The BRAWL² Tournament Challenge has been announced!
It starts May 12, and ends Sept 12. Let's see what you got!
https://polycount.com/discussion/237047/the-brawl²-tournament
It starts May 12, and ends Sept 12. Let's see what you got!
https://polycount.com/discussion/237047/the-brawl²-tournament
Best Of
Re: Early-Late 2000s CGI/Game Models
Thats the one I (and Hanno Hagedorn) learned the basics of organic modelling from.FrankPolygon said:
https://youtu.be/eYAWAK1_6GwWay back when our English was so rudimentary, we didnt know that timelapse means speed up.
So we tried to hit Irfans speed doing the same thing over and over and over again hot seating on Hannos PC, we got close, tho never this fast.
Took me a while to realize why we couldn't hit it, hehe
Good old times
Neox
1 ·
Re: BRAWL2 [Vehicle] Rust Rhino, Hang Li
Here’s a quick update on the 2D concept; the 3D modeling is in progress~
HangLi
1 ·
Re: Early-Late 2000s CGI/Game Models
I think the goto book of the day for facial modelling and animation was https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stop-Staring-Facial-Modeling-Animation/dp/0470609907 probably still relevant when trying to achieve "character" 
I've got a first edition copy from 2003
I've got a first edition copy from 2003
Klunk
1 ·
Re: Early-Late 2000s CGI/Game Models
Johnathan Williams still has some public videos of his edge modeling and facial topology series from the late 2000's and early 2010's. This is fairly representative of how things were typically done prior to digital sculpting. At least for those using open source tools from the period. Tool sets do vary but a lot of the fundamentals are similar.
https://youtu.be/pHYKLFBNeaM
https://youtu.be/9dT6mL_rKp0
https://youtu.be/7aM4z0dV3Qg
https://youtu.be/4gw3wliQVTY
https://youtu.be/kmBqDursfgQThe site is long since defunct but back in the mid to late 2000's there was a forum dedicated to subdivision modeling where artists shared tutorials and offered critiques on work in progress. Unfortunately it seems like a lot of stuff wasn't archived and threads like "Super basic workflows" are now completely lost to time. https://web.archive.org/web/20070712091532/http://www.subdivisionmodeling.com/forums/
There were also a whole bunch of other sites, like CG society, that had similar discussion boards and those were a primary source for a lot of us who either couldn't afford or couldn't access professional level training but still wanted to learn subdivision modeling. Prior to video hosting platforms a lot of online learning content was either posted on forums, which have long since been shut down, or hosted somewhere as web pages and downloadable text documents.
Stuff like this was really all that was available for free and like
others have said, the actual modeling process is pretty rudimentary and
easy enough to replicate today using basic poly modeling operations. A lot of
stuff we either had to figure out on our own through trial and error or
find someone who knew what they were doing and was willing to share
their knowledge. Often with nothing more than a couple of paint overs or a scanned page from a book
and a few lines of text.
It is possible that someone has fragments of these popular workflow discussions or at least the media from them saved somewhere. Though, to be honest, if you want to see these older workflows in action then it's probably easier to try and find modeling time-lapses from 2006-2010 on YouTube. Back in the day it was a somewhat popular thing for organic and character artists to share modeling time-lapses. This trend continued for a while as more and more people shifted over to 3D sculpting applications like Mudbox and zBrush then slowly faded away.
When searching for videos on YouTube, try keyword phrases like: "edge modeling topology time-lapse before:2010" and the search results will be filtered to only included videos from before the selected date. This makes it a lot easier to find content from working professionals who were sharing their workflows back in the day.
Even stuff like basic box modeling time-lapses and other tutorials from over a decade ago are still out there.
https://youtu.be/J1mExXURsWkWhen it comes to the question:"How did people do it?" Often the answer is: artists worked with whatever was available and iterated a lot until things looked correct. Especially when working from concept art or replicating obscure subjects.
Although it's not ideal, it wasn't all that uncommon for people (especially when learning) to create models based on a very limited pool of references that were nothing more than a front or side view and a handful of turnaround images. For characters it might even be as basic as a single concept sheet with just a three quarters view and some basic proportions from a front and side view.
As unsatisfying as that sort of answer may be, if there wasn't direct access to the subject or a lot of reference material that you or someone else gathered then it was often up to the individual artist to fill in the blanks as they were modeling. Usually with some input or guidance from an art director or concept artist.
In the how do you model this thread, Per used to have a few really
good posts with examples that demonstrated what older concept block-out
processes looked like for props and other stuff that was still being
done with subdivision modeling but that content is also lost to time.
Here's a link to the original JOA tutorial that was hosted on 3Dtotal: https://web.archive.org/web/20080621094924/http://www.3dtotal.com/ffa/tutorials/max/joanofarc/joanmenu.asp It takes some doing but it is possible to occasionally find this stuff. Whether or not it gets archived is kind of hit or miss. Knowing where it was hosted also helps and those lost connections sometimes make it difficult to find things people talk about seeing or learning from in the past.
FrankPolygon
3 ·
Re: Early-Late 2000s CGI/Game Models
Dude.5rettski said:Which is exactly why I'm phrasing it like that, I am talking about them today.Celosia said:
Only people chatting about them today would phrase it like this
5rettski said:
If I look up "3D modeling character books from the 2000s" or "3D modeling books from the 90s," I don't find anything.
Celosia
1 ·
Re: Early-Late 2000s CGI/Game Models
5rettski said:
You're phrasing it as if speaking to a person or chatbot. Books being published today aren't described as "books from 2020s" now; Books from your data range weren't described like this when published either. Only people chatting about them today would phrase it like this, and given that book blurbs are rarely, if ever, updated, you simply won't get direct matches this way.
Try an advanced search using a data range and keywords only like "3d character book". You should also try Google Books, which can filter by date as well. While you won't necessarily find the bestsellers this way you'll find plenty books to look up.
Apologies for confusion, I know the link was there, but I'm asking if I wanted to find sources on my own, I don't know how you find them.
If I look up "3D modeling character books from the 2000s" or "3D modeling books from the 90s," I don't find anything. Same goes if I want to look for videos. I don't know how to find them. How can I find what was available during that time if I decided to look on my own?
You're phrasing it as if speaking to a person or chatbot. Books being published today aren't described as "books from 2020s" now; Books from your data range weren't described like this when published either. Only people chatting about them today would phrase it like this, and given that book blurbs are rarely, if ever, updated, you simply won't get direct matches this way.
Try an advanced search using a data range and keywords only like "3d character book". You should also try Google Books, which can filter by date as well. While you won't necessarily find the bestsellers this way you'll find plenty books to look up.
Celosia
1 ·
Re: Early-Late 2000s CGI/Game Models
Confusing thread is confusing 
To the OP :
- Alright, so we have established that there is no "then" VS "now" in regards to polygon modeling - it's all been the same for 20+ years. So these screenshots of the Gollum and Kratos wireframes are hardly relevant.
- No sculpting is needed in order to get a high detailled look for film and still renders. Displacements maps applied at render time after subdivision can and have been painted by hand since forever. But of course they can be baked too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnCbIoPGm50
- CG magazines from back then showed great examples of very cool, detailled art done without any sculpting or baking ! As a matter of fact some looked more original than the samey cookie cutter stuff we see everywhere today. Would love to track back some of these pages ...
- Zbrush is old, like, 26 years old for the initial "2.5D" version and the projection master trickery that soon followed (IIRC). I think regular 3D sculpting showed up in ZB in 2.x, so that's around 2000-ish. And the original Skymatter version of Mudbox released around the time of the Kong movie, in 2006.
Fun stuff. Looking back at old CG is certainly refreshing, espcially compared to the avalanche of ressources and computing power used today. It sure is rough around the edges, but isn't this cool ! (art for the 1999 Ring PC game)
To the OP :
- Alright, so we have established that there is no "then" VS "now" in regards to polygon modeling - it's all been the same for 20+ years. So these screenshots of the Gollum and Kratos wireframes are hardly relevant.
- No sculpting is needed in order to get a high detailled look for film and still renders. Displacements maps applied at render time after subdivision can and have been painted by hand since forever. But of course they can be baked too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnCbIoPGm50- CG magazines from back then showed great examples of very cool, detailled art done without any sculpting or baking ! As a matter of fact some looked more original than the samey cookie cutter stuff we see everywhere today. Would love to track back some of these pages ...
- Zbrush is old, like, 26 years old for the initial "2.5D" version and the projection master trickery that soon followed (IIRC). I think regular 3D sculpting showed up in ZB in 2.x, so that's around 2000-ish. And the original Skymatter version of Mudbox released around the time of the Kong movie, in 2006.
Fun stuff. Looking back at old CG is certainly refreshing, espcially compared to the avalanche of ressources and computing power used today. It sure is rough around the edges, but isn't this cool ! (art for the 1999 Ring PC game)
pior
1 ·
Re: Early-Late 2000s CGI/Game Models
whatever works for you.
Modelling parts and merging them later can work well and is a valid strategy.
Thanks to pior for showing those displacement examples.
It helps in iterating that the artificial separation of modelling and texturing is imo a mistake.
Especially with the emergence of normalmaps in the 2000s.
you can combine and mix modelling/Sculpting/texturing.
Especially with the emergence of normalmaps in the 2000s.
you can combine and mix modelling/Sculpting/texturing.
With texturing you can also easily calculate how many vertices you want to visually emulate so yeah I am going to ignore a bit the modelling/texturing distinction.
If we go further back in time for Software (for example to the Film Jurassic Park) ~1992-~1994 there was Viewpaint before Mari.
Back then they for example painted 2k textures of the snout of a dinosaur...
There was and is a big difference between in-house tools and what the rest of the industry was/is able to get their hands on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_koaelNZpTs
Back then they for example painted 2k textures of the snout of a dinosaur...
There was and is a big difference between in-house tools and what the rest of the industry was/is able to get their hands on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_koaelNZpTsthere was also Amazon 3D Paint available.
which was used by many companies and projects.
amazon3dpaint.pdf
Capcom in ~2009 used Bodypaint3D(4.5) for Monsterhunter3 or at least that is what an advertisement from that time told...
to get back to the threads topic, there was this funny looking device from Geomagic which was used with their Freeform Software?
I think some members here have first hand experience with it and can write more how it worked or didn't work.
you probably mean something like the Polhemus digitizer?thomasp said:You'd have to go back to the 80's and earlier to find some mindblowingly convoluted ways of working (like constructing models on paper and then typing the coordinates into the computer and having the frames printed out without actual preview onto film - I believe they did stuff like that on Tron).
For Tron it was probably more this device in the below video.
can also be seen around 2:20.
https://youtu.be/Tm4i6D3XXBQ?t=948
myclay
1 ·
Re: Relevance vs. Quality
The market is indeed difficult for job seekers, unfortunately.
That doesn’t preclude a chance to be hired showing insufficient examples, but it does make it much less likely.
If you can’t show examples of the kind of work an employer is looking for, then it’s really unlikely they will hire you. Simple as that.
Why not make an architectural render or two?
If you can’t show examples of the kind of work an employer is looking for, then it’s really unlikely they will hire you. Simple as that.
Why not make an architectural render or two?
Eric Chadwick
1 ·