[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

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

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

File: HD800.jpg (25KB, 600x453px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
HD800.jpg
25KB, 600x453px
want to 3D-print a Sennheiser HD 800 - where do i start?
8 posts and 2 images submitted.
>>
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

File: 440794014_640.jpg (52KB, 640x360px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
440794014_640.jpg
52KB, 640x360px
Autodesk Inventor 2015

I am designing two parts that are supposed to fit together. 2 halves of a cylinder. I've already done extensive design work on one side, the more complicated side. Is there a simple way to just subtract this part from another semi cylinder i make so that all the parts where they touch fit perfectly? And if so would this tool be sensitive to history so i can make adjustments and all that?
3 posts and 1 images submitted.
>>
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.

Hello,

I just realized I have an old registered version of mods 401. Is it worth it to upgrade? I haven't done any 3D for years but am feeling nostalgic
13 posts and 2 images submitted.
>>
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

So there's these charts floating around that claim to have the correct values for physically realistic results when using PBR workflow for something like Unreal Engine 4. But all the artist work or included samples that come with the engine don't adhere to any fucking standards at all. Their textures appear to have completely random values for luminosity etc. that don't follow these charts at all.

For example this chart claims the mean luminosity of the albedo map for painted metal is around 94, but it's fucking impossible to make any red or yellow painted metal while keeping the medium at 94 because it looks ultra dark and de-saturated. Am I a retard and doing this shit incorrectly? It's confusing as hell. I have no idea how bright to make any of my textures, I thought PBR was supposed to remove guess work but all I've been doing is guessing how bright or dark to make my fucking albedo maps.
24 posts and 3 images submitted.
>>
>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.

File: 1467001568147.jpg (182KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1467001568147.jpg
182KB, 1024x1024px
Should a person bother with 3D if they are not artistic or creative? I feel I could learn how to but wouldn't be able to make anything cool/good/whatever.

Is it like learning how to play an instrument, but if you can't make good music you are useless?
16 posts and 4 images submitted.
>>
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.

How do I draw a dodecahedron wireframe using opengl? I have defined the points, but I'm not sure of the best approach to drawing each edge.
3 posts and 1 images submitted.
>>
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.

File: r28.jpg (65KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
r28.jpg
65KB, 1280x720px
How do you feel about this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPzxwNlA6mQ
2 posts and 1 images submitted.
>>
>>559994
looks pretty good fame

Who can share these. why do I have to wait multiple months to try all if these even though i already pay for live. What the shit just let me download them all.
29 posts and 4 images submitted.
>>
>>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.

File: 46846949.gif (2MB, 529x380px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
46846949.gif
2MB, 529x380px
I'd even pay for someone making an addon for Blender
10 posts and 1 images submitted.
>>
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.

File: 1490562975876.jpg (3MB, 4000x2737px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1490562975876.jpg
3MB, 4000x2737px
Do you know any good 3D works or techniques that make renders look like paintings? I wonder how a 3D world would look in the style of beautiful baroque oil paintings.
28 posts and 4 images submitted.
>>
>>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

File: images.jpg (7KB, 183x276px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
images.jpg
7KB, 183x276px
Does anyone have a high quality print ready 3D anime model? I want to use something like this as test render for my shaders.
3 posts and 1 images submitted.
>>
>>561469
Waiting for the "literally" guy to say:
Literally, Sketchfab.
|| Literally, Google
>>
>>561469
>>561560
Literally CGFaboogle

File: spine.jpg (65KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
spine.jpg
65KB, 1280x720px
someone have a source to download all kind of programs cracked? I am still searching for the "Spine" Program, Someone knows where to get the full version?
10 posts and 2 images submitted.
>>
Ask /g/
>>
File: spine173.jpg (10KB, 1920x49px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
spine173.jpg
10KB, 1920x49px
hmmm
>>
>>561338
Where did you found it? help please

File: jelly bean.jpg (88KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
jelly bean.jpg
88KB, 1200x1200px
What would be the best way to model this shape?
31 posts and 3 images submitted.
>>
subdivision surface
>>
BOX MODELING
>>
S C U L P T I N G

File: 234784564.gif (16KB, 800x600px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
234784564.gif
16KB, 800x600px
(Almost) complete modelling noob here, is there any reason Houdini is not used more for modelling? Recently started using it for VFX and decided to try modelling too. So far it seems great, the graph and procedural nature is a lot less painful than the usual workflow. My other experience in modelling (and VFX) was Maya which was just a pain, felt like it would randomly break, crash, or just stop working (also felt like you had to buy a 200$ plugin for every other thing you wanted to do properly). While I can't really say how it stacks up against other software such as Modo, Houdini so far has been a much much less painful experience than Maya.

What are the limitations holding it back from being more commonly used for modelling apart from being very different from the others due to the procedural nature?
13 posts and 3 images submitted.
>>
File: rfbottom.png (466KB, 1920x1045px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
rfbottom.png
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.

File: argo-02_out.jpg (274KB, 1000x883px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
argo-02_out.jpg
274KB, 1000x883px
How do you go about designing a character? do you draw it first or experiment in 3d from the beginning? Is it a waste of time to try to draw it out first if it never ends up looking like that anyway?

What is the beginning design to complete animated finished model process that works best?
4 posts and 1 images submitted.
>>
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.

Pages: [First page] [Previous page] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [Next page] [Last page]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.