|
Doredrin posted:I told GBS that I would make a 3d animation of whatever idea they came up with: Legitimately some of the most fun I ever had creating was something like this. Like 11 years ago (holy crap...) I had GBS give me one sentence song ideas, and I made an album out of them (well, 2 albums). I got crap like “Why is there a carrot in my rear end?” And “accidental man-on-man grabbing”, and trying to decide the genre and all that was challenging and hilarious. For Kanine, this sort of ties in to feeling frustrated and stuck with your art, because giving up the core idea like this can be amazingly freeing, and a great way to work through artistic blocks. You don’t need to have random people give you ideas, but even a google roulette or just recreating something laying around your house can ease you back in to the creative process.
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:51 |
|
|
mutata posted:The long-term solution for this is to let yourself have those days. Understand that there is nothing you've done wrong to cause them and that at no point in your future will you ever grow out of them or reach a point in your skill development where they don't happen. I know that it sounds like some kind of zen bullshit, but trust me, the best thing you can do is let yourself off the hook. This is really good advice. Work until you get right to the edge of burn out. Then find something else to do which will calm you down. Whatever you do to relax. Come back to the work with a different perspective. Ask for help or critique. Feeling bad is a trap and guess what ... most artists are rarely happy with their work... that's why they keep trying to improve it. Fastest painter I ever met had 2-3 paintings going at once. Always. He would work on one until he got tired of what he was doing and then switched to the other. In this way he built up confidence to go back to the problem he was dealing with after he zoned out fixing something else easier. He would bounce around a couple of paintings and then complete one in a matter of a day or two. Canvases were like 4-5 feet on average. Point is not to hate the work or burn out. The writing expression I believe is "don't be afraid to kill your babies." Morbid, but you gotta stop caring so much as to hate the process. Thankfully more and more of this stuff becomes easier with time and better software but even so it can be very, very frustrating. sigma 6 fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Jan 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
Work-in-progress walkthrough of my on-going Overwatch-themed project. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8uwYfSW9tE Working thread on Polycount here: http://polycount.com/discussion/193151/overwatch-hq-long-term-environment-working-thread-ue4
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Double posting because idgaf! My OW project was featured on 80 Level today: https://80.lv/articles/overwatch-hq-creating-a-game-level-for-portfolio/ 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 19:49
|
|
|
mutata posted:Work-in-progress walkthrough of my on-going Overwatch-themed project. Very nice work. I heard your name mentioned by Shane Olson and thought... "mutated jellyfish"... why does that sound familiar? Another zbrush doodle. These things rarely get past primary / secondary form stage but I couldn't resist playing around in Keyshot. It isn't a doodle if I am spending more than a couple of hours on it. 3d or not.  
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:Very nice work. I heard your name mentioned by Shane Olson and thought... "mutated jellyfish"... why does that sound familiar? Haha, was this during Shane's Pixologic stream? Shane's amazing and a good friend of mine from the Disney days. I used to go up to his office and force him to give me critiques back when I was working on a character a few years back. Mostly I'd go up there to peep unannounced characters and eavesdrop on gossip, though. I like to go bug him during streams. And thank you! <3
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
mutata posted:Haha, was this during Shane's Pixologic stream? Shane's amazing and a good friend of mine from the Disney days. I used to go up to his office and force him to give me critiques back when I was working on a character a few years back. Mostly I'd go up there to peep unannounced characters and eavesdrop on gossip, though. I like to go bug him during streams. Yeah - getting caught up with the new Zbrush features and have been watching the Pixologic twitch stuff. Here is Paul Debevec going over newest workflows fore creating a "digital double". Cool stuff and just released yesterday. As evidenced by the fact this is actually a cam recording (still worth watching). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Nu0AbyMHVQ sigma 6 fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Jan 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
how would i begin learning how to write a shader the blackbody node in blender is good for the colour but they purposely made it so the luminosity is flat which the exact opposite of what happens in real life and what i want the one in ue4 is so good, coz the engine is HDR and has auto exposure i would just crank the heat and it would glare and blow out the screen and etc just as if it was happening in real life in front of ya eyes i wanna recreate that in my blender renders i mean the ultimate thing i want to do would be to create a simulation in ue4, run it and then somehow export a short clip but all the shaders and models and movement were rendered in cycles
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 00:52
|
|
|
like imagine how sick this would have been if rendered in a cycles https://youtu.be/POQ3eoat9eI
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
You can render UE4 out in cycles to get a higher framerate capture, that's how most of the Paragon and Fortnite cinematics are captured. A shader like that is really easy in UE4, the physics might even be good enough too
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
omg i need to learn how because making physics simulations etc in ue4 is a billion times better than blender coz you can make it dynamic and interactive thanks
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 07:31
|
|
|
FYI to all here, sketchfab has opened a model store - think turbosquid but with the ability to properly inspect the models first, look at the maps, find out for sure that it’s UVed, etc. Right now they’re pretty locked down on who can become a seller, you need to have at least 10 models of good quality work (or an existing relationship with them), need to go through an approval process, etc - but this kind of model store is imo what the industry needed, as we’ve been burned over and over from poor descriptions/awful UVs/garbage geo on Turbosquid et al models.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
So I’m on the verge of springing for Houdini Indie and ZBrushCore, but I want some advice from y’all. Houdini Indie: I’ve been struggling to find the time to sit down and learn Houdini (I’ve had Apprentice installed for almost 2 years now, lol), and I’m thinking that putting some money on the line will give me that rear end-kick I need. There’s also the fact that one of our Clients is looking to integrate a Houdini/Arnold pipeline, and while we handle a bit of CG from concept to scene for them right now, being able to troubleshoot and integrate on our end could be beneficial once they make that switch. They’re also doing some Clarisse stuff, but man I don’t like that interface, so I’ve put that wayyy off on the back burner. Our studio plan would be to get specific artists trained up and just rent the real-deal Houdini when we’d need to integrate (due to licensing concerns with Indie), but from a personal standpoint I’d like to be able to work with Renderman through it and make some $$ on the side. Does there seem to be any big issues with this? Like, I assume I could do cool stuff in Houdini Indie, export it to Alembic and render in Blender if I wanted, or keep within the Houdini ecosystem and use Mantra/Renderman. It wouldn’t cause issues if I potentially just uninstall or not use Indie when we rent the big boy version, right? ZBrushCore: ZBrushCore is the bigger unknown for me. I feel like I need to learn it, I’ve got some great books on doing creature art in R7, and I’ve used R8 at a friends, but the price has been beyond me since I’m mainly a Shading Artist that does prop modeling/geo cleanup when asked (and toooons of UVing 24/7, lol). Looking at the comparison, Core is missing some of the modeling tools (ZModeler mainly) along with texture stuff and it has some limits: comparison chart. Are those differences going to seriously hamper me? Assume I want to use it for both organic and hard surface, and while I’d be bringing stuff into Blender after, I’d like to do as much as possible in ZBrush. I’m not unwilling to spend $800 on a piece of software if the additional features are worth it, but since I’ve made my career out of Blender, Fusion/Resolve, Substance, and other free-to-use/low cost things, I need to justify that I’m getting benefits that aren’t available or are too complicated in what I currently use. Which is why I was leaning towards Core, but that comparison chart... E: oof, no edge loops, creases, or auto retopo??? No UVs??? Pixologic considers those Advanced Features?! Man, that alone pretty much knocks it off the table - Blender’s sculpting tools aren’t bad by any means, and at least there I can sculpt, edit, retopo, UV, and render in one package. The Gasmask fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Jan 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
Full Zbrush is worth it if you want to have it as a core part of your pipeline.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
Anybody have any experience with the Boxx RenderPro 2 or equivalent? We're looking to upgrade our workflow a little bit. We're mainly an ad agency, but we have features come through that utilize us for supporting VFX on things (and some of our commercial projects need it to). There's one coming through right now that's needing some minor fire work and, while creatively I feel up to the task, we aren't really built for dealing with simulation and render times on work like fire and water. So I'm looking for a desk-side render solution that would be available to the three of us that work on VFX to dump off to and render when needed (and when we're not doing feature stuff... we can dump our AE renders out to it). Boxx is just the first place I looked, but I'm open to other places and other total solutions that I'm just unfamiliar with. Budget is around $3500-5000
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
ceebee posted:You can render UE4 out in cycles to get a higher framerate capture, that's how most of the Paragon and Fortnite cinematics are captured. A shader like that is really easy in UE4, the physics might even be good enough too If anyone could show me the way to a link that was about this I would be highly interested and thankful
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 19:50
|
|
echinopsis posted:If anyone could show me the way to a link that was about this I would be highly interested and thankful https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Sequencer/Workflow/index.html You basically setup your camera and level and add command lines to the .exe file
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
ceebee posted:https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Sequencer/Workflow/index.html thankyuou... this might make me very happy
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
         making a lot more progress on blood gulch. still a lot left to do like vegetation, small boulders, the cave, the teleporters, halo skybox, etc. really playing around a lot with the colors and lighting also.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
Can I have some user testimonies on the subject of Phoenix FD? I'm at a studio max and Vray studio and we don't have anything to do simulations. Ideally it's for print and web images so we need stuff that can look good and render in an optimised manner. Most dudes I work with are really good illustrators but kind of impatient on the 3D side of things as they often use pics and photoshop stuff. It works well, but for some stuff is hard if we don't get nice references on the net. Can it be learned quickly and be used efficiently by people that aren't FX artists? What kind of setup do you need licence wise?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
The Gasmask posted:So I’m on the verge of springing for Houdini Indie and ZBrushCore, but I want some advice from y’all. I have Zbrushcore and i cant really recommend it. there is only 3 outstanding features. Zspheres for prototyping model fast, radial symmetry, and applying textures to sculpt strokes. everything else exists in blender. I wouldnt use zbrushcore for hard surfacing either, mainly because you cant create your own insert brushes. Full Zbrush however does look like a cool tool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
Odddzy posted:Can I have some user testimonies on the subject of Phoenix FD? I'm at a studio max and Vray studio and we don't have anything to do simulations. Ideally it's for print and web images so we need stuff that can look good and render in an optimised manner. Most dudes I work with are really good illustrators but kind of impatient on the 3D side of things as they often use pics and photoshop stuff. It works well, but for some stuff is hard if we don't get nice references on the net. Can it be learned quickly and be used efficiently by people that aren't FX artists? What kind of setup do you need licence wise? I have a license with Maya and VRay. I would say it's "easy" to get started at least for people that are familiar with 3D programs, etc. But definitely not for 2D artists if they don't have some experience already in that vein. I'm at an ad agency and there's no way our print and web designers would no where to even begin. But for me, while not very experienced with simulation, I was able to get the gist pretty easily. As far as licenses, not sure what you're asking... but the license setup is pretty traditional. What kind of simulations are you doing? We're about to start some experiments with me doing simulations, then exporting meshes to the designers to use in the new Adobe Dimensions software.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:What kind of simulations are you doing? We're about to start some experiments with me doing simulations, then exporting meshes to the designers to use in the new Adobe Dimensions software. I'm curious about water setups, waves and splashes. Also explosions. Workflow would probably be do sims and bake the mesh at a frame we like and use that for a base for the 2D artists. Do special volumetric material nodes come packaged with Phoenix or everything is already in vray?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Odddzy posted:I'm curious about water setups, waves and splashes. Also explosions. I honestly can't remember. I think there are some presets - since volumetric materials really just need a good base material and you can alter properties. You could bake the mesh and send the mesh to Adobe Dimension/Photoshop and texture the mesh there (instead of just outputting a 2D render).
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
the phoenix presets are pretty solid, super quick to get going. there's no way someone who isnt innately familiar with 3d software is going to be able to do anything with it (outside of learning their way around the software) render licenses are free (maybe included in vray?) & you pay for simulation licenses. phoenix & vray play together super nice when you want the sims to emit light and interact with other things, but it can be rendered in scanline and look pretty good too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
cubicle gangster posted:the phoenix presets are pretty solid, super quick to get going. How many simulation licences would you think is adequate? The 2D guys i'm talking about all know how to do posing and rendering in 3DS max, they're just not really up to date on proper workflows in some areas but you can show them how to do vray proxies and then they understand how to use them. The thing I fight the most for at times is explaining to a few guys how spending a bit more time in 3D can actually help them down the line instead of patching everything with pics. I don't want to sound like i'm throwing anyone under the bus, they're real good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
If all you're trying to do is simulate something kind of basic so that 2d artists can paint over it with the correct perspective / good detail, you can get by with just one. You need more when simulation is more in depth - you'd use them to run 5 near identical sims over night with slight variations, then you'd pick the best and do it again. for ad work I imagine you could take whatever result it gave you and make it work. plus the scale/detail level needed for heavily retouched stills is probably a touch smaller meaning you could do a few low res options during the work day, crunch a high detail one over night and call it a day with that. I dont really know how often you'd be using it - if you get a lot of overlap between projects, but it would be worth designating one person to spend a long time on it at first making a bunch of max files with sources and sim setups which generate certain types of splashes, drips, smoke etc which can then have the object replaced and a new sim spat out relatively quickly when an ad needs it. That practice / understanding will be invaluable in the future. If you try and use it every now and then, forcing someone who hasn't touched it in a month to get back to grips with the interface and watch tutorials you'll be wasting time. There's a big gap in it between managing to get a result that looks the way you want and knowing why you got that result. cubicle gangster fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Thanks for all the info. I'll definitely consider it all. I was especially thinking about this part as something I could propose to my supervisors and work out a way to do some scenes over the next year.cubicle gangster posted:it would be worth designating one person to spend a long time on it at first making a bunch of max files with sources and sim setups which generate certain types of splashes, drips, smoke etc which can then have the object replaced and a new sim spat out relatively quickly when an ad needs it. That practice / understanding will be invaluable in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 02:49
|
|
|
I have question regarding the Max FBX exporter. I am using the hose primitive to, you guessed it, animate a hose on a model. Now I need to export this into Unity, but Max does not create keys for the hose object. Any ideas how I might get this data into Unity?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Mr Shiny Pants posted:I have question regarding the Max FBX exporter. I am using the hose primitive to, you guessed it, animate a hose on a model. Now I need to export this into Unity, but Max does not create keys for the hose object. Any ideas how I might get this data into Unity? Point cache it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
EoinCannon posted:Point cache it? Yeah, I was getting this in a couple of hits from Google, but the Unity3d importer does not respect it, and I've found some scripts that could bake it but no dice as of yet. Is there nothing that says: Convert this to keys?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
Mr Shiny Pants posted:Yeah, I was getting this in a couple of hits from Google, but the Unity3d importer does not respect it, and I've found some scripts that could bake it but no dice as of yet. The workflow we use in the office is to create a progressive Morpher out of it. It's not a great or even a terribly good solution. (Progressive Morph can only have a max of 24 morph targets, barf)
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
Well I haven't really found a solution for this using Max, but I did find a workaround. I have the Ultimate Rope Editor package for Unity and have used this to create a rope/hose in place of the Max one. Might not be how I wanted it, but it gets the job done. Thanks for the help guys, I am still baffled that this is so hard in Max though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
Thanks Mutata and Dark Off! That’s exactly the info I needed, looks like I’ll be springing for ZBrush full soon. I keep on getting blown away by what my coworkers and people here come up with using it, and I want in on that goodness. Unrelated, but I was talking with my boss about POVRay and how it was one of the earliest CG experiences for both of us, and lo and behold they just released a new beta for it! Over 30 years and still being developed... somewhere out there, a kid is rendering his first mirror sphere and being so proud of himself. The Gasmask fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Feb 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Mr Shiny Pants posted:Well I haven't really found a solution for this using Max, but I did find a workaround. I have the Ultimate Rope Editor package for Unity and have used this to create a rope/hose in place of the Max one. Might not be how I wanted it, but it gets the job done. Has Ultimate Rope Editor been updated to work with Unity 2017? We used it in a project a few years ago and it got really broken a few Unity updates ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
ALFbrot posted:Has Ultimate Rope Editor been updated to work with Unity 2017? We used it in a project a few years ago and it got really broken a few Unity updates ago. Works a treat, I've been using it in a crane-simulation so it gets a good workout so to speak. This is Unity 2017.01.0f3.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
Any good resources out there for animating/shading biomedical stuff like cells? Currently trying to create soft-bodied microorganisms and have them absorb each other in combat. Probably via nCloth or something. (these friendly dudes are HIV)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
Fresnel shaders are all the rage for biomedical renders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 06:13
|
|
|
Synthbuttrange posted:Fresnel shaders are all the rage for biomedical renders. Also, Mario.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:51 |
|
|
Handiklap posted:Also, Mario. EVERYTHING HAS FRESNEL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9rgG2vPAvQ&t=133s Kanine fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Feb 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 16:40
|
|