Megascans in a portfolio?
polycounter lvl 10
I'm wondering if it's professional to use Megascans in an environment art portfolio? It looks mind blowing but kinda seems lazy to me, and I'd rather show that I've gone to some effort in my work. What's everyone else's opinion on this? Are Megascans ok if you want to get hired? Would it look unprofessional to a company?
Replies
This title should be more of..
Is it okay to put premade 3d models in your portofolio?
In my honest opinion, no it's not okay
it's kind of stupid when you think about it
for the same reason I don't think turning your render into a photomanipulation isn't a very good strategy
Why?
It's not practical.
If you are showcasing your skill as a level designer then it's okay
if you are showcasing your skill as a environment artist.. well.. it's sort of your job to make those nice rocks
you are telling your potential boss that you dont have the skills to make the rocks yourself
But for texturing? oh it's no big deal I pressume.
Because, remember, scene dressing is still a thing. And someone who makes the scene look really nice using only existing assets can still make a lot of difference.
However, having ONLY photogrammetry is useless. It does not convey your uses in game development, as it is only one of many steps to get something functional in game.
Are you taking megascans content, slapping it in a scene, and presenting it in your portfolio as if you made it from scratch? I wouldn't do that.
Are you using megascan materials in the authoring pipeline to create materials for content you did create from scratch? A lot of people have been doing this with Quixel dDo already, and I can't see how it would be frowned upon. Again, I wouldn't slap some megascan content on my models and call them done, but using megascan content in the texturing workflow the same way we have been using resources like cgtextures for the past decade or so, I have no idea why anyone would have a problem with that.
Portfolio wise, if you end up using them in a smart way to create something unique I don't see any problem. If you are building like a fantasy world environment, Megascans won't be enough to achieve that.
If your portfolio is simple enough to only be made with Megascans and nothing else, you probably could use a more interesting portfolio.
or small environments for asset presentation etc, no harm done, just fill in that you used megascans.
You can see some really nice renders on artstation etc that is created in megascans, no one would take that as a piece showcasing the artists modeling/sculpting and texture skills, but he is able to show his lighting and presentation skills, and he has clearly written that it was made using megascans.
so it's all about how you present it and what the focus is.
Not often or probably never are you gonna have to create every little branch in an environment you are in charge of.
I think if you can create stuff that fit in with the megascans assets and textures then you have already shown skill.
seen more then a few examples where artists have put their stuff inside a megascans created environment and it didn't fit in at all.
Either the style of the assets didn't fit or they didn't reach the level of quality of the megascans assets and it stood out.
Kinda like an animator wouldn't be blamed for not using his own models when showcasing his animation skills.
But yeah it's very possible that some people will create a ground texture with a couple of mushrooms and branches, call it done and
present it as an environment they did from scratch, then yeah that's not right.
I think it's totally fine however to compile scanned heightmap data, like leaves, rocks etc, feed it into substance designer and get your own texture out of it etc. It's not that different grabbing things from photo-sources.
If someone is already an solid artist, then why not spend a weekend and bang out some awesome looking art. I never really frown on using pre-made art, it happens 99% of the time in production anyways. especially if you are a "level artist" aka set dresser. In that case you are always placing pre-made props and art and its the composition and creating a believable space that matters.
As I have said before, it comes down to demonstrating your value as an artist to a company. As long as you are upfront about what you created and can clearly demonstrate a great skillset for the position you are targeting then how you get there is largely irrelevant once you have the overall environment creation process down. there is no need to create 100% of everything all the time, infact, the smartest people in business and production usually take advantage of a good base or jumping off point to build upon. As long as you are confident in yourself and your abilities then go for it.
Some studios who want to hire you for a remote contract will see your familiarity with megascans as a positive, not a negative. Instead of hiring you to make the art for X amount of money, they can get a subscription to Megascans themselves, pay you much less to build a level or cook the assets to their preferences. Just make art, and try not to deceive anyone. You should come as advertised.
If you were looking for a full time in house position however, id probably hold off on doing it. It wont help you very much, likely just confuse things, and you want to show work thats done 100% by you.
For a production environment you are limited by many factors and time so using pre created assets is not only ok, its the only way to get the job done. Almost no one can claim 100% ownership of any given environment they work on (unless its a super small indie game). Almost every game and studio has multiple people helping out in various ways to bring a level to life. So you are bound to use assets you didnt create which is fine. A game is not about your personal art or to show off your best artistic ability as its still a game and there are many more moving parts to a game than just art.
If someone shows me a portfolio full of pre-made assets in the scenes, I don't care one bit. I'm focused on the main product, and if the overall image shows off that product well.
For me, in an engineering and manufacturing company in the oil industry, I need people that can accurately model equipment down to the nuts and washers from 2D CAD drawings, light it, and produce top quality renders. A nice looking environment is important for a good looking final product, but how they produce that environment is of very little concern.
As others have said, it's important what you're applying for. Someone who has the mechanical knowledge to produce an assembled gear box from nothing but a production B.O.M., and a stack of piece-part drawings, is much harder for me to find than someone who can sculpt and texture a tree stump in ZBrush. So for anyone looking to get into my side of the industry, you're probably safe using whatever you'd like to fill out a scene.
Just some input from another corner of the CG world that people don't seem to think of too often.