestions such as putting all the bitmaps in a single Maps folder or instructing customers on how to extract files into a single folder. But the goal of CheckMate is to make the customer experience as smooth as possible, and the most direct way to accomplish this is to strip texture paths and deliver everything in a flat file structure. We’ve created videos on how to do this in 3ds Max and Maya, which you can find in the Knowledge Base article Texture References.
If you’ve already got models in CheckMate, we aren’t requiring you to update your texture paths or archive files with a flat file structure, but we encourage you to do so. If a customer contacts Support about the model (asking about strange texture paths, complaining that the archive file created unwanted subfolders on their system, etc.) then we will require you to fix the file at that time.
1.7 Payment Information - In order to have 3D models CheckMate Certified, the publishing member must fill out accurate and up-to-date Payment Information for the TurboSquid account.
This is actually a requirement for all publishing members at TurboSquid. While we run regular general checks on new artists, we check up on this requirement immediately when an artist submits a model to CheckMate.
3.1.5 Unwrapped UV Image Requirement – The Product Preview includes at least one image of the unwrapped UVs if one of the following options is selected for the model’s Unwrapped UVs attribute:
This update clarifies which models need to have a thumbnail image of the unwrapped UVs.
3.5.3 In the Geometry field, one of these two choices is selected:
Polygonal Quads only
This update clarifies which choices for Geometry under Step 1 of the Publisher are acceptable for CheckMate Pro.
Offering exchange file formats (OBJ, FBX, etc.) with your models is one way to boost your sales, but how do you export decent files that will satisfy customers? Come to our free webinar and find out how!
Although TurboSquid has offered free file format conversions for several years, many customers want to download an exchange format immediately. Offering an exchange format as part of your product can boost your sales, but only if the file works as expected. While customers don’t expect all the bells and whistles of your native format, they do expect the model to be constructed in the same way shown in thumbnails, and to include UVs and textures.
In this free webinar, TurboSquid Member Services Supervisor and conversion expert Chris Johns brings his knowledge to you. CJ (as he is known around here) will show you how to identify potential trouble areas in your model and avoid problems with conversions.