Best Of

Been trying my hands on more stylised character

@orangesky Thanks for the comment. Glad the write-ups have been enjoyable and informative.

The short answer is: it depends. Context is really important because, even from a broad perspective, there's some significant differences between organic and hard surface modeling. While there's definitely some overlap in the fundamentals of subdivision modeling, these two broad fields are still completely different disciplines. Each with specific sub-focuses that require somewhat unique skill sets. What's acceptable in one instance may not be ideal for another.

It's the same sort of situation when it comes to 3D modeling for different types of media. E.g. animation, game, VFX, and visualization projects all tend to have specific technical requirements. The various studios that specialize in each of these fields will generally have their own preferred workflow(s) and best practices. Which are sometimes made public through articles, discussions, documentation, interviews, presentations, etc.

Information that references sources with firsthand experience is probably more accurate than personal opinion. As an example: use cases for triangles and n-gons are discussed in documentation for OpenSubdiv and booleans are also mentioned in other user docs and articles about artists that have worked on feature length animations at the company in question.

In general though, most technical elements are relatively easy to measure. That's probably why it's tempting to try distilling creative processes down into a set of fixed rules. While this sort of approach can work well enough when just learning the basics. It also tends to restrict problem solving by oversimplifying things and optimizing for binary decision making. Which generally produces less than optimal results when dealing complex problems over a longer period of time and contributes to the perpetuation of technical dogma.

Just in game art alone, the relatively short evolutionary period of the design tools has already seen several inflection points where established workflows have changed suddenly and artists that were unwilling to at least entertain the idea of doing things differently were completely left behind.

The switch to PBR texturing workflows and the subsequent rise of dedicated texturing applications is one fairly recent example. Another, which is adjacent to the earlier shift towards sculpting organics, is the rapid evolution of the boolean re-meshing workflow that's now seeing 3D DCC's being replaced with CAD applications. Parametric modeling is accurate and relatively fast. Two things that, arguably, old school, grid based subdivision modeling is not.

These kinds of rapid paradigm shifts are often focused on moving to processes that offer significant improvements in efficiency and visual fidelity. Something that a lot of the older workflows just can't compete against. That's not to say that elements of these older workflows aren't still relevant. It's just that the weaknesses now outweigh the strengths. Traditional subdivision modeling is no exception to this. Especially when it comes to hard surface content.

Booleans, modifiers and n-gons speed up different parts of the modeling process but it's important to remember that they're just intermediate steps and aren't the entire workflow. When combined with effective block outs and segment matching strategies, the n-gons in a base mesh can be resolved to all quads if required. So all quad geometry isn't necessarily exclusive to slower, traditional modeling methods like box, point inflation, edge extrusion or strip modeling.

The takeaway from all this is that the technical elements should be chosen to serve the creative elements that further the story. Not the reverse. Part of improving as an artist is learning to work within resource constraints to creatively solve aesthetic and communication problems while maintaining a cohesive narrative. Which admittedly does require technical understanding. It's just that understanding has to be tempered with other creative skills that might be neglected during these types of discussions.

Sometimes it's helpful to look at the technical elements of a workflow with a more pragmatic lens. Focusing less on tradition and more on comparing the cost of the inputs [time, emotional capital, etc.] to the value generated. Exploring different workflows also provides some needed contrast that helps identify weaknesses in current workflows. It's that sort of iteration and reflection that moves things forwards.

Polycount's career and education section is also a great resource for learning about what's expected from artists working in a specific field and is probably a better venue for discussing building a portfolio to land an animation, VFX or film job. Definitely worth the time to read through the advice offered there by other experienced artists that have worked on similar projects.