Literally what is your excuse for not learning 3D? It's

>>3018700
Because I don't want to become a pro if it means photobashing.

Anyway I know 3D.

File: tumblr_oh54itDCzn1rkq0ruo1_1280.jpg (276KB, 1280x828px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1280x828px

>>3018700
I dunno, there seem plenty of pros who are doing just fine without having to do 3D. Even concept artists working on projects that ARE fully 3D in the final product.

>>3018701
>Because I don't want to become a pro if it means photobashing.
I genuinely wish I could go back to being that naive and stay there.

>>3018759
There are plenty of concept artists who explicitly stated that photobashing and 3D are not necessary to "make it".

File: john_wick___ad_design_by_davidrapozaart-d847t4o.jpg (1MB, 818x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 818x1200px

>>3018759
What does that have to do with being naive? Just don't photobash and do what you enjoy instead. If you're good, you'll get hired by people. Just look at Dave Rapoza for example. He makes far more money and works on bigger, higher profile projects than 99% of polish concept art shitters.

>>3018700

>It's impossible to survive as a pro if you don't know how to use it.

Literally not true.

But it IS a useful skill to have.

>>3018700
3d is piss easy to learn, especially rendering

its not even worth calling it a crutch. if you need help imagining your scene then go ahead and use it.

i pity people stuck in their glass prisons of taboos

What is there to learn? You use it or you don't.

ayy I just haven't done it yet. sculptris is ass easy but zbrush ain't make no goddamn sense the interface is fuckstupid

>>3018700

Takes longer for me to do than drawing. Did a lot of modeling from boxes and quit.

I gave up on doing art as a career long ago, now I'm just having fun with it.
I know a litlle sculpting and box modeling, but this year I'm trying to focus on drawing

>>3018907
never gonna make it

>>3018700
Yeah but maybe don't try to learn cg when you still suck at the fundamentals and lack understanding of form. Just saying.

>>3018700
>tfw the guy manually painted chamfers, but didn't even bother chamfering his models.

>>3018700
>Literally what is your excuse for not learning 3D?
No reason for me to.
>It's impossible to survive as a pro if you don't know how to use it.
t. 13 year old shitposter
>Why do you tell yourself that its a crutch?
wut

>>3018700
Good example of a 3D program fucking up shadows

>>3018982
Explain yourself.

>>3018982
How?

And if there is some sort of error, would a layman even notice?

File: john-sweeney-sketches-part-1-web.jpg (619KB, 1920x1619px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 1920x1619px

>>3018700

The guy who did this (John Sweeney) has excellent traditional skills aswell. All of the really formidable photobashers have solid painting skills. Still, I'm not a fan of the photobashed look .

>>3019018

Not him, but the edges of the cast shadow looks a touch to harsh. That would have been easy to fix in post though. Obviously the geometry of the cast shadow will always be correct in 3d

>survive as a pro
>survive as a pro
>survive as a pro

Once again, /ic/ demonstrates it's tunnel vision regarding what it means to be a "pro".

I dont use it in my work at the moment but if i needed to be turning out piece by piece quickly, then 3D bases can help with that and i wouldnt be opposed.

Generally i feel like if im going to use 3D in my work I want it to be just for difficult poses or environments. Overall I'd still like to have it be 90% Illustrated by hand.

As for photobashing, I'd hope i never have to do that. Feel like a cheat for me, personally.

>>3019046
That is so small!

I'm sure he did that to add a mood, not a 1:1 representation of reality.

>>3018700
My 'excuse' is that I became an artist because I like to draw, fiddling with 3D isn't drawing. Why do work if you don't enjoy the work?

>>3019107
Healthy mindset

>>3019107
>fiddling with 3D isn't drawing

Except it is. Drawing is modifying and creating the illusion of 3D shapes and forms. The only difference with 3D is that you can move the camera around.

If you ever tried sculpting, you would see that it's very similar to drawing too.

>>3019082
This, not ever job that involves illustration needs you to learn 3D software.

>>3019109
>Drawing is modifying and creating the illusion of 3D shapes and forms.
By that logic playing a video game can also be considered "drawing" since you're moving the camera and objects around in the world. In other words your self serving semantic definition is utterly retarded and completely ignores concepts like process and technique, or just plain common sense. You are not an abstract being, stop acting like one, you look a fool.

>If you ever tried sculpting
I have, both using zbrush and clay. But I am not a sculptor either. Again, the main point is "I like to draw (let's use common sense when defining drawing here, please), therefore I draw". Some people care more about the end result than the process, I do not, and neither do many others. That's where this conflict in 3D as a tool or a crutch lies in.

If I wanted to, what should I focus in? ZBrush? Maya? 3dMax?

>>3019118
>By that logic playing a video game can also be considered "drawing" since you're moving the camera and objects around in the world.

Moving the camera and objects is called compositing, which is a part of drawing. Drawing is so vast and wide that it touches all the areas of physics. You should try learning the fundamentals before you speak.

>>3019121
Did you just agree with him?

>>3019132
He claims that 3D isn't drawing. Yet drawing in perspective is extruding, cutting, merging, arranging, the same things you do in 3D.

If he actually knew what drawing is, he would realize that all those skills apply to 3D. Only the tool is different. The fundamentals are the same.

Those who claim that working in 3D isn't the same as 2D don't really practice the fundies.

File: 3dsDos.gif (14KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 800x600px

>>3018700
I was doing 3D back in 1994 on my old 486, using 3D Studio 4.

>>3019120
Zbrush is mostly for characters. 3DSmax or blender for environments. Maya for animation.

>>3019156
With the caveat that, like how any drawing program is equally capable to any other, you can use them all for anything.

>>3019159
Yeah, just pick any and learn it from inside out instead of anguishing over which one is the best.

Moving to a second one is way easier if you're good at any.

>>3019137
>working in 3d is the same as 2d.

ok

Because I do know it yet every place I've applied to in the Bay Area has a strict Bachelor's degree only requirement for that shit for god knows what reason and I'm not going to get 20k in debt for a fucking job that pays slightly more than the art job I already got for free.

>>3019211
>every place I've applied to in the Bay Area has a strict Bachelor's degree only requirement
What the fuck? Artist jobs are dead.

File: 29e75fc643c86c4efecf6a606d5e93ad.jpg (89KB, 736x1110px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 736x1110px

>>3019118
>>3019137

Yes you are technically right modelling is not drawing. But for all practical purposes they're the same.

3d and 2d are both about bringing ideas to life. Once you get your craft to an acceptable level its all about creativity over anything else. The medium matters less than the concept.

Sure you don't get to autistically and mindlessly draw out all the buildings in perspective by using in 3D, and most all of the tedious/time consuming parts can be bypassed. 3D cuts out all of the time sinks and lets you focus on developing your ideas.

Also, compositionally speaking your pieces will vastly improve by using a 3d base since you're able to fly around the scene you setup and figure out what camera angle actually creates the most compelling story.

Learn to like it because its a valuable tool that will save you time and allow you to push yourself creatively

>>3018700
What software do pros use and why? I sometimes block in initial boxes and mess with camera position & lenses in sketchup, but that's all

>>3019296
When it comes to certain programs, everything is used as long as the end product is professional.

Unless you are a coder, and you need to use certain engines or software. As far as illustration goes, the ends justify the means.

>>3019105
>That is so small!

What?

>I'm sure he did that to add a mood, not a 1:1 representation of reality.

It doesn't since it's incongruent with the overall style of the piece. Softer edges of the cast shadows would objectively be better.

>>3019272
>Yes you are technically right modelling is not drawing. But for all practical purposes they're the same.

Nope, not at all. They are separate disciplines all together. There is some overlap though but you can be a great sculptor and poor at drawing and vice versa.

File: 1497029519193.gif (3MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x270px

>using a faggot crutch
Kill yourself.

>>3019646

the idea is more important than the craft.

Obviously you want your craft to be as good as possible so people can understand or be more interested in your idea but ultimately you're out to convey ideas through your medium.

>>3019648
So sad I don't have the approval of literal no-names on 4chan :^(

>wanting to be a conmeme artist for muh vidya gmae eendustree

>>3019245
Only for 3D animation and modeling, everything else still has 0 requirements other than have a not shit portfolio

>>3019211

WHAT?

Why on earth...?

Come to L.A. Nobody gives a damn if you have a degree here.

>>3018700
>stiff and boring
>level of detail all over the place, focal point is less detailed than fucking books in the background
>oh right, its photobashed

Yeah dude. Why arent we all spending time learning 3D to create stale, lifeless images like this (since this isnt a painting obviously).

>>3019873

I've seen the tutorial vid for this piece. If I remember correctly he said that he spent 6 hours JUST looking for the right photos. Jeezuz christ!

>>3019905
I dont get it honestly. To me working as an artist is appealing because I do stuff that I like doing and I get paid for it. If I was only after the money then I'd had studied to be a fucking banker or something. Do these people actually enjoy being Google Image searchbots and paste it all together later? And make bunch of brushstrokes on top of stuff they didnt paint to pretend like they did? Are they getting paid really well for this shit or what is it, when exactly do you decide to give up all ambition and art aspirations for this sort of thing?

I dont get it.

I plan to learn 3D shit to help me compose some ideas I have for personal paintings. But I won't be making paintings of grandpa wondering where he put his keys in his 1950s ranch house. Fucking boooooring

>>3019645
Man, I really doubt it would make a difference.

>>3020170

That's because your eyes aren't developed yet.

>>3019650
so writing is drawing lol
just shut the fuck up, you have clearly no clue what you're talking about you subhuman retard

>>3018700
Nobody cares. Be good at real art and then you'll be fine. Being a crap 3D embarrassment doesn't improve anything.

>>3020327
>real art
No true Scotsman

>>3020334

3D isn't real art anon

>>3020320
Except writing is through language, while drawing and modeling are both about bringing concepts into something you can see.

They're the two main disciplines to create things. Both are used to make illustrations or movies from "nothing".

>>3020320
Successful writing does create imagery but in a far more subjective way than drawing does. Useful in the same process but not the same no. Let me know if you need anything else explained!

>>3020327
I'm sure Scott Robertson would agree ;)

>>3020476
B-but that must be cheating because I don't know how to do it!

>>3020476
hyurrr 3d fucking shits!!!1

>>3020476
Looks like drawing + photobashing, not 3d.

>>3020587
the buildings/vehicle might be 3d. artist didn't specify, but def lots of photobashing.

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

>>3020587

Your eyes need adjustment mate. That literally SCREAMS 3d +photobashing. Some parts are more obvious than others though.

I mean I'd learn it as a way to get work done quicker, but I wouldn't like it to be a replacement for my actual skills, a teach I had (pretty good artist, learned a lot from him) told me these things are tools, not crutches, as should be used as so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imt7hFBr82o

This is what the artist calls "painting" aka 90% photo collage and 10% painting

>>3020688
Well yeah, most photobashers are extremely skilled artists.

I just don't like the look of it.

File: 1443625015988.jpg (38KB, 362x346px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 362x346px

I don't know where the idea that photobashing isn't fun comes from. I love doing it.

If people can get a kick of cockroach sculpting, why not photobashing?

>>3020476
Whatever it is, its fucking cool.

With all of the same tools you couldn't pull it off unless you knew the same thing he does.

>>3020695
The dude is great at painting, you do this stuff to save time once you have the understanding. All the matters is the idea and end product senpai. The faster you get from A to B the faster you can start on the next project.

>>3020739

Don't call it painting if it's technically collage work with some brush strokes on top, that's all.

>>3020747
I can use this same logic to dismiss all digital media because "it's not really painting"


Is a perspective grid cheating? Are layers? Is flipping a canvas? Is using a texture brush you made from a photograph? Is liquefying or free transforming? Using reference?

>>3020748
Generally the closer you are to emulating traditional painting, the more brownie points you get.

So just about everything but using a reference.

But I don't want to be a pro. I just want to be good enough to not have to pay for art commissions of muh ocs.

>>3020758
good luck working professionally friend.

its all tools to save time aka to make more money per hour

File: Trace 3d.jpg (2MB, 2899x4032px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2899x4032px

3D can still help you with that.

>>3020748

Damn man, you're pretty fucking dense.

It's simple. If you're combining photos and do a few brush strokes over them, it's a collage with a few brush strokes, not a painting. Same holds true regardless if you're cutting and pasting physical photos together or doing it in Photoshop.

If you build up your shapes and masses with brush strokes it's painting regardless if you're using a physical brush or a digital brush.

>IIs a perspective grid cheating? Are layers? Is flipping a canvas? Is using a texture brush you made from a photograph? Is liquefying or free transforming? Using reference?

Never said anything about cheating, I'm only interested in calling things for what they are. If you're using the principles of painting you are painting regardless of medium. If you are combining painting with photographic elements you're essentially doing mixed media. If 90% of your work is pulling and pushing photos it's fair to say that your're doing a digital form of collage.

>>3020765

Damn man, you're pretty fucking dense.

What about building your shapes and masses with brush strokes and overlaying photos to save time on rendering if you're going for realism?

is that suddenly painting now that we've fulfilled your arbitrary requirement?


What about building up shapes and masses using photographs?


Again if we're going to get technical/literal, none of it is painting because no paint :)

>>3020765
>this pixel pusher thinks he is a painter

>>3020768

Already explained that part. If you're combing photos with painting you're doing mixed media. I'd be fine with calling it painting if the majority of the work you're doing is painting and the photos are only used for texture. It's really about what you spend the most time doing. If 90% of the time is spent moving around photos you can't be said to be painting. Pretty straightforward really.

>Again if we're going to get technical/literal, none of it is painting because no paint :)

It's using the same principles as painting.

File: 2017-06-13 21-56-37.webm (152KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1280x720px

>>3020765
Brushstrokes blah blah blah.

Don't these count as brushstrokes?

Do these?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcz5Fh6Wcx4

A brush is just a repeating pixel image and a photo is a pixel image. Any image can become a brushstroke in digital.

>>3020780
well you're certainly entitled to your opinion

>>3020781

Nope, that's a form of collage aswell. If you're using premade shapes you're not painting, simple as that really.

File: 2017-06-13 22-12-23.webm (169KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1280x720px

>>3020785
All brushes are premade you dumbass. Even the hard round is a premade circle pixel shape.

>>3020785
but my brushes are all premade shapes! so are yours!

>>3020785
A better analogy would be "if it wouldn't fly in traditional painting, you're going to get nothing but sour looks doing it digitally."

If a traditional painter started using premade perspective grids, tree/cloud shaped brushes and painted photos into his work, you'd think he was a pansy shit.

File: 1525_durer_perspective-machine_c.jpg (138KB, 1607x600px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1607x600px

>>3020788

>>3020786
>>3020787


The difference is that the hard round is a abstract shape that you're using to build other shapes with. If you're using a "leaf brush" to get some leaf shapes onto your canvas you're strictly speaking using a form of collage technique. If you use the same leaf brush abstractly to paint with, you're actually painting. It's really not that difficult and I wonder why you are struggling with understanding this very basic concept.

File: A-Sunday-Afternoon-on-MEDIUM.jpg (67KB, 513x347px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 513x347px

Is pointillism photobashing? I mean there aren't really any brush STROKES. I don't think it's real art.

Did the old masters even painted since they used wax and blood? Wouldn't that be called waxing and blooding?

If you paint with a knife shouldn't that be called knifing?

Is the airbrush allowed? I don't think it should be called painting, more like pressurized-pigmenting.

I don't even think Sargent was a real artist since he just traced the camera obscura. He was just a graphic designer.

If we don't upheld the racial and technical purity of the art world, I might feel offended by my limited understanding of other tools.

>>3020792
but you aren't using paint so its not painting.

>>3020794
do u wanna be my bf while we crimefight all the villains from this board anon

>>3020794
At what point do you just use a fucking camera, throw on a sketch filter and put it in a museum?

Production art can fuck off.

>>3020794

>Is pointillism photobashing? I mean there aren't really any brush STROKES. I don't think it's real art

Congrats on writing one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever read on /ic/

>>3020795

It's the same craft with some minor medium specific differencies.

File: Foam-Museum-Amsterdam-1500x1000.jpg (377KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 1500x1000px

>>3020801
>At what point do you just use a fucking camera, throw on a sketch filter and put it in a museum?

I'm really concerned for you mental health. You're aware that there are museums for photography right?

Photography is still art.

>>3020802

>It's the same craft with some minor medium specific differencies.

exactly my point about photobashing!

>>3020802
>>Congrats on writing one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever read on /ic/

No, this is the most idiotic thing you have read on /ic/:

>Don't call it painting if it's technically collage work with some brush strokes on top, that's all.

>>3020802
>>It's the same craft with some minor medium specific differencies.
It's all made of fucking pixels.

>>3020801
>Doesn't know about photo-brushstrokes

>>3020804

Photobashing is a digital collage technique.

>>3020806

Yes, and it does not refute my argument.

File: This is collage according to ic.webm (215KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1280x720px

>>3020807
>>Doesn't know about photo-brushstrokes

Seriously. It's 2017. Some people should get on board with this thing called technology.

>>3020808
Digitalpainting is a digital collage technique.

File: 68747470733a2f2f746865756e7265636f726465646d616e2e66696c65732e776f726470726573732e636f6d2f323031352f31312f73746566616e2e6a7067.jpg (64KB, 1453x862px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1453x862px

>>3020805

How is that wrong, though? Do you have an argument?

>>3018700
Yeah loish worked on horizon zero dawn, a triple a title.. As a concept artist. No 3d.. Want more examples? 3d isn't necessary in concept art and news flash there are more jobs in art outside of concept art than there are in concept art

>>3020810

If you're making an image by combining and arranging pictures you're doing a collage, if you're building shapes and masses with abstract brush marks you're painting.

>>3020812
Loish actually can do games? What did she do? Prop design?

>>3020811
Sure. A collage is pasting images onto a canvas. Painting is apply pigment to a flat paper surface.

Digital painting is mathematical manipulation of pixels. Brush strokes are pixels reacting according to formulas. You don't really apply more to the canvas. Just manipulate the pixels that are already there to change color.

So either deny entirely the existence of digital painting, or accept that any techniques that involve manipulation of pixels is part of digital painting.

>>3020815
but I'm making an image by combining shapes and masses of pictures.


And I'm making an image by combining and arranging abstract brush marks.

Also not painting cause no paint.

File: painting.jpg (174KB, 900x678px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 900x678px

>>3020815
am i painting yet??

File: 2017-06-13 22-50-38.webm (325KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 1280x720px

When the digital brush touches the canvas, it doesn't applies pigment to the surface. It uses algorithms to alter the color of the pixels that are already there. Like in this WEBM, it's just math that alters the pixels to change the color.

According to /ic/, the concept of digital painting shouldn't even exist in the first place since it's just pixel modifying.

>>3020820

You seem unable to think abstractly in terms of principles. Digital painting uses the same fundamental skills as traditional painting with some minor differencies that are specific to the tools involved. Your whole argument rests on the fact that the physics involved are different while mine focuses on the underlying principles and shared skills.

>>3020830
photobashing also uses the same fundamental skills though

File: 1477713856753.jpg (26KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 306x306px

>>3020830
>Your whole argument rests on the fact that the physics involved are different while mine focuses on the underlying principles and shared skills.

>underlying principles and shared skills.

You mean like perspective? color theory? form?
The same things that you have to take into account while photobashing?

>>3020831
>>3020832

>photobashing also uses the same fundamental skills though
>You mean like perspective? color theory? form?


Those are general art fundamentals, not the specific skill sets of painting. Some skills naturally overlap Photobashing is mixed media as I've said a million times by now.. Still does in no way refute anything that I've been saying. If you're arranging photos, you're not painting.

>>3020842
>specific skillsets of painting

ahh like alla prima and mixing pain- oh wait you don't do any of that on digital.

File: 1484246558622.jpg (12KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 225x225px

>>3020842
>Those are general art fundamentals, not the specific skill sets of painting.

What's an specific skill of painting then? Not spilling the thinner?

>>3020845

The shared skills, not the medium specific skills.

>>3020850
You mean like perspective? color theory? form?

>>3020850
Outside of holding the brush steady I cant think of one single thing.

>>3020847
>>3020852
>>3020853

Realistic painting is fundamentally about creating the illusion of light by masses of value.
Any other questions?

>>3020855
b-but you do that in drawing and photobashing too

>>3020855
Yes, why do you dodge the question?
What are those "specific skill sets of painting" that make digital painting the same as painting?

>>3020856

Depends on the style of drawing. If you're primarily abstracting form by the use of line then no you're not. Charchoal could be said to be approaching the principles of painting and is used in ateliers as preperation for painting in oils. Again, it's about the principles involved.

Photobashing uses painting skills to integrate photos into a illustration. The part where you arrange photos is not painting, though.. If you make a brush out of a photo and uses it as a abstract mark making tool then yes you can paint with it.

>>3020862
>If you make a brush out of a photo and uses it as a abstract mark making tool then yes you can paint with it.

lmao

>>3020862
>Again, it's about the principles involved.
Which you have refused to define, because they don't exist.

>>3020858

I literally answered it in that post. Creating the illusion of light by masses of value.

>>3020862
but 3d is drawing

and 2d is 3d

File: Brickvention-2015-LEGO-Mosaics-1024x682.jpg (277KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1024x682px

>>3020867
So, you're saying is that using legos is painting too?

File: penishbrush.jpg (280KB, 809x960px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 809x960px

>>3020864

Here is an example. It's a portrait painted using a brush made out of a photo of a penis. This is *not* photobashing.

>>3020871
Nothing abstract about those shapes. You can literally tell what they are. It's photobashing according to your standards.

File: romain-jouandeau-the-greater-adjutant-v06.jpg (640KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

640KB, 1920x1080px

>>3020871
and here is a painting using photobashing


>>3020871
nobro thats clearly mixed media :{)

>>3020870

Pointilism. Closely related, but different enought o be considered to be in it's own category. You're placing the bricks one by one, not massing them.

>>3020874

The penis brush is used in an abstract manner to paint forms. The artist used it to build up masses of value to create the impression of form. If he used the same brush to create a swarm of penises then it would be photobashing.

>>3020881
>The artist used it to build up masses of value to create the impression of form. If he used the same brush to create a swarm of penises then it would be photobashing.

This is painting according to your bullshit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hnvoz91k8hc
A girl is used abstractly to turn into a pizza.
Don't worry, as long as you keep throwing the word abstract around, you will never have to make a real argument.

>>3020762
wait WHAT, to think I was so stunned by this gook skill, only to find he's a tracing ass bitch.

>>3021775
He is absolutely capable of doing it without 3D.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODT7L2zxHIU

It's just that it saves you so much time. If you're on a deadline you would be stupid not to do it.

Bump. .

>>3020888
This is a joke right?

>>3018700
But I do anon

File: hb_19.73.209.jpg (563KB, 1106x1500px) Image search: [Google]

563KB, 1106x1500px

>>3020791
This picture is not an argument. It's a picture demonstrating a principle (same with the lute one), not a method of producing pictures. Do you think Dürer was literally looking at pic related through a camera obscura and tracing it?

>>3023991
He should. That anatomy is all broken.

>>3020695
>cutting out the little cars flying in the background
what's the fucking point, just fucking paint the silhouette
I don't think this technique saves time at all

>>3019296
Maya is the industry leader, and zBrush. I've also seen Modo, and a few other apps used. 3DS is a popular one for building props and such.

If you want to take a step up from Sketchup, get Blender. It's free, it has all the tools you could want, and it's a good learning environment. You'll be starting out from scratch, as nothing in Sketchup really applies - you'll need to learn box modeling, rigging, texturing, lighting, and rendering.

It's free. There's no reason not to have it. Watch all the beginner videos, learn the interface, and dive in.