[Showcase] Updated older artwork and curated Portfolio for 2025

NikhilR

Here's my updated artwork for 2025 with improved lighting setup, materials and presentation.

I will be posting comparisons between older versions and the latest version to demonstrate the value in revisting older work with an iterative approach to reformation and curation.

Many times artists are recommended to abandon older work.
I feel that this approach goes against how game artists work in studio creating artwork through iteration and feedback, applying new knowledge and skillsets to showcase process and demonstrate organic growth in their chosen medium.

(The last two pieces have not been updated and my professional work is maintained as is.
The Tarzan piece was retired for a long time until this update, and the dog is in process for an update!)

My updated portfolio - https://www.artstation.com/nikhilr

A resource I used to learn lighting:
https://80.lv/articles/creating-a-bat-like-creature-in-zbrush-marmoset-toolbag

sketchem

Probably what people have told you before, you need to focus on composition and the fundamentals. For example, your Zhou Yu piece is very flat and static. The pose isn't dynamic, it almost looks like a simple t-pose. You muddied the thumbnails for your Paprika works by introducing a noisy background. You tried to fix it by putting a color highlight around the character, but this reduces contrast between the colored character and the non-colored background.

I don't think your images are exposed correctly. Or your fill lights are too bright. You need a little core shadow to help boost the form. Also be careful about using backgrounds from the media the characters are from if you aren't doing the same lighting. Some of your backgrounds have different lighting than the characters! This creates a disharmony and takes away from the composition.

NikhilR

icegodofhungary said:

Probably what people have told you before, you need to focus on composition and the fundamentals. For example, your Zhou Yu piece is very flat and static. The pose isn't dynamic, it almost looks like a simple t-pose. You muddied the thumbnails for your Paprika works by introducing a noisy background. You tried to fix it by putting a color highlight around the character, but this reduces contrast between the colored character and the non-colored background.

I don't think your images are exposed correctly. Or your fill lights are too bright. You need a little core shadow to help boost the form. Also be careful about using backgrounds from the media the characters are from if you aren't doing the same lighting. Some of your backgrounds have different lighting than the characters! This creates a disharmony and takes away from the composition.

Thanks!
I haven't received any feedback yet, so this is the first.

The posing for zhou yu is more in line with his character in the film. (general giving orders)

There is one fight scene in the movie, and I do want to make a horse for him to ride and pose with.
What kind of pose would you recommend?

With this pose, I wanted to highlight the armor and accessories
A more dynamic pose would sell the character more when it comes to first impressions, I assumed studios would look at the complete presentation so maybe a more functional pose would suffice.
I've also added a full walking animation to show that the character is ready for animation. 

Do you feel there sufficient information coming across with his current complete presentation for the kind of work I'd have to do at a studio?
At my previous roles I mostly made character heads and hair and character proportioning. 
Any posing for cinematic/animation work was done by the animation team which used a combination of motion tracking and a universal rigging system.
The poses were provided by the engine and we would set the characters up to make sure there was no clipping issues.

I've removed the backgrounds from the paprika pieces, need to learn more about what background setup would work best but the solid color seems to work so far.
I think my sky light was dominating the shadows in the scene, Here's what it looks like turned off and some additional tweaking of the other lights.

 



About the background lighting not matching up, down the line I want to make background sets for a diorama presentation that should resolve those issues.

Fabi_G

Many times artists are recommended to abandon older work.

For me, the main argument for abandoning older work, is not spending more time polishing something that's fundamentally flawed (no amount of paint can cover it up) and instead apply learnings to an all new project.

Honestly, I think this applies to you're portfolio too. Re-lighting won't fix issues that were introduced at the high poly stage. Some shapes are too blobby/ undefined (hair), some likenesses are not hitting the mark for me, some older works feature wild topology. If you wanted keep those characters, I think you would have to thoroughly asses where they fell short and then probably start at the base, basically reworking the whole thing. At that point you could as well start something new and fresh.

When creating a stylized work, an option would be to adapt an existing games' art-style, to show that you're able to identify and apply it.

I don't think removing old work entirely is neccessary, but I would certainly put the best works into focus. Old stuff could be in a separate section. I believe the work one selects to show, can give an idea of someone's decision-making and the self-assessment of their work.

Good luck! 

NikhilR

Fabi_G said:

Many times artists are recommended to abandon older work.

For me, the main argument for abandoning older work, is not spending more time polishing something that's fundamentally flawed (no amount of paint can cover it up) and instead apply learnings to an all new project.

Honestly, I think this applies to you're portfolio too. Re-lighting won't fix issues that were introduced at the high poly stage. Some shapes are too blobby/ undefined (hair), some likenesses are not hitting the mark for me, some older works feature wild topology. If you wanted keep those characters, I think you would have to thoroughly asses where they fell short and then probably start at the base, basically reworking the whole thing. At that point you could as well start something new and fresh.

When creating a stylized work, an option would be to adapt an existing games' art-style, to show that you're able to identify and apply it.

I don't think removing old work entirely is neccessary, but I would certainly put the best works into focus. Old stuff could be in a separate section. I believe the work one selects to show, can give an idea of someone's decision-making and the self-assessment of their work.

Good luck! 

Thanks!

I do want to add more stylized pieces that don't have the issues of the older works. 
Also all the stylized pieces are interpretations vs the realistic ones where I tried to be as accurate as possible, and my professional work has been in realism as well, so it makes sense how my career in the industry is shaping up.

WIll be sure to emphasize an exisiting game art style to any interpretations in the future, this should make it easier to design and create. 

So far when I apply to studios I always send them an artstation link pointing to the realistic characters or stylized characters depending on if the job is for realistic or stylized work.

Its possible that the stylized peices aren't resonating with studios hiring for stylized works because I didn't make them match the studios art style or a specific piece of concept art, at the time I was looking to explore my own style but communicating this has had mixed results, though I've specified that it is my own interpretation.

For example I get a lot of inquiries about the Huey model and if its for sale, everything from VR chat avatars to 3D prints, but I haven't received the same demand for the other stylized models.
Theres been no feedback from studios on my portfolio, I received some feedback for lighting models from Mike Moore which I applied here.
This process did help me get more comfortable with sculpting freely which translated over better to the realistic pieces.

One other question I had was that if I have shown process and techincal side in multiple peices, would it be alright to make more finished sculpts seeing that I've worked in the industry and have experience in AAA.

I've seen many artists with my profile do this, they have a few pieces demonstrating process and then they just make and render posed sculpts.

This artist for example,
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/Jv0n9A
She's used this technique 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQl4CYJJ-IA

that doesn't really translate over to game dev work, but maybe shows artistic potential? It does get her a lot of likes on artstation and linkedin so atleast in that sense its helping in visibility. 

Throughout hiring for my portfolio, the technical aspect has always been appreciated, but any criticism besides lighting and presentation has mostly been subjective for the stylized pieces.
With this update I wanted to showcase improvement on the lighting and materials.

I do feel it helps to revisit older pieces to make improvements on different aspects, in studio for example we do this regularly since we update many older models for new game releases.

Rima

I realise I'm in little position to talk, but.....To be blunt, the differences between the 2018 version and the 2025 version are superficial as fuck. You can light it better, but I don't really think the biggest problems are with the lighting, as stated.

NikhilR

Rima said:

I realise I'm in little position to talk, but.....To be blunt, the differences between the 2018 version and the 2025 version are superficial as fuck. You can light it better, but I don't really think the biggest problems are with the lighting, as stated.

I may rework the character model geometry in the future, at the moment I just wanted to focus on the lighting.

I felt that the 2018 model was very poorly lit with the materials not being defined (like subsurface) and little to no definition of the form, shape and details.
By adding some rim lights and reworking the material, I felt the latest iteration looks fuller and stands out more.

Eric Chadwick

I would suggest simply removing the weak pieces, Star Trek and Paprika and Chibi Logan, as they only serve to pull down the whole portfolio. 

Unfairly or not, a portfolio is often judged the most by the weakest works.

Also a couple of the FIFA optimizations don't match the references shown below them, if you don't have the original refs to show then remove those examples.

NikhilR

Eric Chadwick said:

I would suggest simply removing the weak pieces, Star Trek and Paprika and Chibi Logan, as they only serve to pull down the whole portfolio. 

Unfairly or not, a portfolio is often judged the most by the weakest works.

Also a couple of the FIFA optimizations don't match the references shown below them, if you don't have the original refs to show then remove those examples.

Thanks! Do you mean both the star trek models (Khan and Ro Laren?)
With paprika I'll like to try an update to the geometry at some point, I could set those aside as I work on them.
Not sure if chibi logan's weaknesses have to do with detail, its built in the nendoroid style so they usually lack detail.

The main issue is that as far as the stylized pieces, they don't have references and all were done as interpretations so I've had every piece being called weakest or strongest or in between at some point.
Interpretations are difficult to judge, I'd asked about them when I was hired twice at EA and both times I was told that assessing them didn't take priority though the fact that they were stylized and the job was for realism was also possibly a factor in this.

I should add a piece done accurate to a reference (like the little mermaid sculpts) which might help there. 

The FIFA bit is an issue and I'm seeing what I can do about them since I don't have access to that content to revise it.

Come to think about it, those pieces don't stand up visually to my realistic peices now after I updated the lighting, but I was told internally that as professional work I should display it anyway regardless of the quality.
Kinda like a recruiter would see that and not care too much about my personal work unless they need to, but maybe this approach would apply to some studios and not all.