Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 61 to 80 of 80
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    133
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 54 Times in 42 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benedikt View Post
    Sure! I just don't understand what you mean.
    Let's say, you're going to talk in front of a lot of people. You're getting nervous, you're preparing a speech. Not just every single word, but how you pronounce them, what your hands do while speaking them out loud, all that stuff is calculated. Just because it's too important for you to make mistakes. And maybe, that's okay. Especially in modern times with political overcorrectness and stuff. But then, let's assume you just want to make people like you, and accept that some will, and some wont. And based on that, allow yourself to be who you are. Maybe you drink a beer before, so that you're relaxed and it just starts to flow. And people start picking up, because your honest character and personality is present on that stage. You talk about stuff with enthusiasm, naturally, people will be more interested in what you have to say.

    This can be translated to everything, and also drawing. I'm not saying, that artists shouldn't plan ahead, actually the opposite is the case. However, the more time you spend between each brush stroke, the more you think about every single line, the more insecure they become, and the more generic you'll try to make them.

    If you use reference, and draw on top of it, you pretty much already pre-establish a generic vision, that is hard to overcome when trying to create your OWN vision. Drawing on top of that, even with the idea to turn it into something, that speaks your signature, you're constantly in conflict between what you see, and what you're actually trying to produce.

    In most cases it's a lack of time, sure, as I said, that's the reality of production work. You can't take days modelling a prop for a keyframe illustration. If you take that long, you're out of a job, 'cause I'll buy the model in 2 minutes from turbosquid and deliver the keyframe by the end of the day.
    But in some cases I couldn't produce the desired geometry, e.g. for particle effects suchs as clouds (as I don't have the necessary software). So I pay someone else for files I couldn't create myself. So what? What's your problem with that? It must be some sort of ethical problem since it's completely legal.
    That's okay, I don't have a problem with that. But here's a thought, just to stimulate the discussion:

    If you plan to create a 3d title, and have unlimited time and money, would you rather use stock material, or let your team create stuff by themselves?
    The thing is, we both agree that 3d becomes more accessible, and by that, also quicker to work with. That's why I'm speculating, that the current way isn't going to translate very well into the future.


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
    If you use reference, and draw on top of it, you pretty much already pre-establish a generic vision, that is hard to overcome when trying to create your OWN vision. Drawing on top of that, even with the idea to turn it into something, that speaks your signature, you're constantly in conflict between what you see, and what you're actually trying to produce.
    What I produce in 3D is a product of my own vision. Zbrush doesn't create models for me, you know? So I don't see the application of the metaphor.


    If you plan to create a 3d title, and have unlimited time and money, would you rather use stock material, or let your team create stuff by themselves?
    Depends on the asset? Take my example; you're to create a keyframe with a blackhawk helicopter. Why on earth would you model that from scratch? There's just no reason at all. A Blackhawk is a Blackhawk is a Blackhawk. The design isn't in the asset, it's in the framing, lighting, narrative etc.
    If I on the other hand was briefed to design a helicopter, I wouldn't just buy a Blackhawk model and present that to the client. That wouldn't meet the specs of the assignment, obviously.

  4. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,813
    Thanks
    300
    Thanked 541 Times in 452 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
    That's okay, I don't have a problem with that. But here's a thought, just to stimulate the discussion:

    If you plan to create a 3d title, and have unlimited time and money, would you rather use stock material, or let your team create stuff by themselves?
    The thing is, we both agree that 3d becomes more accessible, and by that, also quicker to work with. That's why I'm speculating, that the current way isn't going to translate very well into the future.
    Well if you have unlimited resources can be crutch as with limitations can get you there much easier for example if you have too much choice you can get into to choice paralyze and you shut down creatively

  5. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    133
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 54 Times in 42 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benedikt View Post
    What I produce in 3D is a product of my own vision. Zbrush doesn't create models for me, you know? So I don't see the application of the metaphor.
    But the whole thought concept was never about your work flow. Aside from that, planning ahead every single stroke on canvas also results in a product of your vision. That's not the point. The point is, how well it translated from your mind on canvas. That's also why people differentiate between "having your own style" and "forcing a style".


    Depends on the asset? Take my example; you're to create a keyframe with a blackhawk helicopter. Why on earth would you model that from scratch? There's just no reason at all. A Blackhawk is a Blackhawk is a Blackhawk. The design isn't in the asset, it's in the framing, lighting, narrative etc.
    If I on the other hand was briefed to design a helicopter, I wouldn't just buy a Blackhawk model and present that to the client. That wouldn't meet the specs of the assignment, obviously.
    Yes, theoretically, it depends on the asset. I mean, once style becomes part of the visuals, even simple objects are affected, or should be. But again, there is a big difference between using a black hawk for a few frames in the background and buying the most downloaded female character model, put a wig and some gothic clothe on, maybe sizing up her butt and selling it as main heroine (yes I'm aware of the irony).

    In any case, you clearly have a different mindset regarding this topic.

    @stonec

    It's more about setting a price tag on having unique styles.

  6. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
    But the whole thought concept was never about your work flow. Aside from that, planning ahead every single stroke on canvas also results in a product of your vision. That's not the point. The point is, how well it translated from your mind on canvas. That's also why people differentiate between "having your own style" and "forcing a style".
    I don't understand what you're trying to tell me here.

    Yes, theoretically, it depends on the asset. I mean, once style becomes part of the visuals, even simple objects are affected, or should be. But again, there is a big difference between using a black hawk for a few frames in the background and buying the most downloaded female character model, put a wig and some gothic clothe on, maybe sizing up her butt and selling it as main heroine (yes I'm aware of the irony).
    Style in concept design is "realistic" in pretty much all projects. Obviously strongly stylized projects don't lend themselves very well at all to kitbashing or buying premade models.
    Your example with the heroine is highly unrealistic of course. Someone who works like that won't be hired.
    How about this: horses. Let's say you're working on a fantasy game and need to produce concepts for horse armour/ need to produce keyframes involving horses. Are you going to draw every horse from scratch? Good luck with that, horses are notoriously difficult even historically for people who specialized in painting them. What do you do instead? You get an anatomically correct model, rigging included, for what, 40 USD? and that problem's solved. That's what I'm talking about.

  7. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    133
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 54 Times in 42 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benedikt View Post
    I don't understand what you're trying to tell me here.
    Regarding the latter half: 2d artists usually try to stand out with their unique art styles. But big part of thir style is coming from unconscious decisions. I fear, a lot of those are projected into their work. At the same time, a lot of those decisions are lost, if the process of drawing is too well thought out on a conscious level, which means, planning every line, and also drawing on top of pre-established references.

    Regarding the first sentence: It's just that I constantly get a feeling like you're having a certain established idea, and are trying to defend it. But if anything, I'm interested in your point of view, I'm not trying to antagonize it. If you go back a few posts, my original intend was, to explain, that you missunderstood my position on 3D programs.

    But if you want to talk about this, what are the steps you take when creating an artwork?

    Style in concept design is "realistic" in pretty much all projects. Obviously strongly stylized projects don't lend themselves very well at all to kitbashing or buying premade models.
    Your example with the heroine is highly unrealistic of course. Someone who works like that won't be hired.
    How about this: horses. Let's say you're working on a fantasy game and need to produce concepts for horse armour/ need to produce keyframes involving horses. Are you going to draw every horse from scratch? Good luck with that, horses are notoriously difficult even historically for people who specialized in painting them. What do you do instead? You get an anatomically correct model, rigging included, for what, 40 USD? and that problem's solved. That's what I'm talking about.
    I already told you, that's fine, as long as its justified. Mind you, a lack of time and skill is a justification. Not everyone can do everything/ has the time to deal with everything. I just can't help but wonder, if modeling (and making light effects, and rigging) becomes easier and quicker, how will this affect the integration of artists in developing games (or movies, or whatever)?

  8. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
    Regarding the latter half: 2d artists usually try to stand out with their unique art styles. But big part of thir style is coming from unconscious decisions. I fear, a lot of those are projected into their work. At the same time, a lot of those decisions are lost, if the process of drawing is too well thought out on a conscious level, which means, planning every line, and also drawing on top of pre-established references.

    Regarding the first sentence: It's just that I constantly get a feeling like you're having a certain established idea, and are trying to defend it. But if anything, I'm interested in your point of view, I'm not trying to antagonize it. If you go back a few posts, my original intend was, to explain, that you missunderstood my position on 3D programs.
    I'm sorry but I still have no idea what you're getting at here. How does all this pertain to 3D softwares? Can you summarize what your point is in one sentence?

    I already told you, that's fine, as long as its justified. Mind you, a lack of time and skill is a justification. Not everyone can do everything/ has the time to deal with everything. I just can't help but wonder, if modeling (and making light effects, and rigging) becomes easier and quicker, how will this affect the integration of artists in developing games (or movies, or whatever)?
    I'm not sure what I should make of this "justified" you're putting in there. If I did in fact have the time to create said blackhawk, and also the necessary skills to do so, but just didn't feel like it, would that be "justified" for you? As a designer, I operate a business and how I choose to work is up to me and me alone.

    As to your question of how concept art is changing and merging into 3D work, this blog post was already posted in here: https://www.artstation.com/michaelpa...tion-pipelines

  9. #68
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,813
    Thanks
    300
    Thanked 541 Times in 452 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
    @stonec
    It's more about setting a price tag on having unique styles.
    yea but this is video (its bit old but whatta heck) fit here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_skCXC9oVA

    Quote Originally Posted by Benedikt View Post
    I don't understand what you're trying to tell me here.


    Style in concept design is "realistic" in pretty much all projects. Obviously strongly stylized projects don't lend themselves very well at all to kitbashing or buying premade models.
    Your example with the heroine is highly unrealistic of course. Someone who works like that won't be hired.
    How about this: horses. Let's say you're working on a fantasy game and need to produce concepts for horse armour/ need to produce keyframes involving horses. Are you going to draw every horse from scratch? Good luck with that, horses are notoriously difficult even historically for people who specialized in painting them. What do you do instead? You get an anatomically correct model, rigging included, for what, 40 USD? and that problem's solved. That's what I'm talking about.
    What about building own stylized assets and using those?

    But I don't think there should be ultimate style, or direction if it would then industry probably die as it would have lack of variety

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to stonec For This Useful Post:


  11. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by stonec View Post
    yea but this is video (its bit old but whatta heck) fit here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_skCXC9oVA


    What about building own stylized assets and using those?
    That's standard industry practice, yes. It's just that stylized objects are not as widely available, particularily to freelancers. You'll find such collections of assets in one particular style primarily in studios for internal use. The reason for that is economic in nature: a 3D artist wants to sell a lot of his models on stock websites such as turbosquid so that the time spent modelling an asset becomes profitable. The more stylized an asset is, the more problematic it becomes to integrate it into a pre-existing project or find other assets that match the stylization, hence there are far more "realistic" assets out there than stylized ones.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Benedikt For This Useful Post:


  13. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    133
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 54 Times in 42 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benedikt View Post
    I'm sorry but I still have no idea what you're getting at here. How does all this pertain to 3D softwares? Can you summarize what your point is in one sentence?
    You said, I hate 3D, I said I don't, and tried to clarify.

    I'm not sure what I should make of this "justified" you're putting in there. If I did in fact have the time to create said blackhawk, and also the necessary skills to do so, but just didn't feel like it, would that be "justified" for you? As a designer, I operate a business and how I choose to work is up to me and me alone.
    Why are you always getting so defensive? You have to justify for yourself what you want to do, and what sells to the people you're working for.

    As to your question of how concept art is changing and merging into 3D work, this blog post was already posted in here: https://www.artstation.com/michaelpa...tion-pipelines
    Not concept art, just 3D.

  14. #71
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
    Why are you always getting so defensive? You have to justify for yourself what you want to do, and what sells to the people you're working for.
    See, the way you phrased your sentence it sounded like there are "legit" or "justified" reasons to use assets, and reasons that are not "legit". My point is that as long as you adhere to the law (as in copyright), everything's fair game as long as you deliver the product.


    Not concept art, just 3D.
    3D is getting easier and easier to use, but it's still quite technical in nature if you're a dedicated 3D artist. Retopology, UV-mapping, rigging, animation, scripting... those are all quite technical skills. The great thing about many of the softwares I talked about is that you can just do away with all that as a 2D artist. You're not delivering a 3D asset that can be used in a pipeline, you're delivering a 2D design/ 3D protoype. No need for proper topology, proper UVs, low polycount, perfectly baked maps etc.- plus, sculpting in VR is going to make everything even more intuitive.

  15. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    133
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 54 Times in 42 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benedikt View Post
    See, the way you phrased your sentence it sounded like there are "legit" or "justified" reasons to use assets, and reasons that are not "legit". My point is that as long as you adhere to the law (as in copyright), everything's fair game as long as you deliver the product.
    You're from Germany? It was ment more like "angemessen".

    3D is getting easier and easier to use, but it's still quite technical in nature if you're a dedicated 3D artist. Retopology, UV-mapping, rigging, animation, scripting... those are all quite technical skills. The great thing about many of the softwares I talked about is that you can just do away with all that as a 2D artist. You're not delivering a 3D asset that can be used in a pipeline, you're delivering a 2D design/ 3D protoype. No need for proper topology, proper UVs, low polycount, perfectly baked maps etc.- plus, sculpting in VR is going to make everything even more intuitive.
    See that's what I'm interested in. One of the reasons I want to engage myself with 3d more again, is because it looks a lot more fun and inspiring to work with now, than it did a few years ago. Plus, I think that it'll become easier to visualize an entire scene by yourself, instead of asking 3 different people to do 3 different jobs.

  16. #73
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
    You're from Germany? It was ment more like "angemessen".
    Oh, for sure! I mean if I was to buy assets for just about every object that is visible in an illustration and end up paying more for the assets than I earn for the illustration, that's not a very wise business decision. There is, however, the dynamic that once you buy an asset, you can reuse it as often as you want, that needs to be taken into consideration, particularily when it comes to assets that have a high potential to be reused (e.g. trees, buildings, modern/period cars, generic figures/animals etc.).


    See that's what I'm interested in. One of the reasons I want to engage myself with 3d more again, is because it looks a lot more fun and inspiring to work with now, than it did a few years ago. Plus, I think that it'll become easier to visualize an entire scene by yourself, instead of asking 3 different people to do 3 different jobs.
    I tried to get into 3D in 200...5? I think, with Sketchup, and didn't end up using it very often because while it is a nifty piece of software, it is relatively limited. It's much better now, even with a poly-based modeller like Blender 8as long as you've got artist-fiendly addons like HardOps/Box Cutter), to say nothing of Z-Brush/3DCoat, which is basically like working with clay or working in VR. Here's Finnian MacManus sculpting a complete environment in VR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3I2uATj7bA

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Benedikt For This Useful Post:


  18. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    133
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 54 Times in 42 Posts
    That looks really fun. Almost too fun, tbh. But then again, isn't rigging something like that a nightmare?

  19. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    I don't think you can rig that

    The process would be the same as with sculpts from ZBrush/3DCoat: retopology, then rigging/animation etc.

    I don't do that. It's not fun

  20. #76
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Benedikt For This Useful Post:


  22. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    133
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 54 Times in 42 Posts
    Is there any existing concept for animation? I guess drawing key frames and ingbetweens with low framerates would end up looking like a stop motion effect.

    But the thought of creating pictures you can enter is nice, with or without animation.

  23. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    I think I have seen VR/360° paintings in which some elements were animated using 2D animation techniques on artstation, but I can't find them. It's not my area of expertise and anything VR/360° is pretty much cutting edge at this point in time. We'll be seeing much more of this in the near future though I'm sure!

    Jama Jurabaev has really juicy 360° paintings in his artstation portfolio; https://www.artstation.com/artwork/x2E84

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to Benedikt For This Useful Post:


  25. #79
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    13,948
    Thanks
    4,215
    Thanked 6,691 Times in 4,602 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benedikt View Post
    Here's Finnian MacManus sculpting a complete environment in VR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3I2uATj7bA
    I see he had a load of 2D references etc to work from.

  26. #80
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    2,178
    Thanks
    255
    Thanked 955 Times in 569 Posts
    That's personal preference and situational. It's not necessary by any means (depending on the strength of your visual library & subject matter).

    Heres Dominic Qwek sculpting directly in VR, no 2D sketches before that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDPaHd_ieSY

    There's nothing magical about 2D, really. It certainly is faster than 3D for thumnails and sketches or silhouettes most of the time, but that's it. You'll find that you "discover" compositions and forms while working in 3D that you'd never have thought of in 2D, so it can turn out that the 2D prep work was actually not that productive in the end.
    Last edited by Benedikt; 3 Weeks Ago at 06:36 AM.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Similar Threads

  1. A reason why we do this...more than one actually.
    By Jason Manley in forum TAD's ON DEMAND LIVESTREAM VIDEO ARCHIVE
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: November 26th, 2010, 07:37 PM
  2. For some reason, nothing is working. :I
    By RufousPlumage in forum Support
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 10th, 2010, 04:00 PM
  3. another reason to like deviantart!
    By steve kim in forum Artist Lounge
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: November 23rd, 2007, 02:09 AM
  4. Art: Please LAUGH for no reason!
    By ephemerati in forum Finished Art
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 25th, 2006, 08:54 AM

Members who have read this thread: 61

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Designed by The Coldest Water, we build the coldest best water bottles, ice packs and best pillows.