Rant on new artists, and what they should do.
polycounter lvl 18
or what I THINK they should do. the subject line wasn't that long hahah
i've been thinking about this lately, and figgure i might as well make a post.
lately i've been trying to post some replies to people in the P&P, but i haven't been doing it as regularly as i used to. i found kind of a strange thing after becoming a better modeler.. and that is, that i really don't have much to say to someone who posts an anatomicaly mangled model on polycount. its not that i have contempt or don't want to give them crits, it's that i just don't know what to say.
and i think that a lot of people would agree with me, because when i see a bad model posted, aside from a few of you great guys that always give feedback (mop, for example) the thred gets replied to by a bunch of new modelers.
i don't know what to say, other than "start over, get reference, do a good job" which sounds totaly heartless, but let me explain.
i just went through the VFS 3d animation and visual effects program. i'm a bit of a special case, because i've been modeling for a while before vfs. when i got to vfs, my work instantly improved ten fold. I did have a good teacher, but i dont know if that's the reason... the reason is that it's an environment in which you're BITCHED AT if your not modeling something with more than 2 pieces of reference all the damn time, and where only the best quality of work is apprecieated.
when i look back at the way i used to model, i'd just sit down and pull points in a care free manner. i'd get an anatomy sheet and rotoscope it for proportions, but i still wasn't forcing myself to make something look perfect before i continued on.
so what can i say when i see a model that's totaly anatomicaly wrong, and who's form and shape is wrong.. go get some damn reference and make it look perfect. don't model something out of your head to start with. go get a whole shit load of anatomy reference and model a human or something. and when your make a human, do it high poly, and don't stop untill the thing you're modeling looks FUCKING PERFECT and you can't tell the diference between the reference and the model- that's your job as a modeler- to take a peice of concept and re-create it in 3d perfectly.
i know it sounds stupid for me to say "oh.. you can't model well? well just MODEL WELL!" but in a way, i think it's the truth. when i wasn't so good, i dont think i was really taking the time to just focus on a bicep, for example, and get the shape perfect. i'm not saying that when you do this, your stuff is going to be perfect, but it's sure going to be a hell of a lot better.
does this make any sense? i think the problem with new artists isn't that they don't understand this magical thing called "form" or "FLOOOOWWW" but when they model something like an arm, they don't get a GOD DAMN ANATOMY BOOK and make the muscles flow into each other correctly from every angle. when you do that you start understanding form.. how shapes move into each other, and you start doing it in your free-hand models too. some people preach endlessly on understanding this concept of mesh flow and form and blah blah fucking blah. get reference and match your model to it. do it untill you get it perfect and your brain will be forced into understanding form.
the obvious hurdle is topology, of course. while i think that there's lots of great tutorials out there, i'm really thinking of sitting down and making a workflow tutorial. that is, pre-planning stage, a rant about how i work, the method that i use, and a step by step method along with my thought process. i'm a tad buisy.. but maybe i'll find a way of doing it in the next little while.
anyway. what do you all think of this point of view?
am i just an asshole who can't spell?
i've been thinking about this lately, and figgure i might as well make a post.
lately i've been trying to post some replies to people in the P&P, but i haven't been doing it as regularly as i used to. i found kind of a strange thing after becoming a better modeler.. and that is, that i really don't have much to say to someone who posts an anatomicaly mangled model on polycount. its not that i have contempt or don't want to give them crits, it's that i just don't know what to say.
and i think that a lot of people would agree with me, because when i see a bad model posted, aside from a few of you great guys that always give feedback (mop, for example) the thred gets replied to by a bunch of new modelers.
i don't know what to say, other than "start over, get reference, do a good job" which sounds totaly heartless, but let me explain.
i just went through the VFS 3d animation and visual effects program. i'm a bit of a special case, because i've been modeling for a while before vfs. when i got to vfs, my work instantly improved ten fold. I did have a good teacher, but i dont know if that's the reason... the reason is that it's an environment in which you're BITCHED AT if your not modeling something with more than 2 pieces of reference all the damn time, and where only the best quality of work is apprecieated.
when i look back at the way i used to model, i'd just sit down and pull points in a care free manner. i'd get an anatomy sheet and rotoscope it for proportions, but i still wasn't forcing myself to make something look perfect before i continued on.
so what can i say when i see a model that's totaly anatomicaly wrong, and who's form and shape is wrong.. go get some damn reference and make it look perfect. don't model something out of your head to start with. go get a whole shit load of anatomy reference and model a human or something. and when your make a human, do it high poly, and don't stop untill the thing you're modeling looks FUCKING PERFECT and you can't tell the diference between the reference and the model- that's your job as a modeler- to take a peice of concept and re-create it in 3d perfectly.
i know it sounds stupid for me to say "oh.. you can't model well? well just MODEL WELL!" but in a way, i think it's the truth. when i wasn't so good, i dont think i was really taking the time to just focus on a bicep, for example, and get the shape perfect. i'm not saying that when you do this, your stuff is going to be perfect, but it's sure going to be a hell of a lot better.
does this make any sense? i think the problem with new artists isn't that they don't understand this magical thing called "form" or "FLOOOOWWW" but when they model something like an arm, they don't get a GOD DAMN ANATOMY BOOK and make the muscles flow into each other correctly from every angle. when you do that you start understanding form.. how shapes move into each other, and you start doing it in your free-hand models too. some people preach endlessly on understanding this concept of mesh flow and form and blah blah fucking blah. get reference and match your model to it. do it untill you get it perfect and your brain will be forced into understanding form.
the obvious hurdle is topology, of course. while i think that there's lots of great tutorials out there, i'm really thinking of sitting down and making a workflow tutorial. that is, pre-planning stage, a rant about how i work, the method that i use, and a step by step method along with my thought process. i'm a tad buisy.. but maybe i'll find a way of doing it in the next little while.
anyway. what do you all think of this point of view?
am i just an asshole who can't spell?
Replies
Lotsa beginners I've seen think using references are silly, hell I was helping a friend who refused to use character sheets and modeled only using perspective view (I wanted to bash his stubborn face in, but thats another story).
Personally I learned how to do the topology for a head and such through making a head, tweaking it alot, then starting from scratch, after a few heads I got something I liked.
In general, before even attempting to model I would suggest getting a good grip on anatomy generally the modelers who can show really good organic modeling can draw a person quite well. There are exceptions to the rule but regardless if you don't know the human form and understand its form your model won't be that great either...
RageUnleashed is right - people who know anatomy, are guaranteed to be better character modellers than people who don't. Likewise, people who know how guns are constructed and how they operate, will be better weapons modellers than if they just looked at an image of a pistol.
To know a subject inside out is more than just looking at a few references, and too many people (myself included!) like to jump straight in to get "results" after doing a half-assed attempt at research and reference.
If you really KNOW the thing you're trying to represent, whether it be traditionally, or in a 3d model or texture, then you will be able to define it that much better. Even knowing the internal structure, things you don't see from the outside, is often vital to constructing an image or a model, in order to get believability.
Yeah, or something. John, I'm not sure if the intent of modelling is "to take a piece of concept and re-create it in 3d perfectly." - I think it's more a case of interpretation. If everyone interpreted reference or concept in exactly the same way (ie. technically "perfectly"), then there'd be no diversity in modelling or art. It's more than just re-creation of a reference or a concept, it's taking it and making it something MORE than the sum of it's parts. If that's at all possible.
MoP
theres all kinds of degree of talent and ability and there will always be someone who makes you look just as much a noob as those you consider noobs.... and so on , and on and on.
at the end of the day, the boards are just for ego strokes , popularity contests and some lunchtime eyecandy.
90% of the opinions expressed on any board are just people who know a little trying to pretend they know a lot and commenting on shit just to comment on shit and inflate their own sense of self worth publicly.
Or at least, thats how it eventually appears to most of us after we've spent enough time on the boards.
at the end of the day, the boards are just for ego strokes , popularity contests and some lunchtime eyecandy.
90% of the opinions expressed on any board are just people who know a little trying to pretend they know a lot and commenting on shit just to comment on shit and inflate their own sense of self worth publicly.
[/ QUOTE ]
couldn't agree more. which fills me with self doubt
mop, yah, i see what you mean. I've always been told that deciding what a concept is going to look like is up to the art division entirely (in a big company, like a visual effects house) but i guess that yes, there's going to be a flavor of the artist in the finished work, just because of the way he represents those shapes that the concept is made out of.
either way. i used to think you learn alot more by doing something crappy and then re-doing it. i don't think so anymore. if you do something quick and crappy the first time, what's going to stop you from doing just as quick a job the seccond time around?
IMHO you learn faster if you do a model see its shit, understand (or least try to understand) what you did wrong and start over. Its usually much faster to make new rather than make bread out of shit.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to agree. This is one of the dangers of the digital age, when anything can be undone, painted over, or remodeled. There comes a point where you lose perspective on the whole thing, and from there on there's little progress to be made.
[ QUOTE ]
90% of the opinions expressed on any board are just people who know a little trying to pretend they know a lot and commenting on shit just to comment on shit and inflate their own sense of self worth publicly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ouch
-Are bound to be mentioned by someone else
-Are to complicated to explain and reqires so much premliminary explanination of established and classical concepts that it would sound condecending or off-topic
-Usually my advice falls on fllow ground cuz people *ahem* are looking for "but, uhhh, it's good right?"
I hear this this often:
"you should be excited for me, look how much better I've got!"
-R
When you come back to that piece of art, you can modify out the shitty stuff you had been unable to see before because you either had tunnel vision or you were simply burned out on it.
This way, you are your own messageboard, except you are a board that understands wtf you were trying to do and will not bullshit yourself with fancy words to impress yourself.
If something sucks, you can take the harsh critique from yourself because you understand your own motivations.
I've noticed that a lot of good artists you never see posting on boards work this way.
Maybe that is arrogance, but if you try to respond to everyones wants on a board you just end up with generic shite that pleases others more than yourself and thats what your professional work is for heh
PaK-your right. 99% of internet forum posts are just people requesting complements or fanboys posting bullshit. i've learned a lot from online communities, but really not much from posting my work and having it critiqued.
ror- agreed, i guess if you're the right kind of person, you'll give the best crits yourself. i still think it's important, however, to get other artist's feedback on your work. certainly my style has been totaly influenced by other's work and their comments on my work (some might have you know that i never had a style to begin with hehe)
i know some people that are just too damn pig-headed to think that their work needs any improvement. screw them i guess, huh? :S
i guess another problem with the internet forums are, like you said, ror, that they're filled with idiots, and even if you post something meaningful, it'll be challenged by some guy that sucks anyway.
Many artists I've met are just so damn cautious that I can't get anywhere near the truth so its often worthless when I get feedback from them as I don't take on board much from someone who assumes I have an ego and pussyfoots around me.
And then at the other end of the extreme are the boards where noone really knows the other people and says things sharply and abruptly and it all gets misread.
With those alternatives, its mostly ourselves we end up needing to rely upon.
If theres 20 people replying to a post I make and 19 are kissing my arse and 1 person is suggesting I might need to make some change, I just hear 1 person saying i suck.
I can only focus on the negative it seems, I have trouble realising the positive things are still there.
So I don't post much anymore
When it comes to my professional work, well I'm mostly not that proud of it and consider myself a hack most of the time so I don't want to listen to someone blow smoke up my ass and in the pro environment, artists are all too aware of how people can hold a grudge if they express too much truth I suspect.
All I am sure of is that the best thing about my art, is when I finish it and show it to myself.
The worst thing about my art is when I share it with others and realise that they will always read it the wrong way ( well 99% of the time ).
So I try not to rely on many people's input.
That said, we can all learn a lot about ourselves based upon others viewpoint of us. Other artists can be a mirror for seeing ourselves more clearly.
I guess sooner or later we have to spin the wheel eh?
Yes, it's true that often if you listened to everyone's crits and acted on them, on the forum - you will end up with a mass-market crowd pleaser that may not please yourself...
But from time to time someone will pop up with a really cool suggestion that you might never have thought of in a hundred years, and when you learn to incorporate this style or idea into your work, you can come up with something fresh.
I believe it always helps to get an outside source's input into something, even personal stuff, because often they will see what you have missed (especially if it's a blind spot in your own work, that you keep making the same mistake over and over, but never notice it).
You think?
These days I increasingly leave my stuff for a while then come back to it later with a new outlook though, and it does help. But equally some of the best twists and ideas for some of the work I do comes from suggestions from others - just their way of working and thinking is so different that you're bound to come up with new ideas much more rapidly. Then again, that might just be my lack of creativity.
MoP
at the end of the day, the boards are just for ego strokes , popularity contests and some lunchtime eyecandy.
90% of the opinions expressed on any board are just people who know a little trying to pretend they know a lot and commenting on shit just to comment on shit and inflate their own sense of self worth publicly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Heh, then Rorshach.. whats that say about you posting here???
Ok, ok.. On subject. All you can do is give critiques. How the artist responds is their own initiative.
Personally, I have found I never got alot of responses here vs other boards (like cgtalk). Also critiques usually ended up focusing on a area that wasn't finished versus the areas I was after help with.
But I have to give Kudos out to Gauss.. great critiquer. He even tells you the stuff you dont want to hear. Which once you accept, helps further the idea along.
BTW I always use references. And I must say your speal John about VFS is coming off a little "uppitty". Maybe its the way im interpreting it. All I can tell you is I am too much of a perfectionist in my own work, which usually means it takes me 3 times as long.
I think Mr. Steed had the right attitude. Get it done, get on to the next model. Versus mine with "Wait, that vertices needs to move over, oh no, now I have to redo the texture map".
oXYnary: Maybe I'm visiting the wrong threads on CGTalk, then - nearly all the threads I read over there are mainly 1-line responses saying "That's awesome!" or "I don't like it", without much, if any, qualification.
Gauss is the master critiquer! Fortunately he can also take it as well as give it! There are many who can't!
Personally I always try to help as much as possible, be it with design (not a strong point of mine), technical approaches, style or proportion... I tend to crit everything if someone posts it, because if they say some areas are unfinished, you can point out early mistakes (if there are any). Just in case the artist is not aware of them, it's easier to catch a problem area before it is detailed, painted, textured, whatever. Saves time later, saves having to say: "By the way, that foot which wasn't finished before and is now? It's still totally too big."
Ya know?
Oxy: it says that like every other artist ( to some extent or another) I am insecure about my work.
I have to take the opposite tack here.
I feel that the boards are an invaluable source of inspiration, and motivation for me personally.
I remember 1 thing that someone here said that helped me fundamentally as an artist.
He said "...I just put hard edges against soft ones."
For some reason that crystalized a basic concept in my mind.
For somebody like myself who's never stepped foot in an art school or college, it was a revelation. That lit a spark in my brain.That happens on a regular basis here.
There have been several occasions where I posted work, and got a comment/critique that I wouldn't ordinarily have thought of on my own.
I also do what you suggest, let work sit for a few weeks before revisiting it.
Yes, I see many new problems and improvments, but this is not a wholesale replacement of outside observations.
As for posting comments to "boost ones ego" or to "pretend you know more than you really do" thats downright insulting, and pretty untrue I feel. You, being the psuedo psychologist, can appreciate that one may very well project their own feelings onto others.
I try to help others because I like helping people #1, and if they are a "lower level artist" or "equal", whatever those mean, then I've been there and understand the possible frustration on a project where despite your current best efforts, its just not coming out.
Even if all we provide is some modest encouragment...what is so wrong with that? Everybody should be encouraged in thier artistic endeavors, even if they arent good "yet".
This isn't Art-Boot-Camp.
As for being "guarded" or "cautious", I think everybody every second of the day, every sentance they speak measures what they say to a degree. It's just called tact. There is a fine line between being rude and being honest.
You can't criticize a fault without being insulting.
You can't suggest an improvement with being underqualified to do so.
You can't comment on a technique without trying to show off.
You can't give an honest reaction without making enemies.
You can't give a dishonest reaction without being a careless dick.
You can't teach a method that isn't flawed and inefficient.
You can't trust feedback because none of it is what you're looking for.
You can't rely on yourself because, guess what, you suck too.
The truth is out now.
Polycount is all a lie.
Seppuku is the only solution.
Scoobt doofus I would have to disagree on many points in that coddling the artist rarely produces improvement. Art boot Camp would not be a bad idea. and it's something i am some others I know, painters mostly, think about often. Self esteem is something to be trashed and shat upon and broken, beofre it is to be remolded into artistic excellence. Not coddled like the schools attempt to do by squelching competition and standards today.
[ QUOTE ]
Many artists I've met are just so damn cautious that I can't get anywhere near the truth so its often worthless when I get feedback from them as I don't take on board much from someone who assumes I have an ego and pussyfoots around me.
[/ QUOTE ]
listen to Rorshach, as he knows. Someone who will become great is the one that searches and fined the honest critique, even if it is negative, and can onbtain useful information from it, without regard to ego or take things personally. if you still feel "stung" but someone saying that a model or work of art isn't very good, then you need to develop a thicker skin, not to rage against the injustices of the Philistines. many people who aren't themselves good, can, because of knowledge or familiarity through other disciplines, can indeed spot anatomy errors and mistakes when one has departed from the reference.
I do very little without a lot of reference, even if it means drawing my own.
Scott
BTW I always use references. And I must say your speal John about VFS is coming off a little "uppitty". Maybe its the way im interpreting it. All I can tell you is I am too much of a perfectionist in my own work, which usually means it takes me 3 times as long.
[/ QUOTE ]
ah! please don't think that that's what i was trying to say.
if anything i was trying to implement that school doesn't mean SHIT and it's just the attitude that the work environment enforces. i don't feal uppity because of vfs. the point of this post was to was to state that the only thing that's really good about vfs is the work environment, and the effects of which can be replicated anywhere. if anything that means vfs is not of worth.
John however was talking about reaching a point with his art where he felt could no longer really be helpful to people below a certain ability and I discussed the reasons why I thought that might be for him.
I can appreciate that you think I'm being insulting, I expect you think I accusing people of deliberatly trying to be egotistical on the boards. Thats not strictly true for all though.
Take this thread for example. I was having a conversation directly with John and then Mop; you came along later and took offense at your reading of my viewpoint and now I have to be more elaborate than I was previously to explain it to you.
Thats the same trend in the art threads, it leads to one up man ship, it is the nature of messageboards to passively
enforce this method of communication.
It's because of this that many stylish or slightly more daring designs that get shown here get homogenized by the hize mind and I don't agree with that and the longer you spend on the boards and the greater your skill becomes, the more you will agree with me I suspect.
Would we have encouraged Giger had he been one of our number? I reckon we would have complimented his rendering technique and belitted his choice of subject matter ' you should define your forms more giger, I can't tell if you are drawing a spine or a cock'.
You have to dare to be different I think. I don't mean you have to belittle others work, but certainly you need to confidence to seperate your set of ethics from others and be free to find your own ground.
The best artists I've met in the industry never pimp on boards. I've had those I respect most warn me not to hang out on boards or question why I still feel the need to hang out on them because in their opinion there is no surer way to lose my own style.
Perhaps this sounds even more insulting to you. If so , fair enough, thats your right.
Your explanation of the difference between being tactful and
being guarded are not necessary, I'm long enough in the tooth to understand the difference without others aid.
Scott: Good to hear someone older than myself being even more sure of the point I was making being true.
All that stuff about ' be to my faults a little blind, be to my strengths very kind ' is useless when it comes to growing as an adult or an artist.
Look, there are all levels of artists on this board. Not everyone is professional, not everyone even wants to be, and not everyone has the time and money to go to some art school to learn technique, which in my opinion is only a small part of the equation anyway.
If you are modeling someone else's concept and trying to be 100% true to that, are you even an artist? In my book that makes someone a "reproducer", or an "integrator". Much more mechanized than a true artist.
This website began with people making ppm's for Quake 2 if I recall correctly. It has grown and is much more than that now. There is everything from game models, to hi-poly renderings, to 2d art, sketches, abstract, whatever. It's very diverse. Not everyone here is going to see eye to eye on certain things, and not everyone has the skill to make a hi-poly, normal mapped model, and frankly, not everyone ever cares too. That doesn't make them any less of an artist. Art is not "learned".
This site has been an invaluable tool for me. When I see certain things, it drives me to get better. When someone critiques me it helps me improve my next model, or that one if I can fix it. It's all a great learning experience, and it's great to see what other people are working on, isn't it? That's what drives everyone to improve in reality. Their own self doubt created by seeing that one "awesome" model or skin, and trying to take it to that level.
Now as far as coddling, fanboy posting, that really helps no one, and there's certainly plenty of that going on here and everywhere. Nor does completely trashing someone's work either. Constructive criticism is the way to go if you want to help someone. If you don't want to take the time to do it, that is fine too.
I guess what I am trying to say in this jumble of thoughts is...hell I can't remember...but maybe the term "artist" gets thrown around a bit too loosely.
I don't think anyone tells Brom his legs are too long
I've been told numerous times when I've shown art teachers concept sketches of monsters, and non-human characters that the proportions are off and should be changed. Well...they are off because I made them off, on purpose, because its part of the character.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two items with this. the first one is that this arguement can be boiled down to "it's my Style", to deflect criticism. and the Second, for whom are thesze models created, for you, or for your paycheck?
As to the first item, on the board that I moderate, your arguement or defense is taken as an invalid tack. You are encouraged to learn the anatomy, the fundamentals of proportion, anatomy, light and shadow, perspective, color, light and snadow, and composition. for figurative work, the fundamentals of Gesture, construction, anatomy, and technique are to be learned,and eventually mastered. it is better to know the rules and choose which onesto break for heightened effect, rather than to ignore them for some naif "style" which usually means a seriens of shortcuts and appropriations of other peoples styles, without the basic understqanding of the decisions made to render things that way. Most of the westerners that have come across the other forum, who draw in a manga fashion, usually only duplicate the surface, and never understand the underlying principles of anatomy, and the Japanese faithfullness to perspective, and the worshipful treatment of their reference material. Two artists may draw a very similar Anime style girl, but one of then will bother to put her in a background, or sitting on a cute Motorbike, while the second artist may place her ina dull pose, with a background of [atterend screen tone. dollars to donuts, the first artist is Japanese, and the second is an American Fanboy. Daz is as good as he is, because he has studied the figure, the face, and his references. he even asks for further references if he is unsure about something, and as a result, he does jaw droppingly beautiful work, with very close likenmesses. Even if you are doing an alien creature, it pays to know various anatomies, human and animal, so that the creature not only looks alien, but plausible as well, like it could actually eat, sleep, walk, breath, procreate, and raise it's young, and stand near a realistic human model and not look, cheap, fake, or out of place.
the second issue I can give recent personal experience. for a level in our current project, we were given the task of concepting some monsters, and then those concepts would be given to the modelers to make. The bosses liked mine, but didn't think the design was "pushed" far enough. so they handed my sketch off to the main concept guy, and he changed the proportions and some of the general shapes and made the head huge. they then sent the new drawing back to me to model. when I started modelling, in a relaxed pose, the model had a body based off a "real " animal, so that skeletons building and rigging would be easy. I tacked on a large head and proceeded to bone and rig the model. The Art Director was a tad worried, but noted why I did what I did, but warned me that the higher ups may not be pleased. I shrugged, and said that the personality would be in the animation...
In short. I was in error. The president and Vice president saw the model in animation and were disappointed. it looked nothing like the concept art, and that is what they wanted. Their disappointment endedup on my yearly employee review, and that had a monetary effect. I have learned this lesson, and you should too. There is a reason they make concept art, and it is that it is to be followed, to the line. There is a stage for creativity, and designing, but that is usually done on paper, and many designs can be tried, but once one is picked out, that's exactly what they want, and only technical obstacles are valid reasons for any deviation from the design. Oh, and comic Book Inkers aren't tracers either.
However back on the subject of this thread. In general don't give critiques unless you are asked. it keeps things polite. for the artists, don't ask for critiques unless you ewant the unvarnished truth, the bad as well as the good. Let the less new, help the new, because theyare closer equivalent and skill, and wil have a shorter explanation to give. Knock down one error at a time, then. Don't knock art school, unless they are useless bags of skin and teach nothing but crafts, and abstract expressionism. Real drawing skills , or scultpting skills are necessary for success. And then if and when you model, think to yourself, is this a Hobby, or is it a possible career? because if it's a career, you need to start acting like a professional, and throw the ego away.
Scott
Illusions: There are times which you must buckle down and realize that these people are trying to help you. If they're telling you "this muscle looks wrong" or "his legs are too long" then you have, in fact, failed at the look you were going for. I don't think anyone tells Brom his legs are too long
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, those comments are fine, I'm talking about ones like these: "Increase the head size by 15-20%, he's taller than 8 heads high", or "Shorten the arms, they should be at mid-thigh, not knee"...
Originally posted by Scott Rugels
Two items with this. the first one is that this arguement can be boiled down to "it's my Style", to deflect criticism. and the Second, for whom are thesze models created, for you, or for your paycheck?
As to the first item, on the board that I moderate, your arguement or defense is taken as an invalid tack. You are encouraged to learn the anatomy, the fundamentals of proportion, anatomy, light and shadow, perspective, color, light and snadow, and composition. for figurative work, the fundamentals of Gesture, construction, anatomy, and technique are to be learned,and eventually mastered. it is better to know the rules and choose which onesto break for heightened effect, rather than to ignore them for some naif "style" which usually means a seriens of shortcuts and appropriations of other peoples styles, without the basic understqanding of the decisions made to render things that way.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Originally posted by Illusions
Perhaps if I'm doing a demon, or in the case of my Elemental, I want something to look forboding and ominous, and its not human, I will usually do it above the standard 6-8 head count, usually in a range of 10-13. Why? Because it achieves the goal, it makes the character look menacing, evil, and ominous.
Base knowledge is good and all, but its just that, a base to build off of. It doesn't mean that every character you do should have perfect anatomy according to guides or whatever, because once you start thinking that way its hard to visualize outside of it. It only means that you have the knowledge to extend what you can do, and in the case where you have to rely upon it (like making realistic human characters, etc), that you can. Reference is also necessary, but again, only as a stepping stone...
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok...perhaps I have two complaints...the first already stated, and the second being that some of the "veterans" automatically assume the new people don't know jack and need to be told what they should know...
Scott
Okay, okay. true, but then it's not about you. it's about those paying you for you to make what they want. If you don't make what they want they will find someone else to make what they want. This is the definition of a job, or even a "comission".
Scott
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah that part sucks and all with the limited creativity factor, but outside the paying world, where you're doing art for pleasure as well, standardization should not limit creativity. Like big-breasted chicks in body armor, wielding guns twice the size of their bodies, super-realistic looking human beings, and such are nice and all, but it gets repetitive when its done for pleasure...why not experiment and such?
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, okay. true, but then it's not about you. it's about those paying you for you to make what they want. If you don't make what they want they will find someone else to make what they want. This is the definition of a job, or even a "comission".
Scott
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah that part sucks and all with the limited creativity factor, but outside the paying world, where you're doing art for pleasure as well, standardization should not limit creativity. Like big-breasted chicks in body armor, wielding guns twice the size of their bodies, super-realistic looking human beings, and such are nice and all, but it gets repetitive when its done for pleasure...why not experiment and such?
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand what you are saying. Basic anatomy and proportions are important, but...in the real world, humans don't all have the same proportions. Not even close. I think this is one thing about the game industry that really bothers the hell out of me. All these "perfect" humans running around in games.
I hear what Scott is saying too though. Part of creating "stylized" characters is understanding which parts of the anatomy to alter so that it looks pleasing.
Man, I am so glad I am a programmer in real life
If I were to change careers to making models, I am very sure that I would no longer enjoy doing it. That's not a knock on the pros here. More power to ya. It's not because of criticism, I can take as much as anyone, but I think it's more on constraints and pressures.
I think this is one thing about the game industry that really bothers the hell out of me. All these "perfect" humans running around in games.
[/ QUOTE ]
Amen brother, can we at least see a main character with a zit?
You can't complement someone's work without stroking their ego.
You can't criticize a fault without being insulting.
You can't suggest an improvement with being underqualified to do so.
You can't comment on a technique without trying to show off.
You can't give an honest reaction without making enemies.
You can't give a dishonest reaction without being a careless dick.
You can't teach a method that isn't flawed and inefficient.
You can't trust feedback because none of it is what you're looking for.
You can't rely on yourself because, guess what, you suck too.
The truth is out now.
Polycount is all a lie.
Seppuku is the only solution.
[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed.
I think I have boiled down the difference in our opinions and at least part of the reason for it.
You work at a video game company. You are submersed in an environment where you have real-time communication with professional artists on a daily basis. What you do, you can and do show to them. (whether its work art, or possibly personal art).
You get your feedback from interested like minded parties.
I on the other hand dont. I know nearly 0 artists in person. My roomate doodles figures maybe once a month. Thats it. So, when I show people my work, all I ever get are the "thats awesome/nice/neat/good/cool" or the "gosh, your a good artist". I never get the "the proportions are off" or "that color scheme isnt working". Its not negativity that I seek, its constructive creative qualified criticism from my peers. I listen to all advice, but Im selective about which I follow.
Boards are my only opportunity to "talk shop" or to learn outside of personal reading and practice.
I dont think I personally allow my art style to be overly influenced by what I see here, but technique is another story. Technique however can lead to a visual difference in ones art. I am more talking about illustrative/technical rendering help versus creative. That is what I find valuable. I dont see myself creeping towards looking like any other artist in particular.
haha i agree. to a certain extent.
nobody wants to see ugly people. maybe it'd make our culture better to see a few (in fact im sure it would) in movies and games but i have a fealing that it woudln't really sell..this is a shame.
this gets back to the idea of having to model to a peice of concept art. it might suck to have to pound out a model in which you have no artistic licence for, but as i'm told, when you work in the industry, in most places, that's your job. it's a simple fact that its easier to conceptualize in 2d, so all the details are fleshed out there. you've got to get used to re-creating something that people will buy. studying anatomy to produce something that's appealing might sound like a shame, but i can't deny the guy fealing in my stomach when i look at something and it's not astheticaly appealing, for what ever reasons.
i think
"Two items with this. the first one is that this arguement can be boiled down to "it's my Style", to deflect criticism. and the Second, for whom are thesze models created, for you, or for your paycheck? "
sums it up fairly well
anyway, don't think i care when things get off topic.. in fact i encourage it, but just because it might not be clear, the point of this thred was to state that in all the cases where i don't respond to a thred with a crappy model, i would say to that person 99% of the time "get alot of reference and model something, high-poly if nessisary, that gets the forms and the details down perfect" and that i think the problem with new modelers is that they aren't spending enough time with stuff like that. maybe i'm wrong.
one more thing-- "Would we have encouraged Giger had he been one of our number? I reckon we would have complimented his rendering technique and belitted his choice of subject matter ' you should define your forms more giger, I can't tell if you are drawing a spine or a cock'. " ror, that's fuckin hilarious hahaha. and totaly true.
as for the way ppl act on the boards , it sorta depends on how new you are to forums , this is the first and pretty much the only board ive ever posted on , i quite often find it hard to accept the validity of some suggestions on how to improve the work i post..
Really if you want to criticise a new guy for his stuff , then go ahead.
It will probably make them think more in the long run. But there again they may just hate you for it.
I like realistic stuff, but am more interested in the creativity in a piece ie what it conveys to the viewer. Technical stuff can be learned( if the person has some basic talent to start with), but you can't teach someone how to be creative.
Personally I think that if a beginners piece is 'really' crap, then you should send them hate mail, or pay someone to go around to their house and smack them up a bit . (That'll learn 'em)
Actually, those comments are fine, I'm talking about ones like these: "Increase the head size by 15-20%, he's taller than 8 heads high", or "Shorten the arms, they should be at mid-thigh, not knee"...
[/ QUOTE ]
Those are exactly the comments I'm talking about. Don't take it as ill-thought out critisizm, instead, just take it as "I am not convinced by your efforts at stylization"
Though I'm not sure just what kind of subjects you're talking about. If you're talking about generally human characters, then yes, most of the "normal human" ideas of anatomy should usually be kept to, even if you're trying to make it abnormally tall and scary. "You must know the rules first in order to break them.". That is because while you may want to give the character an ape look with long arms, you have to do it in a way that convinces the viewer that he's really like that, and not that you don't know anatomy. Because it's easy to come out simply looking wrong instead of scary.
Though as I said, I don't know what your subjects are, or what your art is like. For all I know you could be drawing totally off-the-wall Demons and gremlins-- ones that have reason to break the rules even. You could be doing them well, and your art instructor could be the kind of person who would tell Brom to go back and shorten the legs on his latest painting.
Yet still, that anal artist is one person you have failed to convince with you art. He could have been your boss. Do your talking with a pencil and a mouse.
Hows that for criticism?
[Edit]I can't spell either.[/Edit]
If someone posts a new Q3 model, with custom animations, you're gonna look like an asshole (and make the artist feel like a loser) if you run wildly into the thread and scream "Jeebus, those animations are really lame!".
What people should be doing is saying "This animation is a good start, but needs some work before it will look great. Try making the legs lift higher, and move the pelvis from side to side during the run animation."
That way, the new artist will learn, and more importantly FEEL ENCOURAGED to learn. What Rorshach said earlier is true to an extent, I think, that most artists' natural "competetiveness" will result in them not being quite as helpful, or more critical, than they really have a right to be. They feel uneasy sharing whatever knowledge they have with a potential rival.
Hmm, whatever happened to that thread, "constructive criticism, the nice way" ? Looks like NoSeRider needs a refresher course of it!
On the slightly derailed subject of references for things that don't exist, like aliens or monsters, the best thing to do is to find references that most closely match what you're trying to design, and use them as a starting point. Hell, if you wanna create a really "realistic" yet totally weird alien, think long and hard about the anatomy of it, what limbs it needs, how it breathes, eats or whatever. Then design a skeleton for it, if it even has one. What is the skeleton held together with? Muscle? Is it in a carapace? Draw out ideas for how the creature "works" internally. And only then, start drawing out the final concept. This way you should have a much clearer idea of how your creature functions, and why it looks the way it does, and with a little bit of luck you should have something that looks more realistic and believable than if you'd just rushed into a crazy design with 5 eyes and 6 arms.
Of course not everyone has time to draw anatomy diagrams for things that don't exist, but if you do... go!
MoP
Rorshach, it may be that you're comfortable not posting your work to the boards, because you can get feedback on your stuff anytime you want, on the job. As for me, I have no other way to show what I'm doing in this arena to anyone who would know what they were looking at. I know no one personally who works on this kind of art -- at least I didn't, until the Dallas Sketch Group got going. And it did in large part due to Polycount, and ConceptArt.
Just responding to Ror's and John's initial comments, I agree that responding to obvious beginners isn't always productive. But if you have no other way to show what you're trying to do to people who might care, online forums are the way to make it happen. In the end, they are unsatisfactory as well, but they are worth some of the effort to us rank amateurs.
/jzero
Simply put, noobs need other noobs, they need encouragement and a little pathfinding for others at their own level.
Noobs become intermediate's and begin to require less encouragement and more direct critiques.
Intermediate's require harsh and insightful critique's to move ahead faster and are less interested in a pat on the back.
Once you get past that, it is very difficult to get the increasingly indepth input you require outside of 'on the job'.
It's no my intention to set up a doctrine where everyone has to fit my profile. It has been my intention to suggest to John that what he has been experiencing is entirely normal for the path he is on.
In example I mean what would you call someone who is a noob to 3d, but not art itself and only having other noobs (under your system) who may be high school students making DBZ items as their only line of critique?
Other extreme, you only allow Pros to critique one another. What if the Pro is working on say a very precise mechanical construction, yet all his fellow Pros are character artists. Yet, there is a noob in the noob area that has a background in mechanical engineering that could help this Pro out.
Your logic seems flawed in the above settings. Is that fair to them because you have cut them out because they aren't at your technical level yet? Its almost like a caste system.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Something though I think I don't see alot of, and what may help all of us. You can't just criticize by saying "X looks wrong" and leave it at that. It should be like, "X looks wrong, because yada yada. Here are some suggestions and references". Many people go into threads and give one liner critiques without getting down and dirty. Thats irresponsible and leads to more frustration. You aren't the managing lead who doesn't know shit about art, your a fellow artist who can give a more detailed and intelligent response.
Once you give a critique, you become in part responsible for how that area develops. So you better make damn sure you get your point across! You also should watch the thread if the artist has any questions about your comment. If you don't have the time for these responsibilities. Then don't respond.
I think this system would do more for helping all skill levels than trying to again make this false and elitist caste system.
all i was saying is that when i looked back on what i used to do, i dont feal like it was a lack of skill, nessisarily, but a problem with the way i was going about making what i was making. just trying to share that point of view with some people who might be able to benifit.
Ruz- it has nothing to do with wanting to model realisticaly. re-creating anatomy will teach you form. with that knowlage, you can skew proportion and make something totaly un-realistic, but that sense of mass and form will stay with you. at least that's the way i see it.
oh haha and MoP: "What people should be doing is saying "This animation is a good start, but needs some work before it will look great..."
what if it's not even a good start?
The "X" looks wrong type critque is a problem, but I haven't seen it as much of a problem here, as in other places, as folks tend to like to burty the questioner in reference, and/or draw overs of their renders,
In General when delivering a critiqu, one should note a potitive thing about the effort, then go into detail about the negatives, but with reference and suggestions for a change, and then wrap up with another positive. Artist recieving it, should say thank you.
Scott
'no, no, no thats terrible ,what ARE you doing imbecile'
To tell the truth , thats what we got on my foundation art course. They were brutally honest.This is not such a good idea in forums I suppose as people will just get ratty with one another. I think polycount in general has good critiqes.
John, i can see what you are getting at.Suppose the best you can do is keep on offering your advice and hopefully the message will get through.
If tis truly terrbible, you could just smile politely or point them to a good example
One professor I had earned his BA and MFA from Yale; he was an excellent visual designer and he was fucking merciless in a crit. He would strip you to the core and not feel remotely bad about it. But he always had a valid point, something it took me a couple courses to appreciate. As a result, I am fearless in crits today - no one I work for could possibly be more critical than this guy. The technical education I got out of college wasn't worth the price of admission, but what I learned about *being* a designer was invaluable.
I'm not sure how the above relates to life here at Polycount, but I wanted you all to know that you can say mean things to me and I won't care
Scott
blast69's blah about anatomy
[/ QUOTE ]
My fault :P
My brain is REALLY left-aligned (aka programmer's mind). I've tried those R-mode exercises in Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain and never switched into R-mode, my mind always verbally commenting on everything. Is there a way to silence your mind in order to make it possible to disable your verbal mind?
This influences reference usage: I use a reference but can't use it, I see where the stuff must go yet can't make it look right. Things like smooth shapes, say, the cheeks or something, never work out. They appear as large flat planes to me so I have to remember how that surface is supposed to curve. Perceiving shadows, contours, etc is a vital ability for an artist and I can't get my mind to see those things.
I have this slight feeling Cheapy has the same problems, he's a coder as well and he, too, understands Blender's interface and uses edge extrusion. Another hunch of mine is that Frag Cow probably is one of us as well.
The first rule of Polycount Fight Club is you do not talk about Polycount Fight Club.
The second rule of Polycount Fight Club is you DO NOT talk about Polycount Fight Club.
If someone takes down their pimp, the fight is over.
One guy pimps, the rest dogpile on.
As many fights as can fit in the forum at once.
No lensflares.
Fights will go on as long as they have to.
If it is your first post in Polycount Fight Club, you have to pimp.