sorry for not getting back earlier, what i meant is that you introduce mechanical looking patterns be having always the same distances and sizes of things.
but besides that, i feel like that you are polishing things too early and often, trying to get a clean result, cleanlines that seem to go on forever. which can be a style choice of its own but looking at the reference i dont think is the way to go.
i do wonder if it would be benefitial for you to cut back on brushes and tools for some time, step down a subdiv level or two and work exclusively with a clay (or claytubes) brush. dont use smooth, dont use i dunno dam standard or pinch. do all the shape buildup and take aways with clay, polish with clay. be lose, be messy, be organic
No worries. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll give that a try next then. I guess that's why my mentor approaches it the way he does, where he basically does the breakup and secondary forms at the same time, like this:
That approach though isn't very suited to me as it just caused a lot of confusion and I felt overwhelmed. So I've opted to tackle things in stages first. But I can at least do things loose and messy. I do tend to smooth/clean things up right after. ^^;
My one comment, is that I see too much pinch tool, or pinch tool like brushes. They almost never make realistic forms, because they create an accelerating curve into the crease, meaning that where edges meet tends to look artificial, So outside of very specific use cases, I'd avoid it.
Hm. I don't recall what areas I've used pinch, but I tend to use it if a crease with the DamStandard is a bit too wide...? Just to make it a bit thinner.
Not Tldr; Explaining what i once did, polygroup/muscle group dynamesh method:
Just tossing in an idea i had to one day use cause i wanted things to look "amazing", when it comes to musculature.
It might be a bit "long" process at least for me but.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpT31z6LErs(video explains extracting the general idea, make bones and actually wrap the muscles to the bones accurately, will kind of save time instead of the constant redoing to get it "right", at least like this you have 100% control over the results. i just expanded the polygroup shape method to a more detailed version with some extra stuff, i made a tutorial back in the day (an image, that is now privated/removed) but the video explains it the same way in a way.
The extract mask method ( polygroup: muscle grouping method) for muscles (so actually build the entire body as we are made) works great with dynameshing and retopologizing and then possibly reprojecting the dynamesh back down, results vary, i used smooth brush a lot on a super low setting and claybuild. The idea is you are making the muscle group strands and adjusting them to the bones and you save multiple copies (backups) so if you ever want to change anything you just go back to the backups.
So i split the parts like this:
Arms, Legs, Upper Torso, Stomach, hands, face.
Each a separated group, bones and muscles, you can use a random piece as a "skin" object to cover the "holes" in the actual muscle group, where there is more bone than muscle. I subdivide all the one group from the mentioned when i like it and feel its at a decent state, i dynamesh all parts of the one group with the highest setting 4096, make a duplicate retopologize it and reproject the dynameshed copy, and fix any issues that look strange manually, using the mask option so i do not make mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/iof0OeqwdHY (this video explains both what it should look like before dynameshing and how each group "turns inward", you'll get it just do a bunch of research about the connecting tissues. it will help, best part about this later on you can "configure" the next projects anatomy with this new "saved" final anatomy and make more portfolio pieces.)
This video is what i mean by muscle group before dynameshing, APART from the coloring, if wasn't 100% clear.
Hope it helps, i really should've made a video about this but i figured someone else did or would've "borrowed" the jpg and make $ and videos about it already. Perhaps it is not very time saving but the results are amazing to me, when you fix it to your liking adding your own learned spin on things.
Tldr:
you should try messaging the author of the work you are trying to replicate or any of his buddies and see if they will respond about what you are attempting to achieve.
Interesting method. I think I get the approach you're referring to. I've used it before when making hard-surface stuff. It's not likely I'll be using this for where I'm at with this particular project, but it is something I could make use of in a future project. Especially if I ever do an ecorche of the body.
Also, fear not, I've been in touch with the original artist right back when I started this project. I recently reached out to him again to get some insight into his approach for secondary forms. He said he'd help out when he has the time. I'm guessing he's super busy working on the latest Doom game though.
That approach though isn't very suited to me as it just caused a lot of confusion and I felt overwhelmed. So I've opted to tackle things in stages first. But I can at least do things loose and messy. I do tend to smooth/clean things up right after. ^^;
its certainly not easy to break a mindset that already is in you. I had some stuff that took years for me to get rid of (looking at you Hogarth Bubble Anatomy!). but yeah its tough to get there when you still have that goal of this specific asset in mind and maybe its just a little too big right now?
maybe losen up, do smaller sculpts, more sketches, limit your tool palette and try to work things more.
what i mean by that is, getting rid of all the nice comfortable tools, smooth pinch, flatten etc. if you wanna go even further, work completely asymmetrically. that helped me a ton tackling things more freely
That approach though isn't very suited to me as it just caused a lot of confusion and I felt overwhelmed. So I've opted to tackle things in stages first. But I can at least do things loose and messy. I do tend to smooth/clean things up right after. ^^;
its certainly not easy to break a mindset that already is in you. I had some stuff that took years for me to get rid of (looking at you Hogarth Bubble Anatomy!). but yeah its tough to get there when you still have that goal of this specific asset in mind and maybe its just a little too big right now?
maybe losen up, do smaller sculpts, more sketches, limit your tool palette and try to work things more.
what i mean by that is, getting rid of all the nice comfortable tools, smooth pinch, flatten etc. if you wanna go even further, work completely asymmetrically. that helped me a ton tackling things more freely
Ultimately though, I need to understand what's going on under the surface here. I've been told one of my attempts didn't make sense or wasn't readable. Even with the sample from my mentor's video, they look like a random assortment of shapes. It's a pity I can't find out from Jason Martin at the moment; would love to know what references he used for this stage.
Tried doing some experiments based on a fan model and body-builder anatomy. This was just purely with the Clay Buildup brush and the FlippedNormals Buildup brush. Usually at subdivision level 3 or 4.
Regarding the lats: that last image above is veering back to
the “too artificial” territory to me. I liked the direction you were going with
in the few images up from the bottom in the previous page here:
Just added some bulkier softer shapes instead. Not sure if they'd be considered 'readable' though, or make any sense. :-\
With the main tweak being that I would try to bring some
planarity back and probably with some of the other muscle groups too, just to
add some larger level specular break-up to the forms so that not everything would
look so uniformly inflated.
The top image that Eric shared of the bodybuilder is really
good reference for that. The original models also has this quality to it.
As mentioned earlier: I would still recommend doing an equal
pass on the whole model, as I think it would help you better gauge what areas
need work. Looks like progress!
Regarding the lats: that last image above is veering back to
the “too artificial” territory to me. I liked the direction you were going with
in the few images up from the bottom in the previous page here:
Just added some bulkier softer shapes instead. Not sure if they'd be considered 'readable' though, or make any sense. :-\
With the main tweak being that I would try to bring some
planarity back and probably with some of the other muscle groups too, just to
add some larger level specular break-up to the forms so that not everything would
look so uniformly inflated.
The top image that Eric shared of the bodybuilder is really
good reference for that. The original models also has this quality to it.
As mentioned earlier: I would still recommend doing an equal
pass on the whole model, as I think it would help you better gauge what areas
need work. Looks like progress!
That's fine; I have backup saves. Those were more experiments above. I'd remove the small strips at the bottom of the traps though as they're too uniform.
When you suggest adding some planarity back, do you mean where it angles like this:
Although I would say that 'rolls' as they're more rounded.
I've isolated the back along with the arms. Those are the main parts that are closely connected. Possibly the bum/legs, too. I was considering, if I continued struggling with this, to move onto another part of the character and see how I fare with that. Try and complete everything else and come back to the... um, well, back. But I'll see how things go first.
I'll take another look at that reference of Eric's the see what you mean about the planarity. Thanks.
Okay, spent half an hour or so with the earlier version, went down to sub-div 3 or 4, used the Buildup brushes to add some directionality, and tried to give the shapes more planarity. Though I'm not sure I'm approaching it correctly with the latter.
Yeah. I’m exaggerating here for the purpose of the diagram,
but the general idea is to break up the contour so that not everything is so
uniform. Find spots you want a little more planar or areas you want to keep
more rounded. Mix it up and experiment to find something that has some rhythm
and looks organic.
Yeah. I’m exaggerating here for the purpose of the diagram,
but the general idea is to break up the contour so that not everything is so
uniform. Find spots you want a little more planar or areas you want to keep
more rounded. Mix it up and experiment to find something that has some rhythm
and looks organic.
Ah-haa. I see what you mean. Thanks for clarifying. I was just about to spend a bit more time on it before seeing this post, so I'll do a bit of experimenting and post the results.
Hmm, Having seen the back and forwards i think i know what everyone's trying to point out, but not quite getting across. When i mentioned the pinch like tools i'm really talking about long uniform form breaks.
Organic forms should have form breaks that are incredibly elastic and organic.
I made a quick paint-over to show just how much of a difference this really makes.
Hmm, Having seen the back and forwards i think i know what everyone's trying to point out, but not quite getting across. When i mentioned the pinch like tools i'm really talking about long uniform form breaks.
Organic forms should have form breaks that are incredibly elastic and organic.
I made a quick paint-over to show just how much of a difference this really makes.
Thanks for the explanation/image. I've tried incorporating it into my current progress:
The point isn't to make the line squiggly, it's to vary the softness and angles of the form break. The simple version of this is applying varying amounts of smooth to different parts of the form break.
The point isn't to make the line squiggly, it's to vary the softness and angles of the form break. The simple version of this is applying varying amounts of smooth to different parts of the form break.
Ah. I see. Totally misunderstood the paintover. ^^;
That's on the right path. Now you've got this insight, I'd say, go back to your reference, and really pay attention to this aspect. On the reference sculpt, this idea is very extreme compared to this update.
I'd draw your attention to the long straight vertical line down the spine, it varies from no crease to strong crease the entire way through. This is exactly what @pxgeek was getting at with his paintover.
I'd also encourage you to think about form breaks being the result of the surrounding form. This is a very subtle point in painting and sculpting, but students tend to focus on edges. But edges are the result of the surrounding forms being built up in specific ways to get that result. Edges are easy to focus on because they are high contrast. Brushes like dam standard and pinch appeal to students because they give you the contrast, but it's in an artificial way that lets you ignore the surrounding forms.
Hope that makes sense, this is a difficult perception to communicate.
Actually check this out. if I try and draw a contour around the same elevation of the forms on the two sculpts, you can see how the edge is just the easily visible part.
That's on the right path. Now you've got this insight, I'd say, go back to your reference, and really pay attention to this aspect. On the reference sculpt, this idea is very extreme compared to this update.
I'd draw your attention to the long straight vertical line down the spine, it varies from no crease to strong crease the entire way through. This is exactly what @pxgeek was getting at with his paintover.
I'd also encourage you to think about form breaks being the result of the surrounding form. This is a very subtle point in painting and sculpting, but students tend to focus on edges. But edges are the result of the surrounding forms being built up in specific ways to get that result. Edges are easy to focus on because they are high contrast. Brushes like dam standard and pinch appeal to students because they give you the contrast, but it's in an artificial way that lets you ignore the surrounding forms.
Hope that makes sense, this is a difficult perception to communicate.
Thanks. This is a lot to digest. There really should be some online courses that cover secondary forms; there are so many considerations and things to be aware of, it could very easily be its own topic, like hair etc.
I think I get what you mean. Essentially, I need to focus on building the forms/shapes and let them determine how the edges turn out?
"Essentially, I need to focus on building the forms/shapes and let them determine how the edges turn out?"
Yeah I think that's a good way to put it!
Really this comes down to building up your observation skills, picking up on subtle form changes.
One exercise that helped me a lot was doing straight copies of 3d scans, using the zbrush reference mode, which lets you have a reference model and your sculpt at the exact same angle. It forces you to notice all these details you may have missed as you hone in on getting it closer.
"Essentially, I need to focus on building the forms/shapes and let them determine how the edges turn out?"
Yeah I think that's a good way to put it!
Really this comes down to building up your observation skills, picking up on subtle form changes.
One exercise that helped me a lot was doing straight copies of 3d scans, using the zbrush reference mode, which lets you have a reference model and your sculpt at the exact same angle. It forces you to notice all these details you may have missed as you hone in on getting it closer.
Awesome. This is essentially what I was doing through my mentor using 3D Scan Store head models. I used the split screen option so I could see the model and my own as I worked. I just don't think my mentor explained it in quite the same way...? Or maybe he did and I'm forgetting. Is that particular model in ZBrush or is that a 3D Scan Store model? I might have to try getting one with a torso and just focus on that for now to practise.
I think I may be nearing the end of adding secondary forms to the back. But I could be wrong, if anyone else has anything else to point out. So very soon I'll most likely break the symmetry and then add some breakup/directionality.
Was going to add asymmetry, but looking at the references, I don't see much if I'm honest. I think most of it comes from the texturing. So instead, I've finished up the detailing and did some breakup.
As I did the breakup on a lower sub-div level, I'm not sure if it's too soft and needs to be stronger.
This is a very nice thread indeed and good progress on the model!
A user above (Neox?) used word "giger-esque" and I can't un-see it now. In last two posts you seem to gravitate back to mechanical patterns. Imagine, uhh, a zen garden with patterns made in sand with a rake. I mean, if it's a style choice (and it totally can be) it's fine. If not - then you'd need to rethink your brush strokes. Add variety to width and angles relative to each other.
This is a very nice thread indeed and good progress on the model!
A user above (Neox?) used word "giger-esque" and I can't un-see it now. In last two posts you seem to gravitate back to mechanical patterns. Imagine, uhh, a zen garden with patterns made in sand with a rake. I mean, if it's a style choice (and it totally can be) it's fine. If not - then you'd need to rethink your brush strokes. Add variety to width and angles relative to each other.
I can certainly see the influence. Particularly in the 2016 version. It's evident everywhere with the wrinkles and protrusions.
Spent over a couple of hours on this torso exercise. I've been making sure not to use any smoothing and just purely Clay Buildup (add and subtract), a bit of the Move brush, and a bit of Dam Standard.
This is an exercise that i want to see you doing! I would recommend making the matcap's identical between both.
For this exercise, i want you to get out of the mind of 3d analysis, as in don't try to intepret and remember the 3d forms, and instead get into matching the shading exactly. Think like a painter, you are just darkening and lightening pixels, you are just doing it through the abstraction of a 3d model.
To put it another way, the lessons you need to learn, are specifically those differences that are hardest to capture. If you push a study to 70%, you only covered the path you already know well, it's by pushing it to be exactly what's there, that where the gold is to be found.
The study isn't on anatomy, it's on training your brain to understand form from shading.
This is an exercise that i want to see you doing! I would recommend making the matcap's identical between both.
For this exercise, i want you to get out of the mind of 3d analysis, as in don't try to intepret and remember the 3d forms, and instead get into matching the shading exactly. Think like a painter, you are just darkening and lightening pixels, you are just doing it through the abstraction of a 3d model.
To put it another way, the lessons you need to learn, are specifically those differences that are hardest to capture. If you push a study to 70%, you only covered the path you already know well, it's by pushing it to be exactly what's there, that where the gold is to be found.
The study isn't on anatomy, it's on training your brain to understand form from shading.
Funnily enough, this is exactly what I was doing when I was doing my mentorship. I rarely think about the 3D forms/shapes of the anatomy, like what's shown in Anatomy for Sculptors. And I've also been focusing on the lighter and darker areas by adding and taking away with the brush. With my mentor, it was pretty much all observation and trying to match the model exactly. This is an example of one of the exercises I did:
I think they're both using the same Matcap, it's just the selected SubTool tends to have a highlight...?
Apparently this is how you turn off that highlight. Just so you are comparing apples to apples.
That face study is fairly good! This might just be a case of needing to just grind out a lot of studies, and ratchet your intuition up.
Yeah, I believe the Polypaint icon is toggled off. I'm always finding myself turning it off when it keeps turning on. However, if you FillObject both, even if no material or RGB is set, they'll both wind up with that same highlight. So both will need the Polypaint icon on.
As to the Hell Knight's back, I'm currently on the fence about adding asymmetry or not. I'm personally not seeing any asymmetry in the primary and secondary forms, just in the tertiary and texturing. I'm pretty sure the primary and secondary are symmetrical and that the lighting and 3/4 pose maybe making it seem as though they're not...? What bit of asymmetry I have added is apparently *too* subtle.
I'm also not sure if my breakup/directionality needs to be a bit stronger...?
To be honest, I'm feeling a bit directionless at the moment. I've not had any further feedback anywhere and I'm not sure if where I'm at is now in a good place, if something else needs adjusting, this needs removing, that needs adding etc. :-\
Feels like the critique already given either stayed relevant or become relevant again.
Like this part, based on @Muzzoid's advice about edge variety, was an improvement (in my amateur eyes), but then you seem to have undone it in later iterations:
I'm not sure what's happened to the site's overlay...? UI...? I know it changes every April Fool's, but it's changed again and I'm not able to quote anyone. I can't see the option.
Thanks for pointing this out. This is where I kinda need someone to do this if I've lost something in another iteration, because I didn't even realise. ^^; Now I'm trying to figure out when/where this iteration was.
Thanks for pointing this out. This is where I kinda need someone to do this if I've lost something in another iteration, because I didn't even realise. ^^; Now I'm trying to figure out when/where this iteration was.
I'll be honest, i stopped replying because each iteration was getting worse, and I've already given the thoughts and advice.
I'll say this. Art is less about doing and more about perceiving. You would be better served at this point to bring up the sculpt you are referencing, and what you've done, and just look really hard at both for a good while. All the answers you need are there, but your brain doesn't have the context to understand them yet.
Thanks for pointing this out. This is where I kinda need someone to do this if I've lost something in another iteration, because I didn't even realise. ^^; Now I'm trying to figure out when/where this iteration was.
I'll be honest, i stopped replying because each iteration was getting worse, and I've already given the thoughts and advice.
I'll say this. Art is less about doing and more about perceiving. You would be better served at this point to bring up the sculpt you are referencing, and what you've done, and just look really hard at both for a good while. All the answers you need are there, but your brain doesn't have the context to understand them yet.
😧😞 And there was me thinking I was making progress… Now I feel deflated and demotivated. 😕
Hey man, you are putting in the hard yards, you ARE putting in the effort and time, and for the most part you are doing well. You are RIGHT on the cusp of leveling up, it's just going to take stepping back and considering the process a bit. I also apologize if I've been a little blunt here.
Let me see if i can break this down a bit better, when I'm talking about art being about perception, I'm not talking about some abstract concept of looking harder. your brain is literally doing signal processing on everything you see and interpreting it. Your brain is literally changing how it processes information when studying art.
The mechanism which our perception gets better is a ratchet. You make a perception, you then check that perception and prove that it was wrong. Every time this happens, your perception improves. The point of external feedback is not to give you theory, (you can get theory from any ol book or video), you are renting our perceptions in order to drive your attention to the areas you didn't know needed attention, which drives this loop.
That's all a bit abstract. So let me put this in practical terms. The pattern I always see with students, is I give a paint-over, pointing out something. Then most of the time they do an iteration, but it's applying the concept in a limited way. What you want to do instead, is instead take the advice and apply it as strongly as you can. How can you capitalize on an external perception as much as possible.
My advice of varying the edges of the form, you just applied it to the one point of the form. What if you instead went to every single form, and added crazy variation of edge hardness. TRY and take it too far. Really get under the skin of what the commenter was trying to get at.
Hey man, you are putting in the hard yards, you ARE putting in the effort and time, and for the most part you are doing well. You are RIGHT on the cusp of leveling up, it's just going to take stepping back and considering the process a bit. I also apologize if I've been a little blunt here.
Let me see if i can break this down a bit better, when I'm talking about art being about perception, I'm not talking about some abstract concept of looking harder. your brain is literally doing signal processing on everything you see and interpreting it. Your brain is literally changing how it processes information when studying art.
The mechanism which our perception gets better is a ratchet. You make a perception, you then check that perception and prove that it was wrong. Every time this happens, your perception improves. The point of external feedback is not to give you theory, (you can get theory from any ol book or video), you are renting our perceptions in order to drive your attention to the areas you didn't know needed attention, which drives this loop.
That's all a bit abstract. So let me put this in practical terms. The pattern I always see with students, is I give a paint-over, pointing out something. Then most of the time they do an iteration, but it's applying the concept in a limited way. What you want to do instead, is instead take the advice and apply it as strongly as you can. How can you capitalize on an external perception as much as possible.
My advice of varying the edges of the form, you just applied it to the one point of the form. What if you instead went to every single form, and added crazy variation of edge hardness. TRY and take it too far. Really get under the skin of what the commenter was trying to get at.
Okay. I also have to apologise if I seem a little too sensitive, which I am anyway, though probably more-so at the moment due to mental health issues, low self-esteem/confidence, new medication I'm taking and its side effects, and family issues. I can get de-motivated very easily and I often feel I just annoy other people with my constant posts/messages. Plus, I can sometimes feel others don't explain things clearly in a way that I understand and then they decide to say no more if I still haven't grasped their input, which really frustrates me. ^^; In other words - not everyone has the patience to deal with me. But I do appreciate and respect every piece of advice/feedback I get.
The explanation about perception is a lot for my brain to properly digest, but I think I get what you're saying. Hopefully. The last three paragraphs make the most sense. ^^; And funnily enough, that's what I was doing last night whilst working on it. I was adding this edge variation to as many places as possible using the two references. And only using a Clay Buildup brush to add and subtract.
You are fine! You didn't lash out, you just stated how something made you feel which is actually good! You've taken every bit of feedback well.
This thing is a long game, anyone who has been doing this for longer than a decade knows that preserving your mental health is the number one priority here. Art can be a really rough journey emotionally, I've worked with friends who broke down in tears because they though they couldn't create any more, and they lost sight of the reason why we are doing any of this.
I mean I'm the guy who had the bright idea of the "honest feedback thread"
. I thought i was able to take the most honest feedback, but in truth
it actually really hurt my ego and made me realize a lot of things. (phew this was 11 years ago )
Also I can expand on any of these ideas at all if you want to know. I've been slowly working on writing a book based on the meta game of art, so it's something I'm deeply passionate about.
"This is a lot to digest. There really should be some online courses that
cover secondary forms; there are so many considerations and things to
be aware of, it could very easily be its own topic..."
Actually, Scott Eaton one of the founding artists behind digital sculpture had authored many of the fundamental concepts/principles you're currently grappling with for example - Anatomy for Artists I might also add peer review offered thus far is quite exceptional and as a point of reference I'd say your journey has imo gotten off to a great start, so keep at it. One other thing I'll mention is that mental health issues prevail throughout the creative sphere irrespective of medium, in my mind perhaps endeavoring upon a targeted artistic pursuit one will initially as an untutored novice resort or attempt to define their self worth via ones creative ability however without going into further depth beyond the scope of this thread, in terms of agreement totally side with @Muzzoid response above.
Replies
That approach though isn't very suited to me as it just caused a lot of confusion and I felt overwhelmed. So I've opted to tackle things in stages first. But I can at least do things loose and messy. I do tend to smooth/clean things up right after. ^^;
Also, fear not, I've been in touch with the original artist right back when I started this project.
Regarding the lats: that last image above is veering back to the “too artificial” territory to me. I liked the direction you were going with in the few images up from the bottom in the previous page here:
With the main tweak being that I would try to bring some planarity back and probably with some of the other muscle groups too, just to add some larger level specular break-up to the forms so that not everything would look so uniformly inflated.
The top image that Eric shared of the bodybuilder is really good reference for that. The original models also has this quality to it.
As mentioned earlier: I would still recommend doing an equal pass on the whole model, as I think it would help you better gauge what areas need work. Looks like progress!
When you suggest adding some planarity back, do you mean where it angles like this:
Although I would say that 'rolls' as they're more rounded.
I've isolated the back along with the arms. Those are the main parts that are closely connected. Possibly the bum/legs, too. I was considering, if I continued struggling with this, to move onto another part of the character and see how I fare with that. Try and complete everything else and come back to the... um, well, back.
I'll take another look at that reference of Eric's the see what you mean about the planarity. Thanks.
Organic forms should have form breaks that are incredibly elastic and organic.
I made a quick paint-over to show just how much of a difference this really makes.
The simple version of this is applying varying amounts of smooth to different parts of the form break.
I'd draw your attention to the long straight vertical line down the spine, it varies from no crease to strong crease the entire way through. This is exactly what @pxgeek was getting at with his paintover.
I'd also encourage you to think about form breaks being the result of the surrounding form. This is a very subtle point in painting and sculpting, but students tend to focus on edges. But edges are the result of the surrounding forms being built up in specific ways to get that result.
Edges are easy to focus on because they are high contrast.
Brushes like dam standard and pinch appeal to students because they give you the contrast, but it's in an artificial way that lets you ignore the surrounding forms.
Hope that makes sense, this is a difficult perception to communicate.
I think I get what you mean. Essentially, I need to focus on building the forms/shapes and let them determine how the edges turn out?
Yeah I think that's a good way to put it!
Really this comes down to building up your observation skills, picking up on subtle form changes.
One exercise that helped me a lot was doing straight copies of 3d scans, using the zbrush reference mode, which lets you have a reference model and your sculpt at the exact same angle. It forces you to notice all these details you may have missed as you hone in on getting it closer.
This model, I think i got in an anatomy bundle a while back, can't remember where.
But this sorta thing would do the trick.
https://www.3dscanstore.com/anatomy-reference-models/anatomy-reference-bundles/range-of-movement-3d-scan
Also found a 3D Scan Store model in my collection to use. Split off the other parts of the body so it's just the torso.
I've done a bit more anyway, towards the base of the back/spine, but obviously, there's still much that needs work.
As I did the breakup on a lower sub-div level, I'm not sure if it's too soft and needs to be stronger.
A user above (Neox?) used word "giger-esque" and I can't un-see it now. In last two posts you seem to gravitate back to mechanical patterns.
Imagine, uhh, a zen garden with patterns made in sand with a rake.
I mean, if it's a style choice (and it totally can be) it's fine. If not - then you'd need to rethink your brush strokes. Add variety to width and angles relative to each other.
For this exercise, i want you to get out of the mind of 3d analysis, as in don't try to intepret and remember the 3d forms, and instead get into matching the shading exactly. Think like a painter, you are just darkening and lightening pixels, you are just doing it through the abstraction of a 3d model.
I think they're both using the same Matcap, it's just the selected SubTool tends to have a highlight...?
Apparently this is how you turn off that highlight. Just so you are comparing apples to apples.
That face study is fairly good! This might just be a case of needing to just grind out a lot of studies, and ratchet your intuition up.
I'm also not sure if my breakup/directionality needs to be a bit stronger...?
Like this part, based on @Muzzoid's advice about edge variety, was an improvement (in my amateur eyes), but then you seem to have undone it in later iterations:
@stray
Thanks for pointing this out. This is where I kinda need someone to do this if I've lost something in another iteration, because I didn't even realise. ^^; Now I'm trying to figure out when/where this iteration was.
The options to flag/quote/like are on the left side now.
The site seems to experience April 1st joke gone completely out of control XD Check General Discussions, I guess.
I'll be honest, i stopped replying because each iteration was getting worse, and I've already given the thoughts and advice.
I'll say this. Art is less about doing and more about perceiving. You would be better served at this point to bring up the sculpt you are referencing, and what you've done, and just look really hard at both for a good while. All the answers you need are there, but your brain doesn't have the context to understand them yet.
And there was me thinking I was making progress… Now I feel deflated and demotivated. 😕
The mechanism which our perception gets better is a ratchet. You make a perception, you then check that perception and prove that it was wrong. Every time this happens, your perception improves. The point of external feedback is not to give you theory, (you can get theory from any ol book or video), you are renting our perceptions in order to drive your attention to the areas you didn't know needed attention, which drives this loop.
That's all a bit abstract. So let me put this in practical terms. The pattern I always see with students, is I give a paint-over, pointing out something. Then most of the time they do an iteration, but it's applying the concept in a limited way.
What you want to do instead, is instead take the advice and apply it as strongly as you can. How can you capitalize on an external perception as much as possible.
My advice of varying the edges of the form, you just applied it to the one point of the form. What if you instead went to every single form, and added crazy variation of edge hardness. TRY and take it too far. Really get under the skin of what the commenter was trying to get at.
The explanation about perception is a lot for my brain to properly digest, but I think I get what you're saying. Hopefully. The last three paragraphs make the most sense. ^^; And funnily enough, that's what I was doing last night whilst working on it. I was adding this edge variation to as many places as possible using the two references. And only using a Clay Buildup brush to add and subtract.
This thing is a long game, anyone who has been doing this for longer than a decade knows that preserving your mental health is the number one priority here. Art can be a really rough journey emotionally, I've worked with friends who broke down in tears because they though they couldn't create any more, and they lost sight of the reason why we are doing any of this.