Can you describe reality? Do you mean why 3d artists tend to create materals/textures on a realistic theme rather than stylized approach? Well, I would argue that substance painter comes bundled with many realistic based materials; thus its the most available, the easiest and time saving method to approach.
Yet again, its just my two cents on the matter. I maybe wrong
Because making something realistic is pretty difficult. Because it's a challenge. Because we want to keep improving. Because we are bored as hell. Because we can copy and we are asked to copy reality. Because the market decides it. Because we lack imagination. Because we want to make a living doing 3D. etc.
It's a matter of tastes. We do whatever we like or whatever the general public like, nothing more.
I don't like too many games with real weapons, and 3d scanned characters, but there are too many people who loves it, and it's what sells.
Anyways, you can try to be the 3D artist, and change all. Trends change, don't it?. Don't ask others to do whatever you want to see.
I dont think we are. I just think artists use reality as a yard stick reference, otherwise there is no way to explain the range of styles we see in the '3D art Showcase & Critiques' forum.
But, reality is still the only place you can get a decent sandwich.
Then make something that isn't based in reality or trying to replicate it. Follow people that do fanciful and epic concepting and 3d. Search for surrealist 3d artists(they exist). Look into machine generation and various algorithmic designs. If you don't like something don't consume or make it.
Computer graphics started as a simulation of the real world made by programmers and academics. It wasn't until actual artists became involved that non-photoreal art was made.
I want to play too, to escape the current reality, that is why it trends to create a reality you would want to be in, filled with magic and super powers where you can fly and anything can happen, where you are a hero in your own story and escape this reality into the reality you always dreamed off.
^ Or what everyone else said ^
That's a pretty bold statement coming from someone who hasn't posted a single image of their art after more than a year of boring questions on Polycount.
That's a pretty bold statement coming from someone who hasn't posted a single image of their art after more than a year of boring questions on Polycount.
@ned_poreyra You ought to have it in your signature.
Also to your question, I wouldn't say all 3D artists are obsessed with recreating reality, though considering that most jobs are in production art unless your a concept artist, helps to start there (and many just stay there)
When I was planning a game project that I want to make later, I was talking to some people who might help. The gist of the game idea is a realistic simulation of birds of prey survival. One of the people suggest that maybe the eagle is more than an eagle. Maybe it's bionic or something.
To me, that is boring. That is so boring is makes me upset. Because it's like every other dumb fantasy ever. Instead of celebrating and reveling in the awesome complexity of reality, we are inventing dumb, crude, caveman brain fantasies. As if we already understand the eagle so much that it should bore us.
You should watch Planet Earth. Now there is real drama. If you think that is boring, you are way too disconnected from life. Need to get out of the city and gain some true experience so you can appreciate things properly.
The thing that makes me depressed is that, if I really wanted to sell copies, probably the bionic eagle would do better than a grounded simulation. Because people who don't appreciate reality are boring.
That's a pretty bold statement coming from someone who hasn't posted a single image of their art after more than a year of boring questions on Polycount.
Everyone's welcome here, and the post could certainly use a bit more substance
Well, he's not wrong. I certainly haven't done anything recently to make the world any less boring.
That's a pretty bold statement coming from someone who hasn't posted a single image of their art after more than a year of boring questions on Polycount.
Everyone's welcome here, and the post could certainly use a bit more substance
Well, he's not wrong. I certainly haven't done anything recently to make the world any less boring.
I'm sure you've impacted someone positively somewhere and they are better for it. With the situation as it is now with the quarantine, you have a lot of time to do something that makes you feel fulfilled, doesn't have to be something that trends here or on artstation. Doesn't have to be art for a job. Just something that gives you meaning. And after all this is over you'll feel better for it.
To give an example, I've been trying new recipes, building legos and reconnecting with family and friends (some in Spain, so a far worse predicament then myself) A lot of people feel downright powerless right now, even the ones working from home. But we're all in this together.
Too many of us get trapped in the endless cycle of make art to trend, make art to get job, why didn't this work out, when will these people get back to me. I mean its great to feel validated, but sometimes it helps to just feel contentment in that you lived another day to have an opportunity to make something of it.
This thread hardly warrants a reply but realism is pretty much the foundation for any 3D art style -- unless you're making something deliberately abstract you need to somehow ground your style to reality for it to make sense. You should understand how real life works and the only way to do that is by studying it.
It's pretty much the reason why most lackluster attempts at making stylised materials come out lackluster, when people didn't take the time to figure out how the material actually behaves in the real world and instead they think they can just bend the rules
I am going a different way - for pragmatic reasons:
Being still a Newbie
Lacking GPU support (thanks OSX for messing up OpenGL!)
Thus working with Blender's realtime Eevee and quite liking it
People compared Eevee and Cycles with "A nice Game look vs a nice game cinematic look". Since Game look works fine for me, I don't mind my dragon having a slight 'comic-like', shiny touch. I am sure though, if I had been a fulltime professional, I would challange my own skills for the most accurate realistic scenery.
Be careful of falling into the misconception that stylized work is somehow easier. It takes just as long to gain mastery of as any other style. Quality work is quality work
I wasn't talking about realism, I was talking about reality. The thing I don't understand is why artists value and respect the ability to faithfully recreate an actual object in 3D more than the ability to come up with an interesting idea of a thing unseen before. And I specifially mean artists, not people. People - you know, the ones who actually look at, buy and use the stuff you create - love outlandish, original ideas. Yet artists view originality as a cop-out. You made a weird spaceship, because you're not good enough to make a sports car. You made a tentacle monster, because you don't know human anatomy enough. It's unbelievable and disgusting for me that these days creativity is either overlooked or downright ignored by artists themselves, while acting as a thoughtless, copying machine is desirable and virtuous.
Well, it's not entirely true that I don't know why it is this way. It's because most artists are boring people. They're so focused on the technical aspect of their work, that they see other works only through the lense of technicality. They're no longer people - they're only artists.
Seems to me you are confusing reality with originality. Just because something is based on reality doesnt mean its devoid of creativity. I think the reverse is true: just because something is non representative in form that doesnt make it good or original.
I wasn't talking about realism, I was talking about reality. The thing I don't understand is why artists value and respect the ability to faithfully recreate an actual object in 3D more than the ability to come up with an interesting idea of a thing unseen before. And I specifially mean artists, not people. People - you know, the ones who actually look at, buy and use the stuff you create - love outlandish, original ideas. Yet artists view originality as a cop-out. You made a weird spaceship, because you're not good enough to make a sports car. You made a tentacle monster, because you don't know human anatomy enough. It's unbelievable and disgusting for me that these days creativity is either overlooked or downright ignored by artists themselves, while acting as a thoughtless, copying machine is desirable and virtuous.
Well, it's not entirely true that I don't know why it is this way. It's because most artists are boring people. They're so focused on the technical aspect of their work, that they see other works only through the lense of technicality. They're no longer people - they're only artists.
you being on a professional game artists platform and putting us into a non people category... nice move
well go on, be the change you wanna see. be super creative. sell your stuff to "people", nobody is stopping you.
But I would suggest you read the reply by Bluestemos above.
As an example, Picasso showed why studying reality matters. He studied and mastered traditional realism, before he pushed into stylism. That solid foundation was required to achieve greatness.
It's definitely a low effort post but I see it as a call for help more than anything.
I am sure many people here have dealt with depression and ought to know what it looks like.
I think ned does have some point in the fact that if we get too bogged down by the technicalities of our work it can 1. stifle creativity and 2. distance us from the audiences perception of the work, but I think he is blowing it out of proportion and working from a narrow perspective.
There is no reason to be offended over anything he said. It's just an opinion.
I just don't understand who he is talking to or about with the whole making a spaceship because you can't make a car. Get better friends dude idk what to tell you. That's some downright toxic shit if you make an awesome spaceship and they come to you and tell you its bad because it isn't a car. I have never heard that in my life, in critiques, forums, classes or otherwise. The only time I have ever heard anything close to that is drawing professors telling people they shouldn't JUST draw anime characters because you don't learn anything from that.
Nobody is walking around telling the guys and girls making Elite dangerous or Star Citizen or Halo that they're not good enough because they made a spaceship instead of a car.
In the distinction between reality and realism I agree with kanga in that I think you want originality. You have to pull from a frame of reference to make something that doesn't exist. You can't just make up stuff, it beyond the human brains capability, things are referenced from reality, distorted, stylized and mixed with other elements to make new and original things. In that way it makes sense people use reality as a metric, its a damn good metric. Reality is complex, reality is cool, its organic and fabricated there is structure and chaos in everything using it as a comparison only makes sense so there is respect for those that can get really close to replicating it. There is also a massive amount of respect for those that can bend reality to their creative whims. One of my favorite artists Zdzislaw Beksinki does this and I would say its incredibly original, reality bending and still based in reality.
This madness doesn't exist, ive never seen anything like this. This is stuff of dreams and nightmares. This aint a car either.
Also saying artists are boring is just like so defeatist man, no one is forcing you to do art. Go be an accountant or something wild and crazy if you don't like it. If you don't like it do something else, it's your life but don't come around trashing a bunch of people because you aren't particularly happy with feedback you're receiving or have received in the past because that is very much what this thread reads as. It reads as someone offered some criticism and you've decided to get upset and kick up dust about art as a whole rather than just moving on and doing what makes you happy.
To be honest to me the whole statement Ned made sounds like someone who as a 'struggling beginner' misunderstood what a portfolio is about. As a junior 3d-artist (not CONCEPT artist) your portfolio is mainly there to answer questions if you can replicate stuff from concepts and do that in a technically correct manner. If people don't know what you were doing because you're being 'creative' they can't really judge if your 'creativity' is something 'original' or just plain bad modelling/shape language.
Even as a concept artist its not about creating 'art' but something that is useful for production.
But yeah, to me its a low effort post to vent frustration. Regarding realism/reality/stylised art - people here hit the nail on the head, so there is nothing more to say.
I would say even if you want to create crazy out there artistic things like monsters and spaceships etc, having an extremely strong foundation and understanding of things that ground the final product in reality will help you communicate your ideas and have it feel "right" to a lot of the general public.
if you want to get paid to make art, you need to have some form of audience/customer. yes totally abstract stuff can sell and make millions etc. but I am talking about joe average 3d artist wanting to work in a studio or freelance. so creating art that can resonate with atleast a niche audience is probably the way to go.
when people wing it and make random monsters or characters without having a fundamental understanding of anatomy, their work usually feels lackluster and unbelieveable. yet someone who can incorporate a strong anatomy/biology study into a creature by understanding nature and adding key elements to their design from reality, usually their work is head and shoulders above the rest. same for having a strong understanding of engineering and mechanical design, your spaceships will just look and feel more beliveable due to all the subconcious manipulation the artists are doing with scale elements, functional design etc.
a lot of junior artists haven't developed the understanding of why or how to implement these things, and can never pinpoint why their work doesn't feel or look as good as some more experienced pros, because they keep just winging it and dont understand the fundamentals of art that make a pleasing image, regardless of art style.
look at the latest episode of astartes, it combines super tech/photoreal art style with some insane surrealist elements, but both work well together because the fundamentals are in place. the composition and lighting is on point, the designs of everything are interesting but feel believable even with the ridiculous space marine proportions. subconsciously you just buy in because everything is well thought out and the designs work well. I would say they are quite left field of re-creating reality.
a LOT of beginner artists gravitate towards semi-abstract work, random monster sculpts, drawing anime etc because they think it's going to either be easier or they wont have to study the fundamentals. I can pretty much guarantee you the best anime artists out there can probably draw an extremely anatomically correct figure drawing that looks amazing. but beginner artists try and avoid the hard work and use "thats how i want it to look, it's not supposed to be realistic" as a crutch to shield their ego and deflect comment and crits, I see it all day on twitter from people who claim "it's just my art style" and then 2 posts later complain they are a broke starving artist or are opening their commissions for 5 bucks a piece (you can't live on that...).
so do you have to re-create reality? hell no! but having an understanding of what makes things grounded in reality and look visually appealing due to the fundamentals of art should be top of the list for anyone wanting to make a living in a production environment. if you think reality is boring, go watch some deep sea documentaries and look at the crazy complex organisms in our oceans, with the most intricate designs in their biology from millions of years of evolution. most people couldn't come up with something half as interesting. nature is often the best designer. just look at some of the insane landscapes and biomes we have here on earth, some rival most fantasy concept paintings.
Just gonna give my input, achieving truly a photo-realistic scene is a challenge, even in these modern game engines. One that I always fall short on at this time, but in my next scene I'll reach it! <- I say this every time
Replies
Yet again, its just my two cents on the matter. I maybe wrong
Because making something realistic is pretty difficult.
Because it's a challenge.
Because we want to keep improving.
Because we are bored as hell.
Because we can copy and we are asked to copy reality.
Because the market decides it.
Because we lack imagination.
Because we want to make a living doing 3D.
etc.
It's a matter of tastes. We do whatever we like or whatever the general public like, nothing more.
I don't like too many games with real weapons, and 3d scanned characters, but there are too many people who loves it, and it's what sells.
Anyways, you can try to be the 3D artist, and change all. Trends change, don't it?. Don't ask others to do whatever you want to see.
However here is his portfolio
https://www.artstation.com/nedporeyra
@ned_poreyra You ought to have it in your signature.
Also to your question, I wouldn't say all 3D artists are obsessed with recreating reality, though considering that most jobs are in production art unless your a concept artist, helps to start there (and many just stay there)
Well, he's not wrong. I certainly haven't done anything recently to make the world any less boring.
With the situation as it is now with the quarantine, you have a lot of time to do something that makes you feel fulfilled, doesn't have to be something that trends here or on artstation.
Doesn't have to be art for a job.
Just something that gives you meaning.
And after all this is over you'll feel better for it.
To give an example, I've been trying new recipes, building legos and reconnecting with family and friends (some in Spain, so a far worse predicament then myself)
A lot of people feel downright powerless right now, even the ones working from home.
But we're all in this together.
Too many of us get trapped in the endless cycle of make art to trend, make art to get job, why didn't this work out, when will these people get back to me.
I mean its great to feel validated, but sometimes it helps to just feel contentment in that you lived another day to have an opportunity to make something of it.
It's pretty much the reason why most lackluster attempts at making stylised materials come out lackluster, when people didn't take the time to figure out how the material actually behaves in the real world and instead they think they can just bend the rules
Seems to me you are confusing reality with originality. Just because something is based on reality doesnt mean its devoid of creativity. I think the reverse is true: just because something is non representative in form that doesnt make it good or original.
But I would suggest you read the reply by Bluestemos above.
As an example, Picasso showed why studying reality matters. He studied and mastered traditional realism, before he pushed into stylism. That solid foundation was required to achieve greatness.
The same holds true for stylized game art.
There are no shortcuts to awesome.
Early Picasso
Later Picasso
Even as a concept artist its not about creating 'art' but something that is useful for production.
But yeah, to me its a low effort post to vent frustration. Regarding realism/reality/stylised art - people here hit the nail on the head, so there is nothing more to say.
if you want to get paid to make art, you need to have some form of audience/customer. yes totally abstract stuff can sell and make millions etc. but I am talking about joe average 3d artist wanting to work in a studio or freelance. so creating art that can resonate with atleast a niche audience is probably the way to go.
when people wing it and make random monsters or characters without having a fundamental understanding of anatomy, their work usually feels lackluster and unbelieveable. yet someone who can incorporate a strong anatomy/biology study into a creature by understanding nature and adding key elements to their design from reality, usually their work is head and shoulders above the rest. same for having a strong understanding of engineering and mechanical design, your spaceships will just look and feel more beliveable due to all the subconcious manipulation the artists are doing with scale elements, functional design etc.
a lot of junior artists haven't developed the understanding of why or how to implement these things, and can never pinpoint why their work doesn't feel or look as good as some more experienced pros, because they keep just winging it and dont understand the fundamentals of art that make a pleasing image, regardless of art style.
look at the latest episode of astartes, it combines super tech/photoreal art style with some insane surrealist elements, but both work well together because the fundamentals are in place. the composition and lighting is on point, the designs of everything are interesting but feel believable even with the ridiculous space marine proportions. subconsciously you just buy in because everything is well thought out and the designs work well. I would say they are quite left field of re-creating reality.
a LOT of beginner artists gravitate towards semi-abstract work, random monster sculpts, drawing anime etc because they think it's going to either be easier or they wont have to study the fundamentals. I can pretty much guarantee you the best anime artists out there can probably draw an extremely anatomically correct figure drawing that looks amazing. but beginner artists try and avoid the hard work and use "thats how i want it to look, it's not supposed to be realistic" as a crutch to shield their ego and deflect comment and crits, I see it all day on twitter from people who claim "it's just my art style" and then 2 posts later complain they are a broke starving artist or are opening their commissions for 5 bucks a piece (you can't live on that...).
so do you have to re-create reality? hell no! but having an understanding of what makes things grounded in reality and look visually appealing due to the fundamentals of art should be top of the list for anyone wanting to make a living in a production environment. if you think reality is boring, go watch some deep sea documentaries and look at the crazy complex organisms in our oceans, with the most intricate designs in their biology from millions of years of evolution. most people couldn't come up with something half as interesting. nature is often the best designer. just look at some of the insane landscapes and biomes we have here on earth, some rival most fantasy concept paintings.