The Relevance of Traditional Art in 3D Art.
polycounter lvl 12
Hello guys. I have something on my mind and it's been bothering me all night. I understand that 3D utilizes the principles of rhythm, form and lighting in much the same way graphite drawings or painting do. It would make sense to say that anything gained from traditional mediums can be applied to 3D. The only difference (at least for me) is 2D drawings can be made much quicker so I can learn faster. Right?
Last night I spoke to a very credible 3D character artist on this very subject. The individual said that a traditional understanding is irrelevant. I have looked up to this individual as both a fan of his work and a friend yet I this is advice is something I feel is necessary to crowd source. After using the search, it appears no one else has brought this up so here it goes.
If this is true, then why is it that every professional 3D artist I have seen is at least competent in drawing and painting? If this is true, then why does every university 3D program in the states require students to take traditional courses? If this is true, why do a lot of people say major developers such as Blizzard and Valve have their staff stocked with artist with a classical understanding? If this is true, then can gaining an understanding of lighting and structure through the sketchbook not carry over to 3D?
The one and only reason I acquiesce and pick up a graphite pencil in the first place is to improve my understanding of the principles that complement 3D skills. I have filled a few dozen sketchbooks in the past 2 years in addition to my 3D studies but I'm starting to think that it was a time sink. Is there any benefit to be had in a traditional medium if you are a 3D artist?
I have also noticed that when most 3D artist say they can not draw, they mean to say that they can't do gesture sketches like Rembrandt or female figures like Scott Campbell. I am sure that insanely high level of skill is unnecessary for 3D practice, but what about something as simple as general competence? Getting things like clean lines, proportionality and lighting at least somewhat correct? Is that even necessary for someone studying 3D?
Last night I spoke to a very credible 3D character artist on this very subject. The individual said that a traditional understanding is irrelevant. I have looked up to this individual as both a fan of his work and a friend yet I this is advice is something I feel is necessary to crowd source. After using the search, it appears no one else has brought this up so here it goes.
If this is true, then why is it that every professional 3D artist I have seen is at least competent in drawing and painting? If this is true, then why does every university 3D program in the states require students to take traditional courses? If this is true, why do a lot of people say major developers such as Blizzard and Valve have their staff stocked with artist with a classical understanding? If this is true, then can gaining an understanding of lighting and structure through the sketchbook not carry over to 3D?
The one and only reason I acquiesce and pick up a graphite pencil in the first place is to improve my understanding of the principles that complement 3D skills. I have filled a few dozen sketchbooks in the past 2 years in addition to my 3D studies but I'm starting to think that it was a time sink. Is there any benefit to be had in a traditional medium if you are a 3D artist?
I have also noticed that when most 3D artist say they can not draw, they mean to say that they can't do gesture sketches like Rembrandt or female figures like Scott Campbell. I am sure that insanely high level of skill is unnecessary for 3D practice, but what about something as simple as general competence? Getting things like clean lines, proportionality and lighting at least somewhat correct? Is that even necessary for someone studying 3D?
Replies
I think as there's plenty of different kinds of artists, having a traditional knowledge will have varying worth for each individual. As an aspiring environment artist I think having a good grasp of composition would be good for organising scenes in an aesthetic way, or having a good idea of colour theory would help to balance or grade scenes, among other things. I still practice concepting even though I might never have a job where I design props or environments myself (instead realising already existing concepts but in 3D.) So it comes down to what kind of artist you want to be and whether you think these skills will help
You were right in looking for more opinions though, I'm sure a few others will chime in to advocate the usefulness of a traditional art background, I certainly recommend it but I'm hardly an established artist
Design, Color, Composition... these are what really matter.
ye
I should have mentioned. I am into high end visuals and realism/hyper realism. I use to be really fascinated by GPU architecture since the G80 back in the day and it kind of stuck. Things like Ethan Carter, Star Citizen, Gears of War and Crysis are my aim and style.
Although it is outside of my scope, I am simply curious to know how important traditional painting or even work with colored pencil is to heavily stylized games with unique color pallets.
I'm comfortable telling non-artists I can draw/paint, but would never claim to have 2d skills to a peer. That said, I typically start every personal project with sketches, as I find it easier to test concepts and ideas in 2D.
Bottom line, you don't truly need 2d skills to be a 3d artist if you have a great knowledge of traditional techniques and artistic principles. In my experience, working in 2d helps teach those things.
Plus im one of those artist that think to dismiss the importance of traditional art is a bit disrespectful to the old masters but thats just me.
Remember "uncanny valley" theory . it's actually just inability to see and feel right nuances.
Traditional art had been exactly same "uncanny" before Renaissance era.
It took hundreds of years + Rafael Santi and Velasquez before human figures in traditional art stopped resemble lifeless robots. Then it just became a part of art tradition and school.
All that translates to environment art and textures as well. With traditional art you have to make constant non stop selection of what part/side of the reality is worth to be reflected.
You just can't fine sewing everything in Zbrush manner up to microbe level so you have to do choices. And those choices often is much more important than amount of details itself.
Yes. Ideally i would like to be able to work with limited references. Correct me if im wrong but i immagine AAA artist dont have a dozen peices of concept art for every prop right? I always find as much as i can for generic things like windows. Doors, tools, etc but i always immagine half the creatively designed props has to come from the modelers mind. Right?
i haven't done any real 2d stuff since about 1995 and have been a 3d guy ever since.
I am sure there have been numerous threads on this subject also