Yeah, I can see where that feeling comes from. A lot of pipelines today optimize for scalability and consistency rather than uniqueness. Procedural tools made production much more predictable, but at the same time they tend to converge toward similar visual patterns.At the same time though, I’m not sure the material side…
Substance Designer and Painter don't have anything to imagine height from regular image . Sampler does but it does it so awful it's almost an advertising gimmick IMO, very blurry unspecific height often totally wrong. The only thing Sampler good is de-lighting ambient shadows . What would really be helpful is image…
Doesn't looks that way. I had a hope anything convenient would appear soon two decades ago and here we are. In all honesty the content creation software doesn't look like evolving much in general. it evolved and frozen already with a few cosmetic changes each years and rarely something new. It's stack in old approaches ,…
I get that feeling too. A lot of mainstream tools seem to optimize for stability and compatibility rather than radical change. Once a workflow becomes industry standard, everything around it tends to reinforce that direction, because production pipelines depend on predictability.But historically most shifts in content…
Yeah, that’s exactly the trap I kept running into as well.High-pass + threshold always ends up being contrast-driven rather than structure-driven. As soon as you start blurring or expanding to reconnect gaps, you’re no longer preserving the original topology — you’re essentially reshaping it. That’s where the “bubbles”…
I sorta agree about manual craftsmanship , Designer included . Every time I do a material in Designer I know they are paying me for gaps and mistakes of scanning contractors . And often I just take my own camera at weekends. Feel myself a camera replacement. It's so weird . Yet we are discussing extracting material id…