Archived threads in /3/ - 3DCG - 49. page

With the wrists.

Oh, and its along the road, not across.

>>561861
not an argument

>>561860
I'm sure this can be done in Blender

boolean

>>562113
inventor is all booleans. I have two separate parts, I'm working on it right now, together they're supposed to make an open cylinder. There's a detail along the rim of one side that needs to be complimented on the other. Can I use a subtractive boolean to do this all for me? If so in what view do i do this in?
I'm in the assembly mode, editing the incomplete part to match the completed one, while it is visible on the screen.

401 is fine for oldfags like yourself

updates are important in 3D so yeah id recommend it.

but if all you do is modeling and unwrapping i don't see why you should upgrade

Blender is more powerful and it's free

>marmoset

>>561739
>Their textures appear to have completely random values for luminosity
This

Do the values you've entered look like the material you're trying to emulate? If yes, job done. If no, tweak until satisfied.
make your albedo around 50% luminosity and multiply it with a float in your shader for easy tweaking.

just do archviz.

Nobody truly lacks creativity.

And for me, 3D isn't about the wild inspiring designs that many CG artists tout, for me it's about nailing the really subtle things - like when I learnt about caustics I had to basically surgically remove my erection, I was making simple glass models for ages afterwards.

But I'm not making stylised characters everyday I'm making cups and chairs and shit and it's fucking nice, and maybe you'll find your little 3D fetish too.

Or maybe you won't, and you'll find something else, but creativity is simply not an excuse.

>>561418
>Nobody truly lacks creativity.
This so much.

have a look at the dodecahedron functions in glut

>>561616
You could do it in spherical coordinates, all the distances from the center to the vertices are equal so you only need the angle.After you are done you would probably want to convert back to cartesian coordinates.

>>559994
looks pretty good fame

>>561582
Don't like it? TOO BAD GOY!
We're the industry standard and there's NOTHING you can do about it!

>>561605
Just make your own in Designer. Fuck them, you don't even need Painter.

>>561582
substance is utter shit compared to 3d scans.

anyone with any knowledge on how to rig could do this easily in any software. you don't need a plugin.

For a plugin like this to work for custom rigs you'd end up having to put in the controls or blendshapes etc. that you want to drive with the UI.
All it is doing is grabbing the average distance from each pin on the grid of the UI and applying those values to the inputs.
You still need custom attributes on the rig to drive the poses and blends. Why use some stupid UI when you can just input values for said attributes?

I got inspired to some really interesting poses just by quickly mixing up poses with the puppeteering tool in a matter of seconds.
Nifty stuff.

>>557911
Literally not possible.
No digital media can capture the presence of a painting in real life.

https://www.artstation.com/artwork/ODzay

>>557917
nooot really

>>561469
Waiting for the "literally" guy to say:
Literally, Sketchfab.
|| Literally, Google

>>561469
>>561560
Literally CGFaboogle

Ask /g/

File: spine173.jpg (10KB, 1920x49px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 1920x49px

hmmm

>>561338
Where did you found it? help please

subdivision surface

BOX MODELING

S C U L P T I N G

File: rfbottom.png (466KB, 1920x1045px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 1920x1045px

I've been using it as a generalist tool (including modeling) for a long time, so I'll try to give my 2 cents.

Houdini has traditionally been a vfx/td tool and very few people attempted to use it for traditional modeling. Since straight poly-modeling is one of the easiest things to transfer between packages, the urgency and focus to improve that facet of the program wasn't really there. I mean, SideFX did improve it over the years here and there, but realistically the modeling tools were not a showstopper for their customers.

Things have kind of changed and more people outside of vfx are coming over to Houdini, and there is big internal push to expand it beyond vfx. I believe SideFX hired on a couple of ex-softimage devs and it seems like good number of SI users moved over to Houdini as well. They've contributed a lot of ideas on improving the modeling/workflow aspects of Houdini (there's a bigass thread in the SI subforum on sidefx) and some of that has been incorporated into 15.5/16.

I also really like the modeling tools in the latest release, but like you I'm not up-to-date on other programs like Modo/Max/Maya. I've used them all at some point but not in the capacity of a modeler who's job it is to crank out awesome models day after day. I'm thinking if you're really proficient in another modeler and you have all your scripts and plugins to buff up your workflow, switching to Houdini as a modeler might be a hard sell. Not saying it's baby duck syndrome. More like, why bother when it's so easy to transfer models and why do it if Houdini's modeling tools aren't vastly superior.

Personally I'm really used to having Houdini's network editor and being able to branch off things, modify them and merge them back in, and all the other useful stuff you can do in a procedural workflow (even when you are modeling in a mostly destructive fashion).

Modelling in Houdini is like killing a fly with a Howitzer

>>561357
So is it really easy or is it amazing or what?

Your analogy is terrible.

You pretty much always draw it first, so you have a better reference. Drawing a character from scratch is easier than sculpting it, so there's less of a chance you horribly fuck the proportions up or something like that. This applies to most 3D modelling: If you can, get a reference, even if you make it yourself on a sheet of paper.

i saw a guy that works for dreamworks and he had several character from mythology/animals from photographs that he based his character on. he just merges all of his references into 1 image

>>561492

I like to sculpt my characters right away. If drawing them helps get a better idea of what you want, do that. If you like the sketch you can make extra sure to stick to it, or you can change it. There's no "right way" to do it.

The only "wrong way" i can think of is box-modelling a character from scratch without sculpting first - it's not like you can't, but it's backwards and way harder to make it look good.