photogrammetry will change the game?(industry)
polycounter lvl 7
hello
as u know these days photogrammetry is being very common in most cases,but u think it will change the pipe line industries very much?
would be environment artist go way from most of jobs?
my opinion is it can be used only for very little percentage of models specially organic models like as rocks ... but for example for modeling a car i dont think photogrammetry would be useful enough...
generally what do u think about this manner?im interested to know your ideaas...
tnx
as u know these days photogrammetry is being very common in most cases,but u think it will change the pipe line industries very much?
would be environment artist go way from most of jobs?
my opinion is it can be used only for very little percentage of models specially organic models like as rocks ... but for example for modeling a car i dont think photogrammetry would be useful enough...
generally what do u think about this manner?im interested to know your ideaas...
tnx
Replies
You can buy very good quality data off megascans for very little money compared to the cost of capturing it yourself and there's plenty of tools floating around that allow you to muck around with it.
I disagree about how useful it is. Just having something to draw around can save days and days of work, never mind all the other data you can pull from it
That's been a thing since day1
3d scanning only does what 3d scanning does - nothing more, nothing less. To the layman it will always seem like surface details sum up the whole thing. In practice, these things are probably the least important factors contributing to a convincing character (or rather : they are the easiest parts to get right).
With all the knowledge, skills and tech available, even the most advanced studio in the world will only be able to make mediocre content if things are not carefully crafted. Here's an example of the best output an AAA studio could do in probably a day of so worth of time - quickly fixing up the scans and probably setting up the head to a generic rig without much tuning. It's pretty much awful.
at 4mins30, then 6mins12 for the result.
The best way to get a grasp of the reality of these constraints is simply to make a character head oneself, from start to finish, with facial expressions - even in a cartoony style. It's a tremendous amount of work with or without 3d scanning.
And then of course there's the LA Noire tech, but that a completely different story.
I'm still not getting it though. Won't scanning give you the likeness faster than any 3d artist could? & then it's just a question of retopologizing the scan? What am I missing here?
Or is cleanup much more tedious and time consuming?
Your misconception is to assume that the scan holds most of the "stuff" that makes the head work. It absolutely doesn't
Of course anyone can do a cheap scan at home, decimate it, slap some automated UVs on it and stick it into Unreal - that's easy and takes a couple hours from start to finish. But that sort of stuff is nowhere near an actual production "double".
3D Scans and photogrammetry are good for games with "realistic" people and environments. Did you watch the unreal engine ps5 demo? the female character doesn't match/fit in the whole. It looks weird!
But for environments there have been several games where the environments use 3d scans extensively. For a AAA game it's not a big expense to send someone to another country with a rig setup for photoscanning compared to having a team of dedicated artists or outsourcers create the assets.