How viable is 3D Coat for sculpting? I'm not asking if its as good as zbrush, just can it do a basic job (picrel) in similar time?
Also, do you think generalist programs like Maya or Blender may at some point subsume organic sculpting and make the more specialist software a dead end?
Yes, once you learn it, it's just as capable as zbrush. I use it for Uv's and retopo. Sculpting wise it is great for seams on clothes with the spline tools and the ability to save splines and repeat strokes. It has one major problem tho, scale. It's a nightmare trying to sync it with zbrush and a modeling program. The bigger the mesh in 3d coat the more voxels, so more slowdown. Trying to sync marvelous, zbrush, max, mari is nigh on impossible. You really need to do everything in it for it to be viable.
I love 3D Coat myself. It was much cheaper than zbrush and has a far easier to use interface. I use it all the time. I'm sure zbrush can run circles around it as far as features go but for what I do it does the job just fine.
Am I on the right path?
what's the video game industry standard method for making+texturing huge, single objects (like a skyscraper for example)
do you split up the model into multiple meshes and give each mesh a separate UV map? if so, how do you make sure that the edges of each 'chunk' are connected?
or do you make one massive mesh with a 10,000x10,000 pixel textures and then split that up into a bunch of 512x512 chunks somehow?
if you need specifics, I'm using blender + substance designer + Unity 5
to be specific, they use traditional retopology+texturing on modular assets (like those windows).
the exterior is simple as a cube. there are various texturing techniques that can tile bricks and patterns into the texture, or bake from highpoly to lowpoly into a normal map.
for a huge building you might want to duplicate each floor (in engine).
just imagine you have a lego set and you need to combine all the parts to make it fit
well, that pic wasn't the best example because that style lends itself to being modular
if I were doing something with a big flat surface, e.g. a giant concrete wall with rust leaks, or a really tall and huge pillar with patterns and moss at the bottom, anything that needs to have a unified texture and doesn't have a tiling-pattern but is too big to put onto a single UV map. how would I do that?
I'm in a shit university, so I'm interested how fast the introduction to 3D modeling class progresses in your place.
3 weeks have passed and here is what we """learned""":
Basics of 3ds Max - drawing basic shapes + move, rotate and other tools
Basic edit poly tools
Literally just went through all the object creation tabs and did some animation with default particle systems
1.5 hours per week (keep in mind that's just one and only 3D class for now, though)
Meanwhile, I'm learning by myself:
>watched only first 5 videos by Arrimus 3D and learned more tools in less than an hour
>proceeded to some digital tutors tutorial
>modeled container, backpack and a machete with moderate amount of details
>didn't even work that much until now
If the class continues like this, it will be a complete waste of time. So, once again - what does your curriculum look like and what models are you expected to make during your lessons? I'm really interested so I can compare programs. But basically, every 3D education in this country sucks.
Eastern Europe. How many hours did you have per week? 1.5 hours is not much, but it is still going way too slow.
What were your assignments?
Anyway, I'm learning by myself, it's the only way.
I'm having the problem described here and it's really frustrating. Is it just a bug?
I have. No dice. And part of the issue is that it's literally cutting off about a third of the video. I'm afraid it might have something to do with the way it's being imported, which obviously there's nothing we can do about.
Because I'm a poorfag and I can't find anything else that works. Also, I'm trying to do some motion tracking.
are maya sculpting tools sufficient for an organic modelling scrub?
The basic sculpting tools are pretty much the same now. The differences lie more in the interface and how the programs perform under stress.
First off, mudbox has access to stamps and stencils, which help to quickly add features to a mesh, and also to create different maps to use in other programs. It also has materials that are conducive to showing you more minute surface details under ideal lighting, an essential tool for real-life sculpting that naturally migrated over to sculpting software. These materials are quickly interchangeable with the press of a button, which is very convenient when you want to see how your mesh is turning out.
This is anecdotal to my experience with a pipeline between both softwares: Maya does not handle large poly counts as well as Mudbox does. A scene with anything more than 200k+ polygons can bring Maya to its knees, even on a 1080, while Mudbox will happily chug along past that.
Mudbox's interface is also much cleaner out of the box, more fitting for something you would have in real life: a lazy susan, a few tools and a light, though I think Maya handles image planes more elegantly.
In reality, you wouldn't sculpt anything in Maya. You would block out a base mesh there, take it to Mudbox, wrap up your mesh there and try to retopologize as much as you can, then bring that back to Maya at a sensible poly count. The sculpting tools in Maya are there for slight adjustments post-Mudbox.
Hope this helps you.
Hi, is it possible to convert a 2d plane (like the item on the left) into a 3d cylinder (like the item on the right) and have the diameter of the cylinder's segments be the same as the plane's width in that area?
Did you seriously consider answer like "No, unfortunately that's one thing our technology cannot do yet. Perhaps Pixar or Google might be able to do it with their computing power, but if you're an ordinary guy then you're pretty much fucked" ? Just get the damn plane, cut it in half and spin it around it's axis, as if you were turning rectangle into a cylinder.
I'm following this tutorial. What am I doing wrong that the extrusion looks different?
Should l learn sculping or box modeling to do animuh models like pic related?
There's no reason to go into zbrush or mudbox for models like this. The skin is "perfect" enough that subdividing it in those softwares to model in details is almost a zero-sum game. Good-looking hair can easily be done with simple planes and geometric shapes, musculature is almost non-existent, and clothing is very simple to do.
The biggest challenge is making a 2D face look good in 3D. It's by far the most difficult part of these models and the one that'll probably have the highest concentration of polygons in your model. But even then, exporting your model to a sculpting program just for that is complete overkill.
In short, you could sculpt this out, but it's like bringing a flamethrower to kill an ant.
Post your favorite Sketchfab models and Artist.
I'll start with Graft, love his style.
Can't forget about Skuddbutt, I recommend you check out his works too.
Sankaku3d stuff is nice too.
tfw we are too irellevent to be combined with another board for aprel fools
I will be open with you guys I need to win this 3D printer so I can start my little project.
Hit the like button for me.
I'm looking to hire 1 or more 3D generalist/texture/animation artists and possibly a gamedev with UE4 / C++ / VR experience for a fulltime position in Germany.
Tasks would include:
>3d modeling, level design
>creating pbr materials / shaders and general texture work
>creating, adapting and implementing animations in UE4
>creating and adapting blueprints in UE4
Should obviously have experience in UE4 and Substance or Quixel.
Where would I go to find such people?
Anyone here interested?
Feedback he lovveesss it boss
Where do you guys learn your stuff? Im just starting to learn but I find watching free tutorials isn't getting me anywhere. Are sites like lynda.com worth the money for lessons?
Why isn't it working for you?
Because the quality of the tutorials is poor, or because you feel like you're "painting by numbers" without understanding what you're doing?
If it's quality, then try some stuff off cgpersia or cgpeers before you buy anything
If "paint by numbers", that's a natural feeling, you're learning you just don't feel it because you haven't learned enough to go from start to finish on your own.
As you keep doing more tutorials and projects, you'll find you're accumulating skills and knowledge, and you can test this by going back to an old tutorial and trying to improvise over it (which, if you've tried now, has likely resulted in minimal success)