/3/ - 3DCG

[Anonymous No.645668]

Show this to anyone saying that Blender has no potential

[Anonymous No.645669]

>>645668
link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN0zPOpADL4

[Anonymous No.645673]

Shrek came out 17 years ago, and it looked better than this.

[Anonymous No.645674]

>it's another software argument thread
You never fail to disappoint, /3/.

[Anonymous No.645676]

>>645673

[Anonymous No.645677]

>>645676
>implying the agent's waxen complexion can compete with Lord Farquaad's pink puffy nipples
lol get out of here you hiragino typeface loser

[Anonymous No.645678]

>>645668
>>645676
Nice trash for NPCs.

[Anonymous No.645686]

>Show this to anyone saying that paint has no potential
You get talented artists and shitters using all sorts of tools OP stop being precious about the one you use and git gud

[Anonymous No.645687]

>>645676

[Anonymous No.645711]

>>645687

[Anonymous No.645717]

>Blender Foundation has to make animations with it's own software to prove it can be done.
I wonder why the Maya dev team never had to do this?

[Anonymous No.645719]

>>645717
The Maya team didn't have to deal with Autodesk actively working to undermine them.

[Anonymous No.645724]

>>645719
Are you sure about that?

[Anonymous No.645767]

>>645719
>implying that Autodesk gives a shit about Blender

[Anonymous No.645831]

>>645717

[Anonymous No.645844]

>>645717
.....really? How new to 3d are you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX5ajyPr96M

>>645719
Yes, they do. Autodesk is awash in middle management hell, and no they don't have any time to think about Blender, ever. Blender is a fine piece of software and getting better all the time. Stop letting Autodesk live rent free in your head and enjoy the tools you have.

[Anonymous No.645864]

>>645844
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX5ajyPr96M

I've seen that at SIGGRAPH '98

[Anonymous No.645998]

>>645686
op here, and yes i agree

[Anonymous No.646002]

>>645717
Because you can't do pro animations with Maya?

I know, I worked on the internal Maya project to produce an animated movie. $1,500,000 was spent over three years but we never went anywhere. Some of our interns even used Blender to finish the animations, it was a mess. Management canned the entire project.

To this day I have nothing but the utmost respect for Blender foundation for having created a software that works, and used it to produce animated shorts and movies.

[Anonymous No.646003]

>>646002
Maybe you are all just a bunch of shitty untalented artists, just sayin

Also, fuck off you Shill

[Anonymous No.646005]

>>646002
>Because you can't do pro animations with Maya?
No YOU CAN'T.
There is a difference.

[Anonymous No.646009]

>>646002
Yeah, this sounds like a big fat lie. You're gonna want to start spouting sources out your ass if you ever hope for anyone to even believe you. If not, great job on you for making the thing you were rooting for look even worse.

[Anonymous No.646011]

>>646002
So now the Blender Foundation is promoting FUD? That's a new low... and quite an accomplishment for the Blender fanbois.

[Anonymous No.646015]

>>646002
The rumors are true, then. None of Disney/Pixar's films were made with Maya, but in Blender instead.

Deal with it, Autocucks.

[Anonymous No.646017]

>>646015
>being this delusional

[Anonymous No.646029]

>>646017
I think that post was ironic.

...I think.

[Anonymous No.646044]

>>645668
Looks like a student project

[Anonymous No.646056]

Pretty funny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exAwxzhBL8w

[Anonymous No.646057]

>>645687
New meme?

[Anonymous No.646058]

>>646057
Autumn Season.

[Anonymous No.646062]

Friendly reminder
https://www.blender.org/conference/2018/presentations/467

[Anonymous No.646244]

>>645668

why is blender only ever used to create cartoon memeshit with tumblr noses, how come nobody ever even attempts photorealism

[Anonymous No.646246]

>>646244
Perhaps because Blender has a difficult time dealing with high-poly meshes, which are required for feature-level photorealism.

[Anonymous No.646264]

>>646029
Fuck, hopefully. And it's sarcastic, not ironic.

[Anonymous No.646266]

>>646244
Blender follows the concurrence, and as Maya can't do photorealism, Blender is stuck with an userbase of people who never learned how to use a photorealistic product. You can't fault Blender for Maya's failures, man.

>>646264
>>646029
This is the nth time I have seen people on /3/ incapable of taking a joke or understand the most basic of humor. This is really interesting, as most /3/ users are artists and leans heavily toward the left.

I think it tells something deep, though I don't know what. Historically the left is disruptive, feminine, and chaotic, from a Jungian archetype standpoint. Recently (~20 years) it has become a tangled mess, and lost its disruptive and chaotic attributes. The new generation of artistic minded people are literally unable to understand basic humor, which kind of freak me out. There's something deeply wrong that.

Or maybe it is just 3d that attracts autistic weirdos?

[Anonymous No.646282]

>>646266

[Anonymous No.646314]

>>646282
If you consider it again, I bet you'll find the post to be a particularly well-made trolling attempt.

[Anonymous No.646317]

>>645676
>Implying it wasn't a mere design choice.

[Anonymous No.646338]

>>646317
i was making renders like that in 2013

[Anonymous No.646384]

I really can not imagine, how you guys can go at it non stop...

[Anonymous No.646390]

>>646384
It's the power of Blender. It entraps the soul, and, if not treated soon enough, send its victim down a path of cult-like reclusion, fact-denial, and wishful thinking, all along sheepily following of the words of the Donut Prophet, being ultimately condemned to reading and """artistically""" interpreting Nature through a torus-shaped, heavily glazed looking glass.

[Anonymous No.646411]

>>646338
Dumb Zoomer I was doing renders like that on my Amiga.