Is automatic 3D sofware anything to worry about?
Hey everyone,
I have seen more and more automatic 3D software popping up? At the moment it is fairly early stages but is this anything to worry about in terms of replacing jobs?
I understand there will always be a place for original art style but surely big studios will jump on this type of software to cut costs?
http://youtu.be/7ryRSspZlrQ
I have seen more and more automatic 3D software popping up? At the moment it is fairly early stages but is this anything to worry about in terms of replacing jobs?
I understand there will always be a place for original art style but surely big studios will jump on this type of software to cut costs?
http://youtu.be/7ryRSspZlrQ
Replies
that said, this video is so full of fancy sounding blabla. nothing to be worried about.
Then again i might be totally wrong and photometry is god speaking through us in software code.
It seems as more of a helper tool rather than a hindrance for simple environment assets
But if we look at photoshop as an example. There's so much automated work for photography within in it these days, but still you see those taking their work seriously willing to pull those curves around and blend manually layers, controlling the tonal values down to the finest values, instead of slapping on a preset. I think this is where 3D will be as well. If you take it seriously you will always honor the craft by knowing the ins and outs of it and go in manually to get the look you want to achive.
I think we'll be fine.
Agreed. To be honest I welcome automation. Some of the most beautiful art in Brave was created proceduraly by artists using systems and algorithms. Check it out here:
http://www.cgw.com/Publications/CGW/2012/Volume-35-Issue-4-June-July-2012/The-Royal-Treatment.aspx
Don't make the mistake of not accepting change. The term artist may go out of style but human creativity will not. Don't forget this! And absolutely do not allow anyone to push down wages for doing a creative job. Remember value is perceived. For a culture of people obsessed with creating images, we all to often forget our own image as professionals.
In the short term is it going to replace artists? Maybe some, but I really don't see it as a game changer. Artists are hired because they are creative and create and invent things that don't exist. There is also the limitations of scanning like others have talked about. It's not just is it capable, but is it financially viable to work that way.
just look back 10 years, zbrush was barely usable for anything but weird 2.5d illustrations until some people realized you can deform their weird 3d brushes inside the app
change is good, you constantly have to adapt and invent
i certainly do not miss the times when unwrapping a character took longer than modelling it, due to the lack of proper tools and needing to EVERY SINGLE VERTEX by hand.
It's impossible to recreate the nuances that a musician creates whilst playing an instrument, remember the old saying "the devil is in the details" it's the same for art and ok we might have the ability within the next decade to recreate any object from 2d photos into 3d but it wont be the same because of the nuances. It's the artist's touch that make or breaks the immersion and that's my way of thinking about it. Put like this we could ask every one on polycount to make a simple crate, I can guarantee you that the majority will look the same but the most experienced and not forgetting talented artists amongst us will shine because of the nuances. The same goes for a musical phrase, most musicians will recreate the phrase with their sample library but the guy/girl with 15 plus years behind the cello will shine.
Great example. I think they actually wrote this algorithm that analyzed the classics and could compute "perfect pieces" based on lot of key variables, but it never came out as anything special. I can't remember who did this experiment though.
The cinema for example never had to chase photo-realism. You could simply collect a bunch of real-world objects, put them together, get some actors and shoot a movie. But that alone is not enough to make a pleasing image. Things such as choice of locations, lighting, composition, choosing the right clothes for the actors, camera angles and multitude of other artistic decisions will always make some images better than others. There are reasons why certain scenes have become iconic, while other were quickly forgotten.
[ame="
food for thought but I don't agree that algorithms will replace human nuances !
An even bigger problem for the developers that use this is trying to maintain a brand or something that sets them apart when everyone and anyone can produce the same.
that argument doesn't work, just check out film its "photoreal" or filmreal for decades and there are plenty of things that set them apart. I guess an more evened out playground for realistic games could help focus on the games, i fear this will not happen, but at least one can hope
What robots will never be able to achieve is the level of emotional depth the human soul can produce in a piece of art.
But robots will no doubt try to mimic the soul, and the scary part is... I think we're fast approaching the day when "Joe Gamer" won't notice the distinction or care in the slightest.
I agree with this, this is more factual:
Which is why a lot Less Artist are still needed.
Lets face it, having an AI do our work is still a few years to a few decades away from happening. But what we are seeing which is great and bad is the evolution of the tools.
Myself and many can agree tools are great they give freedom to the ARTIST. Yes that is true, but they also slowly kill our technical skill set. Lets be honest, before if you knew how to model it was something a few folks can do, to the point were you needed a phd to even perform these practices. Now anyone can do it, which is great but like we learned in history over saturation kills value. This not only impacts our value(salary, perception, etc) but also our opportunities. You still need artist, but you need less and less.
First off no offense to any folks in these fields, but I seriously hope 3D doesn't land in that same category. Yes they survived but they got hit really hard, and still getting hit harder. Hard to make a living as a photographer let along support a family.
First off artist do not just mean 3D artist, there are very few in house character and animators now a days. Also an increase in budget can relate to a longer time frame, a more thought out pre-production, mistakes, etc.
A lot of studios have trimmed the fat and resulted in less in house staff, but outsourcing has become the go to option.
yes please
This guy on youtube makes some good points about automation taking over jobs in general.