|
Three-Phase posted:I'll have to check out Modo. You can find a 2nd hand copy on the luxology forums for around $700 mark. Having said that it's worth it's full price easily, the raytracer alone is comparable to vray.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 03:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
Three-Phase posted:I had a much easier time picking up Dwarf Fortress than Blender. I've used several different programs involving 3D modeling (everything from making video game levels to finite element analysis) and they were all much easier to pick up and use than Blender. Some people use it, and use it really well. Hats off to them - I found it pretty frustrating. I started with Maya and then in school for one day they were teaching us Blender. I absolutely hated it and was completely lost. Kind of the same when you start with Final Cut and get used to it, but then switch to Avid. Totally different and frustrating even though in the end they do the same thing. Also, I don't understand the Blender monkey.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 07:12
|
|
|
Three-Phase posted:I had a much easier time picking up Dwarf Fortress than Blender. I've used several different programs involving 3D modeling (everything from making video game levels to finite element analysis) and they were all much easier to pick up and use than Blender. Some people use it, and use it really well. Hats off to them - I found it pretty frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 08:13
|
|
|
ConanThe3rd posted:I could totally believe that Dwarf Fortress is easier to learn than Blender. As a 3ds Max person it comes off as if everything is placed in the most unintuitive place possible if at all. Definitely agree. I play DF all the time but I uninstalled blender within 10 minutes. It's ridiculously bad and I try to tell everyone not to use it at all costs. Just because something's free does not make it good, nor should you try to tell yourself "it's good for its price!". I'm pretty sure dirt's good for it's price too if it's free 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 08:25
|
|
|
forelle posted:FxGuide just posted a cool video we recorded at Siggraph 2012 of Scott Metzger showing off some Mari Spherical HDR work. This is REALLY cool stuff. I saw him demonstrate a very similar workflow for a VES meeting and it blew me away then too. He said it was posted on the Nuke site, so this must be a newer, tweaked version. SVU Fan: Nick's tools are great!! Thank you. That is exactly what I needed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 08:58
|
|
|
There's some aspects of Blender I like, and it does some things other packages wont, but yeah, it's horrifyingly hard to get into.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 09:04
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:There's some aspects of Blender I like, and it does some things other packages wont, but yeah, it's horrifyingly hard to get into. It would be used a lot more if it only had a better stock UI and didn't rely on what is hoping people will mess with the bed until they get something that sorta works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 10:34
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:This is REALLY cool stuff. I saw him demonstrate a very similar workflow for a VES meeting and it blew me away then too. He said it was posted on the Nuke site, so this must be a newer, tweaked version. It's the level of detail he's able to capture that gets me. The shot near the end of the chipped wood is amazing. Makes the emails starting 'So I've got these 15 11k HDR spherical maps that I want to project in realtime' and ''Mari slows down a bit when your ptex files go over 60GB' worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 13:37
|
|
|
I'm a lensflare slut. :bigtran:
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 02:35
|
|
|
Making a TF2 hat. I haven't textured it yet, have to work out how to get it to rig to more than just the head bone but it's great to see something you made work in-engine!
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
Especially TF2... the import process to get that poo poo working in-engine blows. I only ever made one thing:  And it was so painful, I just moved on to other engines.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
Anybody use Element 3D for After Effects? Holy poo poo for "3D in Motion Graphics" this thing has sped up my work flow tremendously. Also..new free update comes out this week (along with the Metropolitan building pack) and v2 comes out later this year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
forelle posted:It's the level of detail he's able to capture that gets me. The shot near the end of the chipped wood is amazing. Makes the emails starting wow you worked on these tools? I'm not up to speed on vfx workflows in any sense, but this seems amazing. I've worked with 3d and laser scanning technologies before, but how is this working, the 3d point cloud is not coming from the hdr image correct? This is being mapped to a scanned spherical point cloud correct? Whats the cost of something like that scanner? correction, mapped to the retopoed mesh from the point cloud.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:Anybody use Element 3D for After Effects? Holy poo poo for "3D in Motion Graphics" this thing has sped up my work flow tremendously. Also..new free update comes out this week (along with the Metropolitan building pack) and v2 comes out later this year. Can you explain it a little bit? I have seen a lot of videos from it, but I am curious as to what you can actually do with it. Do you have to use their 3D stuff only, or can you bring in your own stuff? How does their stuff look, is it more for just static or fake 3D shots, or can it actually be used for 3d tracked shots and animations and stuff? What was your previous 3D program?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
chimheil posted:Can you explain it a little bit? I have seen a lot of videos from it, but I am curious as to what you can actually do with it. Do you have to use their 3D stuff only, or can you bring in your own stuff? How does their stuff look, is it more for just static or fake 3D shots, or can it actually be used for 3d tracked shots and animations and stuff? I use Maya for 3D stuff primarily. Element 3D is a method to bring 3D objects into After Effects and be able to light and animate them via an OpenGL system. They have tons of presets, but you can use your own stuff pretty easily. C4D, OBJ, FBX are the primary supported file formats. Technically it's a 3D particle system which is great for motion graphics. You can replicate complex 3D objects as particles and have little impact on performance. However you can also use it as a system to just do some rudimentary animating for a singular object. It's not a full on animating system so it won't replace that, but it's a great way to get objects into AE, lit fairly well, and then animate them nice and quickly for projects with tight deadlines (and reanimating when changes come in can go a lot quicker without having to switch back and forth in programs). For instance I recently did an animated spot for a hunting call company. They gave me their SolidWorks step file, I imported into Maya, cleaned up and exported as OBJ. Opened up AE, initiated Element and imported the hunting call. Then I can just do quick lighting all the swishing and swooshing animation I want. It does have shortcomings. There's no real time shadows (but some AO is included). And animating objects can be a bit of a pain sometimes because it's not made for that. But I was able to do simple animations like animating the hunting call handles and tuning posts with relative ease. If it's not C4D, then you have to reapply your textures in AE when you bring them in from your native 3D program, but that's easy. But now I think they are realizing that people are using it for more than just a 3D particle replicator and a full on "3D in AE" system so they are gearing the program more towards that. Also it's like $150 which is just loving ridiculously cheap for what it can do. Sorry that's a huge wall of text that may or not be clear. edit: And yeah you can definitely use it in 3D tracked shots as long as you have a way to get your tracking into AE. Here's a tutorial where they do an exploding truck with tracked footage. It's pretty cool. http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials/3d_truck_compositing/ And then here's one of using iPhones as a replicated 3D particle. http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorial/screen_animations/ BonoMan fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Jan 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 05:39
|
|
|
I have seen VCP's tutorials on it and they do good things, but I don't always trust a company's own videos on a product. Not that I have been burned nor am I saying VCP stuff is bad because I do own Action Essentials, Optical Flares, Twitch, and Pro Scores, but this is the first one which I was not sure of the immediate benefits. Do you happen to have the hunting call one online? And as far as re-linking textures, how much leeway do you have on the type of material it is? Do they have Lamberts, Blinns, Anistropic, etc or is it here is your material but you can only adjust reflectivity, specularity, diffuse, etc? I am asking a lot of questions because my business partner saw the new building pack which got him interested, but I have been playing with Kludge City and Qtown in Maya and learning their strengths and weaknesses. I was not set on buying a set number of buildings with no easy way to modify them. I may also be thinking too much into it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
HolyJewsus posted:wow you worked on these tools? I'm not up to speed on vfx workflows in any sense, but this seems amazing. I've worked with 3d and laser scanning technologies before, but how is this working, the 3d point cloud is not coming from the hdr image correct? This is being mapped to a scanned spherical point cloud correct? Whats the cost of something like that scanner? I'm the product manager and ex-lead developer of Mari. The basic workflow is Faro 3D scanner->Point Cloud Point Cloud->Maya manual topology->obj Nikon Medium format camera->Multiple 11k Spherical HDRS Mari + obj + HDRS -> HDR PTex textures Vray + obj + PTex -> Render The scanner is about $30k as I understand it. The main benefit from this is that you get an environment you can render immediately, but also one that acts like one huge area light so you can drop CG directly into the scene and have it look plausible. It's very close to a fully captured virtual set. You could probably do a cheap version of this using a kinect and solved 2D HDR exposures. forelle fucked around with this message at 12:33 on Jan 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 11:23
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, why hasn't there been a new solution, replacing 3dsmax, establishing itself in archviz? Seeing how that drat app crashes left and right for no good reason?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 14:25
|
|
|
I am a bit relieved that other people have had UI issues with Blender as well. It seemed too like it was one of those software packages where doing complicated things are easy, and doing easy things are complicated. And yeah, this might just be me, but I couldn't ever get into a "flow" of using it. I used other 3D programs in the past, and it's a little like going from a car to a jeep to a truck. There are some differences, but generally you can figure it out once you understand the basic concepts and get used to how things work. But with Blender it was like going from a car to a helicopter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 15:27
|
|
|
chimheil posted:I have seen VCP's tutorials on it and they do good things, but I don't always trust a company's own videos on a product. Not that I have been burned nor am I saying VCP stuff is bad because I do own Action Essentials, Optical Flares, Twitch, and Pro Scores, but this is the first one which I was not sure of the immediate benefits. Do you happen to have the hunting call one online? Unfortunately the hunting call video is still in production so I can't show it (it's due today actually...so I can post it soon-ish). As far as textures go, I haven't noticed any Lambert, Blinn, etc options. I think it just utilizes the UV data and all texture options are internal...but they're pretty robust. Also if you have C4D I think you have more options of data that can be ported back and forth. Which by the way...you can use all the models and textures in any other 3D program essentially (all model packs come with "alt" model formats for 3D programs) and the shader pack works natively in C4D. Here's a quick pic of the texture options for a shader (there are also some UV/normal options but they're in a different part of the options). http://i.imgur.com/nGWJQ1V.jpg Modifying the building pack would, in theory, be pretty easy but who knows. It comes out tomorrow I think so I'll know pretty quickly. The biggest benefit to E3D at the moment is workflow speed. You won't get the same results, quality wise, as a production level 3D program, but you can bring things in and get good quality lighting, rendering, DoF, fog, etc really quickly and interactively. It's a great supplement to a good 3D program.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Out of curiosity, why hasn't there been a new solution, replacing 3dsmax, establishing itself in archviz? Seeing how that drat app crashes left and right for no good reason? I think it's been nearly a couple of years since I had a totally out of the blue crash with max. What version are you on? 2012 is an absolute rock for us. Do you bring too much cad information/not clean dwg's or imported geometry up enough? i've yet to see someone here have serious problems with it that wasn't due to 'something else', problems are very rarely random in max (from 2012 on) - it's just sometimes it's very difficult to see what caused it. driver trouble, hosed up computers, thrown together scenes etc. The vast majority of 'random crashes' I see in our office are because someone took a folder of supplied drawings or models and brought the whole lot into max straight away without doing anything to them. I'm a staunch supporter of max, I think it's actually loving brilliant and it'd take any other package a lot of work to even come close. cubicle gangster fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Jan 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
I really apologize if this is just the totally wrong place for this. I figured if anyone would know, it would be people in this thread, I've been skimming through threads in Serious Hardware but it just gets too daunting thinking about it sometimes. I'm about to transition from doing strictly 2D/2.5D/After Effects stuff to a pretty ambitious CG only project, essentially, and I'm really not sure whether I should be investing in a new computer right now or not. I'm working on a 2009 Macbook Pro. I've never had any real issues with it but nothing I've worked on has been particularly taxing or intensive, whereas this upcoming project is significantly more ambitious. And I really have no idea what I need for it. But if my intention was to be able to do anything from modeling, texturing, rigging, animating, to outputting a finished short film of some kind (I do have resources for rendering, I just want to get the most for my money and don't know how much to consider), should I drop the money and buy a new computer? Could the base model (that is, the upper tier of the two base models) of the 27" iMac be sufficient? 3.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz 8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB 1TB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB GDDR5 Another setup I was looking for, which is pretty much at the absolute height of what I could afford to spend on it, is upgrading that to this: 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz 8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB 1TB Fusion Drive NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB GDDR5 Then I end up seeing that it would take me about a month to get that even if I dropped all the money for it now and I get a little disheartened (where as I'm relatively certain I might be able to pick up the base model relatively quickly, not 100% on this). More than anything I really don't want to put so much work and effort into this and find out that I've screwed myself by not using a machine that can even handle what I have in mind. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
cubicle gangster posted:I think it's been nearly a couple of years since I had a totally out of the blue crash with max. What version are you on? 2012 is an absolute rock for us.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
redjenova posted:3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz I have a question as well; I'm still in the process of learning, and I want to know what a portfolio of someone who is ready to get a job looks like, just so I know what to aim for. Ervin K fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Jan 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
forelle posted:
That is what I was thinking  , do you mind clarifying what solved means here, as in lined up?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
Does anyone in here use Alias? I need a hand with this tool:  I'm using it to add crown to bodypanels by pulling hulls. My issue is that it doesn't seem to have any reasoning to the way it works. More often than not I'll click one side and it'll go negative instead of positive. So switch sides and click; Still negative. When I do get it to eventually work I'll click again in the exact same spot to double it and it'll go back to flat. It's so frustrating and nobody I have spoke to knows how it works really.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
HolyJewsus posted:That is what I was thinking Yeah basically. Normally this would be done programatically.There's a bunch of different techniques and bits of software that given multiple different images of the same scene can solve the location of each camera location in 3D space. Once you have this information, you can project the images from those solved camera positions back onto modelled geometry. It's kinda magic when it all lines up. I was wondering if Blender has a camera solver. It seems to have a lot of other stuff in there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
forelle posted:Yeah basically. Hey Forelle, I'm very interested in developing design tools for architects, games, movies etc, is it possible to email you for a longer convo (dont have pms) or do you have any advice for getting internships specifically aimed at that kind of development?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
forelle posted:I'm the product manager and ex-lead developer of Mari. That's really cool you worked on Mari. I wish I could get my school to pick it up and teach to the students. Trying to get new software through nationwide corporate approval is nearly impossible though. A couple of teachers have talked about it but I don't think we have enough teachers who really know how to use it. Regardless, I would love to try a scaled down workflow of this with a xbox Kinect instead of Faro. Why can't high resolution photos be used for image modeling? Like that autodesk "Catch" thing. http://www.123dapp.com/catch All you need is a point cloud based on the same environment you get the HDR probe from right? Then that get's retopologized into clean geometry and the lighting info comes from the HDR. The texturing is reprojected back on from the same photos the point cloud comes from. This can be done with cheaper hardware / software but perhaps not at such high resolution. Right? Am I missing something? Would really like to master a workflow like that. Seems like it really gets mindblowing results for taking a bunch of high res pics and knowing what to do with them. The only tedium here seems to be the retopo of the point cloud.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
Hey so this was a model I made for Vehicle and Structure. I was aiming for a typical steam-punk robot. I used Autodesk 3DS Max, and I used a couple methods in creating my geometry. For parts like the chest piece, the groin, legs, and feet, I created through spline edge modeling. By using the Connect tool in Editiable Spline mode, I created a spline cage that I eventually formed into an editable poly through the use of the Surface modifiers. I then further refined the pieces with extra edge loops where they were needed so that the model would sub-divide nicely when Mesh-Smoothed. Other pieces where created with box-modeling techniques and bend-modifiers. This model is not unwrapped, just materials. Further development of the model will include the development of arms, rigging, and texture work. Rendered in mentalRay. Any suggestions on environments would be appreciated. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
I remade a 2D character in 3D from Patapon 3 today to test out if 3D models could be stylized to look like vectors. I'd say yeah! Here's the character:  And here's the model I made:  Here's a slightly older but still mostly valid wireframe, too!  I originally wanted to make this to test out a style. Now that I worked out the style, I might program a game using this style of models. Probably a platformer. Could be interesting! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH2cpCIqxwE&hd=1
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 06:51
|
|
|
HolyJewsus posted:Hey Forelle, Sure. Drop me an email to greasley at the foundry dot co dot uk
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 11:22
|
|
|
sigma 6 posted:Seems like it really gets mindblowing results for taking a bunch of high res pics and knowing what to do with them. The only tedium here seems to be the retopo of the point cloud. Yeah, you get so much more than just the model as well. The HDR lighting solution it captures makes rendering in the environment a snap. I'm wondering if it would be useful for Arch-Viz or interior design work. There does need to be a simpler point-cloud->decent topology path though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 11:24
|
|
|
forelle posted:Yeah, you get so much more than just the model as well. The HDR lighting solution it captures makes rendering in the environment a snap. I'm wondering if it would be useful for Arch-Viz or interior design work. I can only really see applications in the lower end - which wouldn't have the budget to use it. Anything high end requires far too much control to use scanned data. We've tried using scanned data to rebuild a 3 block square site before, and it ended up faster to just go there on a cloudy day & cut textures from photography to re-build & re-light the whole thing after. cad data & height references good enough to work over are available easily enough for anywhere in the world now, either with something like z-mapping, or taking google earth into max. It's a shame, really, because i'd love to start doing it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
mutata posted:Especially TF2... the import process to get that poo poo working in-engine blows. I only ever made one thing: Tell me about it. Getting it in and skinned to THE HEAD BONE was relatively painless. Trying to work out how the everliving hell I export a skin with more than the head bone is proving impossible. I post on polycount and everyone in the TF2 thread just ignores my questions, I've watched endless lovely "tutorials" on youtube, read the whole source wiki. This is bullshit. I have heard mentions of elusive QC files but nothing that really explains if this is the solution, and if it is then the current SDK exporter seems to be a much newer alternative (even if it doesnt seem to have any options in it). This is ridiculous, I just want to know how to export a proper skin!
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 22:57
|
|
|
Haven't done any personal projects for months so I started this from a sphere using dynamesh. I haven't seen the hobbit but I think I saw the artwork for the trolls and it was rolling around in my head. I have a long weekend so I might try to retop/pose/detail it It's kind of a human/monkey/elephant/troll 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 06:39
|
|
|
Looks good Eoin! The proportions are really well done. You've probably mentioned it, but I forgot, are you working as a character artist or something else?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
Cheers I work as a modeler/generalist at Iloura in Melbourne Occasionally I get to do some character work but that stuff is mainly on my own time at this point
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2013 00:39
|
|
|
Can anyone here recommend some books on Maya and Zbrush? I've made son headway with Maya since I last flapped my gums on here, but I'd really like to know if any of you guys have any favourite learning tools.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
These are some WIP shots of a mech suit I'm making in Zbrush. I wanted the armor to wear like hockey pads from the waist down, with the rest of the suit assembling when necessary. Basically a big walking missile platform.    Started using Zbrush in April 2012, basically playing with it in my spare time. This is the fist big project I want to finish. To anybody contemplating learning Zbrush, but holding off because you heard the interface was weird just shut up and start using it today. Go here http://www.pixologic.com/zclassroom/homeroom/ and watch the Getting Started videos, then watch the rest of the videos as you play with it. I can't model a teacup in 3ds Max, but I can create these shapes in Zbrush pretty easily and I think that's amazing. I'm really stuck on the feet with this thing, I've been sketching robot legs and feet every free minute I get at work, and nothing is sticking. I really like what this guy did here: http://eat3d.com/forum/work-progress/bio-mech-zbrush-hard-surface-project-ryan-watkins EDIT: One more update: 
bring back old gbs fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 06:21
|
|
