/blend/ - Blender General

[Anonymous No.748519]

Do not poly-model characters unless you are a retard. Blender has sculpting tools, use them.

Welcome to the Blender General, where we discuss Blender, share our Blender-related works and ask for Blender-related help.

>What is Blender?
Blender is the free and open source 3D creation suite. It supports the entirety of the 3D pipeline—modeling, rigging, animation, simulation, rendering, compositing and motion tracking, video editing and 2D animation pipeline.

>Download
https://www.blender.org/download/

>Blender Market
https://blendermarket.com/

>Documentation
https://docs.blender.org/

>Useful tutorials
https://pastebin.com/tKhxuTJu

>Useful addons
https://pastebin.com/mMZqukF1

Previous Thread: >>745896

[Anonymous No.748524]

>>748519
Flip fliuds when

[Anonymous No.748546]

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but if I shade an object with just volumetrics, can I then use a boolean modifier to alter its shape without cutting it and revealing that it's empty inside?
Is applying the modifyier the only way? I'd like to animate it to make something like this: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bt3wrzGFskj/

[Anonymous No.748554]

>>748519
>Do not poly-model characters unless you are a retard. Blender has sculpting tools, use them.
Don't tell me what I can or can't do. Creativity should always be free you fucking facist.

[Anonymous No.748570]

>>748554
>If I want to do things worse, slower, objectively inferior and with outdated workflows that ruin all pipelines it's MY choice

[Anonymous No.748574]

>>748570
Well, technically it's his choice. Unless he works for someone other than himself.

[Anonymous No.748578]

>>748554
>my colossal incompetence is actually brave rebellion against the tyranny of being good at things
whatever you need to tell yourself, sweetheart

[Anonymous No.748581]

>>748570
>>748574
>>748578
Not all projects require sculpted and then retopoligized characters. Are you all stupid?

[Anonymous No.748582]

>>748581
poly-modeling produces shittier topology and does so slower than full sculpt + retopo.
There is literally no excuse to not sculpt.

[Anonymous No.748584]

>>748582
If you suck at modeling then I guess polymodeling isn't your thing.

[Anonymous No.748585]

>>748584
*If you suck at modeling, you're doing polymodeling

[Anonymous No.748587]

>>748581
>Not all projects require
>require
if you think of sculpting as something that you only do when it's "required" then you don't know sculpting. it's faster, more convenient and produces better results. it's the default workflow for pretty much any organic character scenario other than very minor niches, like imitating quake-style low poly or whatever.

[Anonymous No.748589]

>>748585
Good luck selling the idea of having to sculpt and retopo everything to your client when you are working on mobile games. Time is money and you prefer wasting it on unnecessary workflows. You're not going to make it anon. Unless 3D is purely a hobby. Then by all means do whatever you want to spend your free time.

[Anonymous No.748590]

>>748587
Yes you only do sculpting when it is required. You take the best technique and the best tools for the specific job at hand. That's what separates the professional from the hobbyist

[Anonymous No.748591]

>>748584
yes, the entire professional gamedev and vfx industries abandoned polymodeling for characters 10+ years ago and never looked back because they just suck so hard at modeling. you, awkwardly trying to put together an anime waifu from an old tutorial, are the real master of the craft here.

[Anonymous No.748592]

>>748590
>You take the best technique and the best tools for the specific job at hand.
yes, and this is sculpting for almost all scenarios.

[Anonymous No.748593]

>>748591
>every project is the same
kek

[Anonymous No.748594]

>>748589
Sculpt and retopo is still faster and cheaper than polymodels you idiot.

[Anonymous No.748595]

>>748589
>Good luck selling the idea of having to sculpt and retopo everything to your client when you are working on mobile games. Time is money
a decent sculptor will have a whole character sculpted from imagination and repologized while the polymodeler is still waiting for someone to give him front/side concept art so he can start pushing the vertices around. you're completely clueless if you think polymodelers are faster.

[Anonymous No.748596]

>>748592
>almost
aaah there we go.

[Anonymous No.748597]

>>748593
yes, every project where you make organic shapes is going to benefit from the workflow that is the best for making organic shapes.

[Anonymous No.748598]

>>748596
yes, i already explained that if you're making fake quake models or whatever then you should just model them. what of it?

[Anonymous No.748599]

>>748594
For you maybe because you have no clue how to polymodel a character from scratch

>>748595
Both techniques can be done with or without references or modelsheets. Both techniques are good in the hands of skilled artists. A skilled polymodeler can just as easy model something from imagination, and will get to the final result faster than someone sculpting and retopologizing.

[Anonymous No.748600]

>>748596
> Aaah
> That one half of 0.001% of possible scenarios truly validates learning of a stone-aged modeling technique

[Anonymous No.748601]

>>748597
>what are subdivision modifiers

[Anonymous No.748602]

>>748600
you ever work on any mobile games anon? you ever work on anything at all in the industry? my guess is no.

[Anonymous No.748603]

>>748589
How stupid are you exactly? Sculpting + Retopo is literally faster than polymodeling a character you absolute retard.

[Anonymous No.748604]

>>748603
If you suck at polymodeling then I completely agree with you, noob.

[Anonymous No.748605]

I personally prefer the reverse approach of polymodeling and then sculpting in detail.

[Anonymous No.748606]

>>748599
Look dumbshit, it's pretty glaringly obvious you're new to 3D, so best you stick to learning instead of trying to lecture people who are clearly more experienced and more intelligent than you.

[Anonymous No.748608]

>>748599
>A skilled polymodeler
A skilled polymodeler will tell you to sculpt and retopologize your characters, and that you should save polymodeling for non-organic models...

[Anonymous No.748609]

>>748606
So far you haven't posted anything that supports your claim of having the superior intelligence. Just because you like sculpting more because it's easier for you and has the more approachable learning curve doesn't mean polymodeling is not a viable option for creating characters.

[Anonymous No.748610]

>>748601
A modifier, not a workflow, idiot.

[Anonymous No.748611]

>>748610
I guess you don't understand the significance. Understandable. You can achieve organic shapes with polymodeling. You'll even end up having more control over the final shape.

[Anonymous No.748612]

>>748608
Completely depends on the type of project and art style.

[Anonymous No.748613]

>YOU SCULPTORS JUST SCULPT BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOOD ENOUGH AT POLYMODELING
holy shit is today opposite day? did i fall through a hole to another dimension? this board is the stupidest place for 3d on the internet. first it was "DON'T SCULPT WITH A TABLET A GAMER MOUSE IS FASTER" and now this. this place is fucking hilarious

[Anonymous No.748614]

>>748609
>doesn't mean polymodeling is not a viable option for creating characters.
It isn't, no matter how badly you try to tell yourself that it is. You're only deluding yourself because you've already invested too much time following all the wrong tutorials, and you're trying to rationalize your time spent.

Sculpting + retopology allows you to focus on shape/form and retopology independently. If you're polymodeling a character, every time you change the form, you have to adjust the verts to remain consistent, which usually entails pulling and pushing several more verts, all while constantly checking the silhouette looks ok. This is why literally every 3D character artist will tell you sculpting is the far better, more efficient workflow, but stupid people like yourself just refuse to accept it.

[Anonymous No.748615]

>>748613
They ignore polymodeling as a viable option because they aren't good at it, yes. This doesn't mean sculpting is a bad practice. I do both.

[Anonymous No.748616]

>>748611
>You'll even end up having more control over the final shape.
You are an actual idiot.
By all means, try to back that statement up though. Explain how polymodeling gives you more control over the final shape than sculpting does.

[Anonymous No.748617]

>>748613
It's a braindead newshit to 3D, probably a covid immigrant, who no doubt watched some of the beginner character tutorials on youtube, and is now in a state of severe cope trying to tell people polymodeling is just as good, if not better than sculpting for characters.

[Anonymous No.748618]

>>748614
>You're only deluding yourself because you've already invested too much time following all the wrong tutorials, and you're trying to rationalize your time spent.
Now you are just guessing. or maybe you are projecting? I can do both and know when to use which technique. Saves me a lot of time.

>which usually entails pulling and pushing several more verts, all while constantly checking the silhouette looks ok
what do you think sculpting is?

[Anonymous No.748619]

>>748612
Yeah, if you're making a Minecraft character, you polymodel it.
Anything organic, and sculpting + retopology is clearly the better workflow, no matter how much it pains you to admit.

[Anonymous No.748620]

>>748617
You should give up 3D and start a career in creative writing. You have a knack for it.

[Anonymous No.748621]

Minecraft characters are made with primitives only. You're not even trying anymore.

[Anonymous No.748622]

>>748618
>Now you are just guessing
Logically concluding, actually.

>or maybe you are projecting?
What? Are you trying to suggest because I learned the objectively superior way from industry professionals that I'd be projecting? While you just learned from some shitty character tutorial on youtube?

>I can do both and know when to use which technique
No, you're a dumbfuck who's brand new to 3D, and don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.748623]

>>748611
>hey bro just build an intricate geometric construction to get a single wrinkle
>instead of just moving your hand once
>trust me, you'll have "more control" if you do things in an incredibly circuitous way instead of just doing them directly
go on, polymodel this for me real quick. it should be really fast for an expert modeler like you, and the result should be much better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLb_CCoWn5o
i'll see you in 2070

[Anonymous No.748624]

>>748615
post your sculpts

[Anonymous No.748625]

>>748618
>what do you think sculpting is?
Why did you omit the previous sentence, idiot?
When you are sculpting, you do not worry about topology. You're free to sculpt whatever form you want without having to worry about things like edgeflow or clean geometry. Then with retopology, you focus on all that stuff, with the guarantee the form won't break because you're snapping to the sculpt.

[Anonymous No.748626]

>>748622
>objectively superior way from industry professionals
I know a few that would disagree. And then there are a lot who value either set of techniques equally.

>No, you're a dumbfuck who's brand new to 3D, and don't know what you're talking about.
I think actually you are the one brand new to 3D because you cling to your precious sculpting without seeing the benefits of polymodeling. You've probably never had to create anything organic without sculpting. This tells me you are the noob,

[Anonymous No.748627]

>>748623
>>trust me, you'll have "more control" if you do things in an incredibly circuitous way instead of
You still fail to understand that there are different types of projects with different art styles. Not every project calls for characters with a high definition in topology or the requirement of high detailed bump maps. Again, clearly you've never had to work on anything for a client. You're just a bunch of amateurs.

[Anonymous No.748628]

>>748626
>I know a few that would disagree
No you don't, moron. You're a Blender beginner, you don't know any professionals.

[Anonymous No.748629]

>>748625
Oh sorry if I don't respond to all of your idiocy. I hope you don't feel left out too much. See you are describing two sets of work which polymodeling conveniently wraps into one. Again, you think I'm anti sculpting, which I am not. I like sculpting and retopo work even. But I'm not going to state that polymodeling is somehow the worse option as there are countless of situations and reasons why one would prefer to choose exactly that technique instead of sculpting. Just use your brain for a few seconds.

[Anonymous No.748630]

>>748627
>y-you must all be amateurs!
You've been called out like 3-4 times, idiot. You can't back up anything you say with your own work, you can't provide a single good counterargument to anything being thrown your way, and all you've done is cry "w-well there are certain cases where polymodeling can work!".

Swallow your pride and stop.

[Anonymous No.748632]

>>748628
In terms of being a blender beginner, this is partially true. I've got 10+ years of experience in 3DS Max, and started using blender 6 months ago. But being the pro that you are, I'm sure you understand how 3D skills translate between softwares.

[Anonymous No.748633]

>>748629
>See you are describing two sets of work which polymodeling conveniently wraps into one
You. Are. An. Idiot.

> Again, you think I'm anti sculpting, which I am not
No, I'm just correctly pointing out you're both a beginner gaslighting as a professional, and a complete idiot with no idea what you're talking about.

>But I'm not going to state that polymodeling is somehow the worse option as there are countless of situations and reasons why one would prefer to choose exactly that technique instead of sculpting
and you haven't provided a single one. Others provided them for you, and that's what you desperately clung to.

[Anonymous No.748634]

>>748582
>poly-modeling produces shittier topology
not that I bash sculpting, but this is delusional

[Anonymous No.748635]

>>748630
>You've been called out like 3-4 times, idiot
By whom? You? The other fag posting in this thread? Doesn't seem like it to me.

>You can't back up anything you say with your own work
I don't have anything to prove especially to you.

>you can't provide a single good counterargument to anything being thrown your way
I've been doing nothing else anon. But then again you both do spout a lot of nonsense. Hard to keep up.

>all you've done is cry "w-well there are certain cases where polymodeling can work!".
which is true, but you two started "crying" about how sculpting is superior in every single case. I'm just reminding both of you repeatedly that it is not true. Oh I guess this makes you two the crying party

[Anonymous No.748637]

Would you sculpt this?

[Anonymous No.748638]

>>748627
>Not every project calls for characters with a high definition in topology or the requirement of high detailed bump maps.
a decent sculptor will have you beat on time and quality on simple cartoon characters as well.

post an actual organic character you've polymodeled and explain why a sculptor would struggle with producing the same or better result. you keep going on about these "situations" where polymodeling beats sculpting, so please actually show one.

[Anonymous No.748639]

>>748633
>You. Are. An. Idiot.
talking about great arguments

>No, I'm just correctly pointing out you're both a beginner gaslighting as a professional, and a complete idiot with no idea what you're talking about.
I guess you would know best, being the professional. Like I said, you should do some more creative writing. It suits you.

>Others provided them for you
Oh really? When did that happen.

[Anonymous No.748640]

>>748637
Easier than polymodeling.

[Anonymous No.748641]

>>748638
google it

[Anonymous No.748642]

>>748637
yes.

[Anonymous No.748643]

>>748639
>Oh really? When did that happen.
when i mentioned quake-style lowpoly, and when someone else mentioned minecraft.

you are actually worse at arguing your own case than your literal opponents. we have given you more examples of proper use of polymodeling than you've given us. it's hilarious how inept you are at this.

>>748635
>but you two started "crying" about how sculpting is superior in every single case
again, we have provided more legitimate cases for the use of polymodeling than you have.

>>748641
oh hey, we got to the part of the thread where the "professional" with "10 years of 3ds max experience" who "works for clients" all the time cannot post a single piece of work to back up his claims. what a surprise

[Anonymous No.748645]

>>748637
100%.
Polymodeling Mario would be fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.748647]

>>748637
No.
I would either box model and let subsurf take care of the rest.
Or just do the model with NURBS.

[Anonymous No.748650]

>>748637
Clearly not. Subdiv modeling is the right answer in that case. But blendlets don't know about that because SUBDIV MODELING IS BROKEN IN BLENDER AND NONE OF YOU COULD HAVE SUCCESSFULLY USED IT, EVER.

[Anonymous No.748652]

>>748643
I'm not going to show my work here and be asociated with the gutter of the internet. I've got a business to run and mouths to feed. Only idiots post their work here. Also I was the one mentioning minecraft you daft simpleton.

[Anonymous No.748653]

>>748652
>Also I was the one mentioning minecraft you daft simpleton
No you weren't, retard.

[Anonymous No.748654]

>>748653
prove it

[Anonymous No.748655]

>>748647
>>748650
Don't educate the sculptards. It might shatter their worldview.

[Anonymous No.748657]

>>748637
No

[Anonymous No.748660]

>>748652
>I'm not going to show my work here and be asociated with the gutter of the internet.
yes, because a modeler with 10 years of experience does not have a single random model on his hard drive that he could post here without it getting traced back to his real-life job and ruining his life. this is what's happening here, not you being a fucking liar who knows all his shit is too awful not to get you laughed out of the thread.

>Also I was the one mentioning minecraft you daft simpleton.
no you weren't, you lying turd. this is the first mention of minecraft in the thread:

>>748621
>Yeah, if you're making a Minecraft character, you polymodel it. Anything organic, and sculpting + retopology is clearly the better workflow, no matter how much it pains you to admit.

it's obviously not you because that's the opposite of your argument. why would you try to lie about shit anyone can check by pressing ctrl+f? why would anyone believe your stories about how you're secretly some amazing pro when you can't even stop yourself from lying about what you said five minutes ago?

[Anonymous No.748662]

>>748660
Unlike you I don't fuck around with my art or my time. I sell or use what I produce.

[Anonymous No.748664]

>>748662
sure! i will totally believe that you're the earth's only artist that never did anything for fun in his whole 10-year career, even thought a. it's extremely unlikely and b. i just demonstrated that you're a pathological liar.

this is an anonymous board, dude. you can just go lie about something else in another thread and no one will know. you don't need to degrade yourself like this.

[Anonymous No.748665]

>>748664
the fun is in making money and doing the stuff you want to do. this is what separates the professional from the hobbyist.

>this is an anonymous board, dude. you can just go lie about something else in another thread
this applies to every single poster on this site, even you.

[Anonymous No.748667]

>>748519
>do not poly model
>use sculpting toos
>posts hard surface render in OP

are you serious?

[Anonymous No.748669]

So I wasted probably up to ten hours on this following the guide
https://youtu.be/FB1HRmn07C4?t=1323
and don't really want to finish because I can clearly see that my topology is already quite dirty compared to that in the video.

Seeing here that you can sculpt and then retopo afterwards, is this still true for a complete beginner? I mean, if I sculpt and try to retopo, will the result be worse than if I were to poly-model from scratch?

[Anonymous No.748670]

>>748665
>this applies to every single poster on this site, even you.
yes, but i'm not the one stuck making up preposterous lies to try and save face in a dumb argument that was lost 10 posts ago. nobody would buy your "i could totally own you with my models but if i posted one it would ruin my life" shtick even if you weren't already a proven liar. that's how kids on a playground talk to each other about their nintendo uncles.

an actual professional, even if he lost all his personal work in a hdd crash or something, would probably be able to whip up a simple model to prove his point in the time it took you so far to create and develop this silly fairytale about how your point cannot be demonstrated without the joker finding out you're really bruce wayne. at least get better at lying because you're just making yourself look ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.748671]

>>748669
you'll either have to learn how to sculpt, or continue to learn what you were doing.

[Anonymous No.748672]

>>748670
You're the one claiming I'm lying. You ever consider I might not be lying at all? Also I'm not going to spend time modeling something just to prove a point to some obnoxious idiots on 4chan

[Anonymous No.748673]

>>748671
Yeah but... nvm, you're right, that was a stupid question and I should just try sculpting right away and see for myself.

[Anonymous No.748674]

>>748672
>You ever consider I might not be lying at all?
no, because i caught you in one undisputable lie already, and the thing you're saying right now is idiotic. we've been over this. you're refusing to back up your point because you know you can't, not because it would destroy your career to do so. that's a moronic fairytale.

>Also I'm not going to spend time modeling something just to prove a point
but you are going to spend it making yourself look dumb with obvious lies? just prolonging the embarrassment? what positive outcome do you expect from this?

[Anonymous No.748675]

>>748674
>undisputable lie
the fuck are you talking about mate. you're not getting desperate now are you?

>but you are going to spend it making yourself look dumb with obvious lies
if you are refering to our little discussion here, I don't know how long it takes you to write a post but it doesn't take me that long.

>what positive outcome do you expect from this
I didn't know there was a goal here. are you trying to prove something?

[Anonymous No.748677]

>>748669
topology would likely be easier to learn when you're just laying down loops on an existing sculpts instead of having to worry about the form at the same time. as for the quality of the result, it's really all about art skills with sculpting.

[Anonymous No.748679]

>>748601

Subdivision modifier is the thing you don't use in blendaaah because it raises the polycount above the 1000 polygon count which makes blunder slow and unresponsive.

[Anonymous No.748680]

>>748679
How unfortunate for blender users.

[Anonymous No.748681]

>>748680

Not that they have the skill required to use any of these tools anyway. Most of them can't do anything more than the donut tut.

[Anonymous No.748683]

>>748677
Huh, so I sculpt, then make this sculpt a 3D reference and poly-model over it? Sounds boring but maybe it'll help

[Anonymous No.748684]

>>748683
retopo is mindnumbingly boring. if you want to get the edgeflow right you still need to look into poly modeling. sculpting won't magically make you good at 3d.

[Anonymous No.748685]

>>748675
>the fuck are you talking about mate.
the undisputable lie where you claimed to have written a post about minecraft which you couldn't have written because it was disagreeing with you. you know, the time i demonstrated that you were a pathological liar that can't stop himself from lying even about things that happened minutes ago? are you going to lie about THAT now?

that's your tactic, isn't it? fuck up, wait a bit, and then insist it never happened. it just doesn't work online because anyone can just scroll their mousewheel and prove the lie. but i bet you've gaslit some friends and family real good with that shit, right?

>I didn't know there was a goal here. are you trying to prove something?
no, you are: you were going to prove to us all that sculpting is inferior to polymodeling for "certain scenarios" in organic character modeling, remember? you just stopped because you couldn't actually provide examples, and now you're just bullshitting aimlessly.

[Anonymous No.748687]

>>748685
I wrote the bit about the primitives you absolute brainlet.

>you were going to prove to us all that sculpting is inferior to polymodeling
I never said sculpting is inferior to polymodeling. I said polymodeling is still a valid technique and should not be ignored. You are too fucking hot headed to properly read posts.

[Anonymous No.748688]

>>748683
basically. use something like retopoflow (they sell it, but you can also get it for free from their github) to make it faster. this stuff is going to only get more automated in the future so i wouldn't sweat it too much other than understanding the basics of proper edge flow etc.

[Anonymous No.748698]

I like polymodeling, its fun

[Anonymous No.748700]

>>748687
>I wrote the bit about the primitives you absolute brainlet.
...which was in response to someone else bringing up minecraft, which means that the other guy was totally right to say you are getting examples provided to you instead of providing them, which you denied. that's the lie.

here's you pretending to not remember something from five minutes prior:
>>Others provided them for you
>Oh really? When did that happen.

>Also I was the one mentioning minecraft you daft simpleton
see? this is a lie. you weren't the one mentioning minecraft. your opponent brought up minecraft, not you. i brought up quake-style lowpoly. why lie about these things happening when anyone can read the posts?

>I never said sculpting is inferior to polymodeling.
i never said that you said sculpting is inferior to polymodeling, you're lying again by intentionally cutting off half of my sentence. i said you said it was inferior in certain scenarios, which you then failed to provide. this is you saying it right here:
>there are countless of situations and reasons why one would prefer to choose exactly that technique instead of sculpting
and then instead of demonstrating these "countless situations" you went into your fairy tale about how you have to protect your career or whatever, if you told us you'd have to kill us etc. laughable bullshit.

it's incredibly tedious to sift through all your lies on top of lies, but i was just wondering if you're going to grow a spine and admit to it when confronted or just stay a snake forever. i guess i have my answer now. i pity the people that have to deal with you daily.

[Anonymous No.748703]

>>748700
minecraft is not a good example of polymodeling because like I said before, but somehow this completely goes over your head, A the models in minecraft consist of primitives only. B the models in minecraft, in particular the early ones, weren't modeled but hardcoded like everything else in the game. I understand why you wouldn't know such things because you've been talking bullshit since the start of this thread.

>you were going to prove to us all that sculpting is inferior to polymodeling
scroll up mate. I'm pretty sure this was you

>you went into your fairy tale about how you have to protect your career or whatever, if you told us you'd have to kill us etc
that's you imaginating running to your head again. Like I said twice already, maybe you should start creative writing instead of pretending 3d is your thing. The part about protecting my career is true though. And that's something you'll never have. But hobbyists deserve a voice too I guess. I just hope there are better ones than yours out there.

[Anonymous No.748706]

this is sculpted.

[Anonymous No.748707]

>>748684
>>748688
Understood, thank you very much

[Anonymous No.748708]

Are blender sculpting tools any good?

[Anonymous No.748709]

>>748703
>I'm pretty sure this was you
no, i said sculpting was superior, not inferior. you're getting lost in your own lies at this point.

anyway we're back to that point where i've just shown you were lying, so you write about something else to avoid admitting it, and a few posts from now you'll start pretending you never lied in the first place and so on. you're just going to move in a loop forever now so i'm done. enjoy making all these models you're too embarrassed to share even on fucking 4chan lol

[Anonymous No.748714]

>>748709
>you were going to prove to us all that sculpting is inferior to polymodeling
you said this to me I suppose. so that corresponds to:
>no, i said sculpting was superior

You are the one getting lost.

[Anonymous No.748715]

>>748709
>you're just going to move in a loop forever now so i'm done
typical. running away with the tail between the legs as you are starting to forget your own posts. looks like dementia is coming early for you.

[Anonymous No.748717]

>>748186
>https://twitter.com/pablodp606/status/1183803453715484673?lang=en
I've tried this but it's not as intuitive as in topogun plus you need to switch to sculpting mode which is kinda shitty imo. Kinda shitty imo :(.

If anyone knows an addon that does that lemme know, or i might make one myself. I dont think its technically hard to make: just average vertices along their edges within the brush area (including some falloff function within the brush) and move them a bit along the mouse movement.

[Anonymous No.748718]

>>748708
Very good even.

[Anonymous No.748719]

>>748718
so how come people use zbrush?

[Anonymous No.748720]

>>748719
because zbrush is also good?

[Anonymous No.748721]

>>748719
better performance at very high polycounts, some fancier tools you probably don't care about if you're a beginner

[Anonymous No.748726]

>>748719
Because its the best sculpting tool and nothing else can compete.

[Anonymous No.748729]

>>748519
Poly modeling is comfy as fuck, sculpting is soulless.

[Anonymous No.748753]

I hate how two dumb posts resulted in the thread getting absolutely shit on.

/r/blender and other literal reddit resources are significantly better than /3/ for general information; the only good thing about /3/ is the honest feedback people give in the WIP thread and also when /3/ comes together to advance the state of the art breast/penis/vagina simulation

[Anonymous No.748754]

>>748753
that's fucking degenerate. improve yourself anon.

[Anonymous No.748760]

>>748719
Because most generalist programs stop scaling at a few million polygons.
Z-brush doesn't.

And the 3D industry has been doing multi program workflows for half a century by this point.
Thats still true today, even if a generalist suit and a beefy computer can do a lot of amazing stuff you would normally need a specialized program to do.

[Anonymous No.748770]

>"You already know how to <method> and have been doing it for years, but you have to stop working on projects and go learn to do <other method> because i say its faster"

>"<method> is better than <other method>" (never defines what they're actually talking about)

>"I am cool and talented because I use the same workflows as people who are cool and talented, even though I don't actually produce anything"

>"Everyone must use the industry standard workflows because they are the best" **goes to /v/ and complains that all video games have looked like derivatives of each other since 2005**

>"Don't do things in ways that I don't like REEEEEEEEEEE"

Tbh these threads were less cancer when we were just arguing about if Blender could ever be used in the industry.

Also, Generators are the future.

[Anonymous No.748771]

>>748770
A lot of newcomers to 3D see all the magical tools available to them and think getting a shortcut substitutes actual knowledge and skill.

[Anonymous No.748786]

[Anonymous No.748787]

>>748786
too shiny.

[Anonymous No.748791]

>>748519
>Do not poly-model characters unless you are a retard.

What if the character is a robot. It will be easier to poly-model than to sculpt.

[Anonymous No.748793]

>>748791
plot twist, OP was the retard all along

[Anonymous No.748796]

If you learned poly modeling for hard surface, but didn't learn sculpting, are you allowed to poly model organics too since you know it anyway? Or are you required to learn sculpting?

What if you learned to poly model organics many years ago before sculpting was a thing?

[Anonymous No.748799]

How did they do hair here

[Anonymous No.748801]

>>748796
>are you allowed to poly model organics too since you know it anyway?
No.
>Or are you required to learn sculpting?
Yes.

[Anonymous No.748802]

[Anonymous No.748803]

>>748799
Probably with a comb.

[Anonymous No.748806]

>>748667
Sculpting hard surface is acceptable if you know what you're doing.
Poly modeling organic is dumb

[Anonymous No.748808]

>>748791
Robots aren't organic. Are you even paying attention?

[Anonymous No.748813]

>>748803
What do you mean? Is it a sculpt tool?
I saw mesh xray screenshot on the page but it has no hair so I dunno

[Anonymous No.748816]

Trying to create the asthetics of a 2d game in 3d. I'm going to fake lighting, but is there a way to get "am i in direct light?" in the shader nodes?

[Anonymous No.748820]

>>748799
Hair particles and combing.

[Anonymous No.748837]

How would you go about replicating beastars fur shadow shader? I've gotten close with a wave and magic texture amalgamation but it's not hitting right. I feel retarded it looks so simple.

[Anonymous No.748838]

>>748813
>What do you mean?
I say a comb, because that's a photo, not 3D. But in 3D you'd have to comb it anyway.

[Anonymous No.748840]

>>748837
A texture into the Size of a toon shader for the shading, and you also need a texture on the borders between colors.

[Anonymous No.748843]

>>748838
>photo
>that preview screenshots of meshes
wot

[Anonymous No.748856]

I can't create saliva in Zbrush, only the shape of it, as there's no material and no effect that can actually give it a proper viscosity/grayscale/transparency effect. How hard is it to create water in Blender WITHOUT the Flip Fluids addon?

[Anonymous No.748858]

>>748843
Not that guy but what previews? You only posted one image.

>>748856
Why not export the mesh of the saliva to blender to render? Isn't that the workflow with a lot of CGI artists anyway?

[Anonymous No.748863]

>>748837
A lot of the shadows seem to be painted textures. The dynamic stuff looks like some custom normals + normal map.

So... a lot of painting and sculpting.

[Anonymous No.748864]

>>748799
Is it even possible to do hair like this in blender

[Anonymous No.748865]

>>748799
That's a photograph silly anon.

[Anonymous No.748866]

>>748858
Thank you for answering. Yes, I do have the mesh of the saliva as part of the sculpture. In Zbrush there's not much one can do to make saliva look liquid, it instead looks like either green or blue glass. So, my question is, can one make meshes look like water WITHOUT the Flip Fluids addon?

[Anonymous No.748877]

>>748866
That's just a matter of the material, so yes you can do it without anything fancy. Flip fluids is about creating water simulation meshes/particle systems.

[Anonymous No.748897]

>>748638
Not him, so is this why it's so arduous to poly model anime style characters? Rather than figuring out the topology first to get the shape, is it actually more sensible to sculpt and get the shape and then retopo?

[Anonymous No.748898]

>>748897
(Me) Fug, never mind, reading the rest of the thread pretty much answered that. I suppose I already do this to a degree when fixing things done with proportional editing, but doing it from the start seems pretty new to me.

[Anonymous No.748900]

>>748877
In that case, does Blender have materials for water? All I fucking want is just a material that allows for some translucency, and that changes the saturation of gray just like any normal drop of water or tiny collection of fluids regardless of viscosity.

[Anonymous No.748908]

>>748900
Yeah, blender can do transparent/translucent and all that in both Cycles and Eevee.

[Anonymous No.748914]

>>748808
characters don't have to be organic. you can have all sorts of characters.

[Anonymous No.748915]

>>748806
polymodeling organic shapes is easy as fuck and doesn't require retopology. take the Suzanne monkey head from blender. that thing wasn't sculpted yet you can make it look organic as fuck with just a few subdivisions. no retopo needed at all.

[Anonymous No.748916]

>>748796
there's no 3d modeling police anon. you can literally do anything you want.

>>748801
wrong

[Anonymous No.748930]

>>748908
Sounds promising. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.748962]

>>748915
>uses the blender mascot from 20 years ago as his example
You are a complete idiot.

[Anonymous No.748964]

>>748962
how is age a factor in this? you are the idiot

[Anonymous No.748966]

>>748915
>dude, i put subdiv on the default monkey thing once and it was like all smooth and shit
you sound like a real expert

[Anonymous No.748967]

>>748966
If it works for the default monkey thing it should work on other meshes. Since I'm a noob I can't be sure because I've only put it on the 20 year old default monkey thing. But deductive reasoning would support the idea that it should work on other meshes. Would you, judging from your expert opinion, concur with this hypothesis? Or will you continue to make yourself look like a fool.

[Anonymous No.748969]

>>748915
>>748967
>polymodeling organic shapes is easy as fuck
>I've only put it on the 20 year old default monkey thing.
>will you continue to make yourself look like a fool.

[Anonymous No.748971]

>>748969
You are not the sharpest tool in the shed. And that's an understatement.

[Anonymous No.748974]

>>748806
>>748962
>>748967
>>748966
>>748964
>>748969
>>748915
And to think this is all about a fucking brainlet who is scared from learning something as easy as sculpting

[Anonymous No.748975]

>>748974
guess again. it's all about this statement
>Do not poly-model characters unless you are a retard. Blender has sculpting tools, use them.
sculpting is great. poly modeling is great. 3d is great. some of you fucktards can't read.

[Anonymous No.748977]

>>748971
okay i'll make it clearer because you're struggling

>A THING I'VE LITERALLY NEVER DONE appears VERY EASY to me because i suffer from extreme DUNNING KRUGER

is this helping at all?

[Anonymous No.748979]

>>748977
You clearly don't understand sarcasm which kind of leads me to conclude that you are suffering from autism. You really think I only put a subdiv modifier on the monkey? I also put it on the utah teapot...

[Anonymous No.748980]

>>748979
yes, i'm sure you're only retarded "sarcastically"

[Anonymous No.748981]

>>748964
Because that was the only way you could model back then on Blender you utterly stupid moron. The whole point of the sculpting + retopology debate is that it's a far better, more efficient workflow for organic characters in the current year. Fuck me you're braindead.

[Anonymous No.748982]

>>748975
Poly modeling organic characters in 2020 is stupid, idiot. A suzanne head modelled 12 years before sculpting became available in Blender does not nullify that point, moron.

[Anonymous No.748983]

>>748980
If you can't understand the difference between a principle and an example i've got bad news for you.

[Anonymous No.748984]

>>748981
>>748982
Ask me how I know both of you aren't into 3D for that long. Do you know how long sculpting exists? I doubt you know.

[Anonymous No.748986]

>>748984
>Do you know how long sculpting exists?
We're talking about Blender, specifically the Suzanne monkey head you utter moron.

[Anonymous No.748987]

>>748986
no we're talking about polymodeling vs sculpting you fucking brainlet. These things exist outside of blender. And even blender is probably older than you think.

[Anonymous No.748989]

>>748987
and yet, you used suzanne as your prime example like the idiot you are.

No professional poly models organic characters in the current year, as much as it paint you.

[Anonymous No.748990]

>>748989
It's a good example unless you fail to see the implication which you've done more than once in this thread. I guess you're a little thick.

[Anonymous No.748992]

>>748990
>It's a good example
No it isn't you moron. A monkey head modeled in 2002 is not a good example for why polymodeling organic characters is a good workflow in 2020.

>unless you fail to see the implication
This is some hilarious mental gymnastics. Keep digging yourself deeper, idiot.

[Anonymous No.748993]

>>748992
just because at one time you managed to sculpt a penis doesn't mean everything should be sculpted. the age of the monkey head is not important. It's the low poly mesh that serves as a base for the subdivision modifier which makes it organic. you can quickly polymodel a low poly objects and make it organic in a matter of minutes. the resulting smooth model will have the correct edgeflow, if you kept everything quads (pay attention you might actually learn something). You will apply sculpting on every problem or perhaps this quote rings a bell: ""If Your Only Tool Is a Hammer Then Every Problem Looks Like a Nail". Don't forget you still need to do retopology AND make sure the edgeflow is correct. All this time the polymodeler is already working on the next model. You're the one showing remarkable mental gymnastics by somehow insinuating that the age of the monkey head , which I used merely as an example to explain polymodeled mesh in combination with subdiv makes for organic shapes, is a valid arguement against polymodeling. I've seen quite a bunch of stupid people on this site but you are the worst.

[Anonymous No.748996]

>>748993
>the age of the monkey head is not important
The subject is workflow techniques in the current year, and you're saying age is not important.

Honestly, stopped reading there. You're a complete idiot, 100%.

[Anonymous No.748998]

>>748996
>monkey head older than 20 years reeeee
stop moving the goal posts you moron. You were talking about the age of the monkey head.

[Anonymous No.748999]

>>748996
good god anon you are contradicting yourself

[Anonymous No.749001]

>>748993
yet you can't name even one professional studio still modeling organic characters. you're just a worthless amateur coping with your garbage techniques.

> the resulting smooth model will have the correct edgeflow
>Don't forget you still need to do retopology AND make sure the edgeflow is correct
haha, you shouldn't accuse others of doing mental gymnastics, dumbass.

[Anonymous No.749002]

>>748998
No, I was talking about the relevance of certain workflow techniques in the current year, idiot.

[Anonymous No.749003]

>>749001
>t. sculptfag who never had to animate his own abominations

[Anonymous No.749004]

>>749002
polymodeling is still a valid workflow in the current year and the foreseeable future

[Anonymous No.749005]

>>749001
Why should he name a studio, you can look that shit up yourself. It's like you blendlets never heard of stylistic or low poly art.

[Anonymous No.749006]

>>748993
>the resulting smooth model will have the correct edgeflow
a smooth model does not mean you have correct form, or that the form can be poly modeled efficiently.

>the resulting smooth model will have the correct edgeflow
What? No it won't retard. You have to constantly work on topology as you're extruding, inseting and tweaking, except unlike retopology, you have to worry about not breaking form.

[Anonymous No.749007]

>>748519
>Blender has sculpting tools, use them.

You'd be a fucking idiot to do so. If you're that desperate just pirate zbrush

[Anonymous No.749010]

>>749004
>i'll just mindlessly claim the contrary! t-that'll show him!
Also idiot, try to grasp context: organic characters.

>>749003
What's animating got to do with anything, idiot? Retopology is objectively better for creating animation friendly meshes.

[Anonymous No.749011]

>>749005
>Why should he name a studio
Of course, dumbfucks like yourself feel the need to deflect the burden of proof to people correctly highlighting your utter stupidity.

You're not naming a single studio because you know you can't. Character production always begins with ZBrush in 99.9% of studios, no matter how much it pains you.

[Anonymous No.749013]

>>749006
>a smooth model does not mean you have correct form, or that the form can be poly modeled efficiently.
this sentence makes no sense

>What? No it won't retard. You have to constantly work on topology as you're extruding, inseting and tweaking...
If you've done your polymodeling correct, the resulting mesh after subdivision will need zero tweeking in the flow of edges. Now take note, this does require modeling skills, so I'm not expecting you to make sense of this statement.

[Anonymous No.749014]

>>749010
>What's animating got to do with anything, idiot?
he doesn't know the importance of correct edgeflow for animation. Jesus christ just drop 3D already. This is clearly not for you.

[Anonymous No.749016]

>>749007
Blender is acceptable, unless you want to get into very high frequency detail.

One of the advantages Blender has over ZBrush is an integrated polymodeling workflow, which can sometimes prove useful in the sculpting process. And you don't have to export before commencing manual retopology.

[Anonymous No.749017]

>>749013
>this sentence makes no sense
Don't worry, idiot, I don't expect you to understand what form means.

[Anonymous No.749018]

>>749017
reply to the other part brainlet, or are you having difficulty?

[Anonymous No.749019]

>>749014
Again, what does animation have to do with the argument, dumbfuck beginner?

Every single pixar character and realistic + stylized video game character is the work of a sculpt + retopology. One of the main purposes of retopology is creating an animation friendly mesh from a sculpt.

Jesus, how stupid are you?

[Anonymous No.749020]

>>749011
>burden of proof
thickheaded pieces of shit like yourself wouldn't be convinced by any kind of proof.

[Anonymous No.749021]

>>749018
Why should I waste my time? I already know you're a moron who can't back up any of his claims, or even name a single professional studio that adopts your laughable workflow. You've lost already.

[Anonymous No.749022]

>>748546
Is this the best blendlets can do? Yikes

[Anonymous No.749023]

>>749020
What are you talking about? I asked you to provide just one studio and you didn't. At this point I can only correctly label you exactly what you are: an idiotic beginner who thinks he knows more than he really does.

[Anonymous No.749024]

>>749019
Mate, go back to the posts and read them again. This time put your glasses on.

[Anonymous No.749025]

>>748990
firstly, you're talking to multiple people, dummy. secondly, it's not a good example of polymodeling an organic shape because it literally isn't. subdiv modeling something organic would involve first conceptualizing the form and then purposefully constructing a subdiv cage so as to produce the desired shape. simply smoothing random geometry with a subdiv modifier is not "polymodeling an organic shape". you have not polymodeled any organic shapes.

the idea that finding the smooth button in a program "implies" you know how to polymodel organics is preposterously retarded. you're straight-up admitting to having never actually even tried to do the thing you're talking about and insisting is "easy as fuck". that's incredibly stupid and arrogant.

but i guess it's good to know that the sort of people who argue for polymodeling organic characters over sculpting them in 2020 have literally never done the thing they're recommending lol

[Anonymous No.749026]

>>749021
>Why should I waste my time
And there it is. Capitulation.

>>749023
I'm pretty sure you are the beginner here

[Anonymous No.749027]

>>749022
Thanks for the bump but I was like 3 days in when I made that post, with zero experience in any 3D program, so it's more a reflection of my own incompetence rather than that of Blender users in general.

[Anonymous No.749028]

>>749024
I don't need to. You brought in animation where it was completely irrelevant, and now you're just trying to backpedal. You're a worthless moron.

[Anonymous No.749032]

>>749025
>firstly, you're talking to multiple people, dummy
no shit einstein

>secondly, it's not a good example of polymodeling an organic shape because it literally isn't.
it's not good because it isn't. wow you sure convinced me there

>subdiv modeling something organic would involve first conceptualizing the form and then purposefully constructing a subdiv cage
in the case of the monkey head that "subdiv cage" is provided. what makes you assume a good modeler can't make his own "subdiv cages". What makes you assume people who use polymodeling simply press a "smooth button" and hope for the best. This sounds more like the sculpting approach and the automated retopology tools that exist today. Are you sure you aren't projecting your own incompetence?

>polymodeling organic characters over sculpting them in 2020
you have absolutely no idea and that amuses me

[Anonymous No.749033]

>>749028
edgeflow is incredibly important when you want to animate your objects. anyone who actually understands 3D would know this. You don't know jack shit about 3D son.

[Anonymous No.749036]

>>749026
>Since I'm a noob I can't be sure because I've only put it on the 20 year old default monkey thing.
>I'm pretty sure you are the beginner here

[Anonymous No.749037]

>>749033
and if you weren't a complete idiot with the brain the size of a crumb, you'd know retopology exists for the sole purpose of creating good edgeflow. I don't even know how your idiotic brain somehow decided this was even about edge flow.

[Anonymous No.749038]

>>749036
Again, understanding sarcasm is specifically difficult for people struggling with autism. I'm not judging you. Autists can be quite colorful people.

[Anonymous No.749039]

>>749032
You haven't posted your own polymodeled work.
You can't name a single professional studio that polymodels organic characters.

Again, you lost. Swallow your pride and move on, retard.

[Anonymous No.749040]

>>749037
All I said was that you need to do this retopo shit after sculpting while the polymodeler already did that before subdividing. But you don't read posts so I'm not surprised you miss bits and pieces.

[Anonymous No.749041]

>>749039
>show your work
>name a studio
>do this
>do that
i'm not your lap dog. go suck a bag of dicks (polymodeled preferably)

[Anonymous No.749043]

>>749032
>it's not good because it isn't.
it's not a good example because it isn't an example. don't pretend to be that stupid.

>what makes you assume a good modeler can't make his own "subdiv cages"
what makes you assume it's "easy as fuck" when you've already admitted to never trying it even once? we're not talking to a hypothetical "good modeler", we're talking to you.

[Anonymous No.749045]

>>749040
What pea-brain beginner dumbfucks like yourself fail to realize is that polymodeling alone is not a faster, let alone more efficient workflow than sculpting and retopology. Your small brain reads it as "well, i only have to do one thing, so it must be quicker than doing two!"

You followed some shitty youtube tutorial and thing you have it all figured out, but in reality, ngmi.

[Anonymous No.749047]

>>749041
>can't back up his argument
I know, that's why you lost, idiot. Move on.

I can name an endless supply of studios and pro artist who sculpt + retopo their organic characters. You can't even name one that polymodels them. just lmao

[Anonymous No.749048]

>>749045
It totally depends on the project.

>You followed some shitty youtube tutorial and thing you have it all figured out
projecting much

[Anonymous No.749049]

>>749043
>it's not a good example because it isn't an example
It's a perfect example of why polymodeling is a good technique to get organic shapes. You model, you subdivide, and presto, there's your organic shape. It's not that difficult anon.

>when you've already admitted to never trying it even once
Twice, remember the utah teapot?

[Anonymous No.749050]

[Anonymous No.749052]

>>749048
>It totally depends on the project.
Yes. If you're making a minecraft character or an extremely low poly 90s style character, polymodeling works, especially since you're adopting the same workflow 90s 3D modelers had.

Alas, morons like yourself still believe it applies to more, yet you're completely unable to back it up. On top of that, you laughably tried to bring in animation and the importance of edgeflow, like it was relevant to the argument at all.

[Anonymous No.749053]

>>749050
kek

[Anonymous No.749055]

>>749052
minecraft was already mentioned itt. those characters weren't modeled. they are hard coded. even if you wanted to model a minecraft character, you'd use standard primitives. that's not polymodeling.

[Anonymous No.749056]

>>749052
the arguement was that the polymodeler starts with the proper edgeflow. the sculpter ends with the proper edgeflow. jesus if you don't read the posts just don't reply.

[Anonymous No.749058]

>>749056
>the arguement was that the polymodeler starts with the proper edgeflow
>add some edgeloops and tweak some verts to achieve correct form
>whoops, crooked quads, better move the verts around to fix them
>whoops, that altered the form a bit, better move some more verts again
>*2 hours later*
>i have finally completed the elbow!

[Anonymous No.749060]

>>749058
you've clearly never done any modeling

[Anonymous No.749061]

>>749052
>>749058
why are these people on /3/ ?

[Anonymous No.749066]

>>749058
>sculpt a character
>do the retopo
>client wants to change something
>resculpt the character
>do the retopo again

[Anonymous No.749068]

>>749066
altering sculpts is trivial. retopology is half-automated and takes minutes.

have you even, like, seen a sculptor work? do you even know what zbrush looks like?

[Anonymous No.749070]

I hate to interrupt your argument, but suppose I have an ear shapekey, which increases the size and changes the shape of the ear in all axes. But I only want the X transformations.

Is there a way to axis lock shapekeys in this way?

[Anonymous No.749071]

>>749068
maybe trivial but every additional step takes time. and yes I have.

[Anonymous No.749076]

>>749060
>no argument
No problem, moron.

[Anonymous No.749078]

>>749071
>and yes I have.
Saying that means nothing, moron. You obviously haven't.

[Anonymous No.749079]

>>749076
If you were the one who wrote that ridiculous scenario, you've never done any modeling. That's a simple fact. That's the argument. Do with it what you want, idiot.

[Anonymous No.749080]

>>749078
>You obviously haven't
this says just as little as me saying that I have. Which of us is telling the truth. Who can really know.

[Anonymous No.749082]

>>749079
>If you were the one who wrote that ridiculous scenario
How is it ridiculous, idiot?

>you've never done any modeling
Another mindless statement from a mindless idiot.

>That's a simple fact.
Yep, saying that's a simple fact really helps your cause, hey idiot?

>That's the argument
and here you prove you don't know what an argument is. Ultimate confirmation of your sheer idiocy.

Until you show us how you poly model your organic characters, you've got nothing. It's your word against literally every single professional.

[Anonymous No.749083]

>>749082
>How is it ridiculous, idiot?
You wouldn't know, idiot

>Yep, saying that's a simple fact really helps your cause, hey idiot?
Did you enjoy your lunchbreak kid?

>and here you prove you don't know what an argument is. Ultimate confirmation of your sheer idiocy.
You are here to argue for argument's sake. Can't help you if you're not willing to learn little baby.

>Until you show us how you poly model your organic characters, you've got nothing. It's your word against literally every single professional.
Like I said I'm not your lap dog. Have you sucked that bag of dicks yet? I doubt you'd recognize a profesional if one polymodeled a dick for you to suck.

[Anonymous No.749085]

when will you faggots learn? the same idiot is shitting up the same thread with exactly the same bait posts about the superiority of polymodeling every day, down to identical wording. why are you still responding to him? do you really want this thread to be one retard's adventures in baiting forever?

yesterday he was larping as a successful 3d business owner with decades of experience or whatever. today he's trying his hilarious new character, a dude who just installed blender and played with the monkey, but he's just typing up all the same posts all over again.

it's obviously some bored neet autist that doesn't really do 3d and just chose "polymodeling is better for organic forms" as his shitposting tactic because it gets him all the attention on a slow board. you're not going to "win" with him because he has all the time in the world to post the same shit endlessly. just fucking stop responding and he'll have to go to /lit/ instead and tell them that harry potter is better than moby dick or whatever.

[Anonymous No.749086]

>>749085
tldr samefag

[Anonymous No.749087]

>>749085
I merely objected to this statement:
>Do not poly-model characters unless you are a retard. Blender has sculpting tools, use them.
All the rest is in your head.

[Anonymous No.749088]

>>749083
>still no examples
Your word against millions upon millions of professional artists. You lost, moron.

[Anonymous No.749089]

>>749088
Where are those millions upon millions of professionals? Also do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? "millions upon millions". What are you, twelve?

[Anonymous No.749090]

>mfw the blendlets start warring among themselves

[Anonymous No.749091]

>>749089
Let's see, Pixar, Dreamworks, Naughty Dog, Epic Games, Disney, Blur, every organic 3D character on the front page of artstation

https://www.artstation.com/artwork?sorting=trending

I could go on, but being the idiot you are, you won't give up. You swear by your free youtube tutorials.

[Anonymous No.749096]

>>749091
That's not a very long list anon. I am not impressed.

[Anonymous No.749097]

>>749090
christmas came early this year

[Anonymous No.749098]

>>749096
You weren't worth any more effort, idiot. At the end of the day, you're a dumb beginner desperately coping after learning bad workflow.

[Anonymous No.749100]

Being caught polymodeling should get you banned and blacklisted from the industry.

[Anonymous No.749101]

>>749096
he only had to name one, and he's still done more to prove his point than you have.

[Anonymous No.749102]

Blendlets are a plague on society

This fucking industry doesn't need more bumbling fucktards that leech off your wage

[Anonymous No.749103]

>>749098
>You weren't worth any more effort
still, made you look

>At the end of the day, you're a dumb beginner desperately coping after learning bad workflow
mere speculation. try harder.

[Anonymous No.749104]

Sculpting just ain't fun.

[Anonymous No.749106]

>>749101
I'm not here for a pissing contest kid

[Anonymous No.749108]

Buhlenda gooroo heyah, with anatha twotoriel, woil you wallabees argue with this pooftah who woen't sculpt a didgeridoo, oim making donuts with the uhray modifrier.

Bazongadooey, mate, that's some donut! Tune in next toim when oil make a horseraudish out of tarantula appendixes. That's arl from mei for now - g'day and lucky koala to you sobscroibers.

[Anonymous No.749111]

>>749104
only if you're bad at art lol

when i sculpt i'm constantly surprised that i actually made the thing i'm looking at from nothing. i do it every day because it's a constant dopamine hit, like videogames but not fake.

[Anonymous No.749112]

>>749108

lendlets literally we wuz khangzing

[Anonymous No.749113]

>>749108
lmao

[Anonymous No.749144]

>>749108
>Bazongadooey, mate, that's some donut!

fucking kek

[Anonymous No.749160]

FINALLY

[Anonymous No.749198]

>>748840
>>748863
Its half and half. They do use a dynamic shadow though that's clearly noticeable in some scenes. pic related. And yeah I've translated it and it doesn't tell me anything.

[Anonymous No.749199]

>>749198
Also what I've managed to do so far. Extremely rough draft of the model ignore it.

[Anonymous No.749219]

>>749199
The anatomy is wrong. Look up in Sketchfab for 3D models of wolf skulls and you'll realize the chin is too big and doesn't have a correct shape either

[Anonymous No.749232]

>>749219
>expecting a f*rfag to care about anatomy

[Anonymous No.749233]

>>749199
...and of course it's a furfag.
jiff in hell, degenerate.

[Anonymous No.749264]

Is Grant Abbit based?

[Anonymous No.749276]

>>749264
like most other Blender youtubers, he's a bad artist.

[Anonymous No.749278]

Can blender simulate a mesh cut deformation?

[Anonymous No.749299]

>>749219
Its an extremely rough model, spent like two hours on it. I'm mainly focusing on the shader.

>>749233
I model fighter jets for a living, but you can't pass up retards paying $450 a model and I don't even do the VR chat shit.

[Anonymous No.749302]

>>748519
Kind of a stupid question (since I'm sure I already know the answer), but is there any kind of logic based animation system kind of like game engines have?
So you could have an animation/action for a character switch and blend based on the speed that character is moving, or have something like a running animation blend with a turning animation procedurally?

The NLA editor does things slightly like that, but it's not exactly good at those things. Which is another reason why having a logic/interaction mode again would be a godsend. Why they got rid of the game engine is beyond me.

I'm sure the answer is "no" in terms of whether or not Blender has something like this (been using it for years and years and never came across a feature like it), but I figured I'd ask since there's always areas that you don't really dip into all that often.
If there's a decent addon or something that has a similar functionality that could work too. Animation nodes probably does it, but it looks like a real headache to learn and I've been putting it off for ages.

[Anonymous No.749303]

>>749264

[Anonymous No.749304]

>>749302
3DsMax has all of that stuff.

[Anonymous No.749306]

>>749304
That's not really what I asked.
If I'm too lazy to learn animation nodes, what makes you think I'd be willing to drop a shit load of time re-learning another software and all the little quirks involved with it?
Sure modelling is transferable between softwares, but that's about it. Why abandon an entire skillset just for a feature that I'd maybe use once or twice?

Eventually I'll bite the bullet and learn Max/Maya, but I don't really have any pressing need to right now.

[Anonymous No.749307]

>>749303
Söyboy cuckface.
Why are they doing that? I just vomited a little in my mouth.

[Anonymous No.749308]

>>749306
That's exactly what you asked for, you even knew what the answer would be (no), all i did was adding the info that Max has all of this.
I don't care what you do with the info or if you are lazy, that's not my problem.

[Anonymous No.749309]

Trying to learn texture baking. I seem to run into the problem where a part of my texture gets fucky.
I've tried bringing the margin down to 1 or zero, but it causes black dots everywhere else with next to zero improvement in the affected parts.
The left is the source for the texture, right side is the target.

[Anonymous No.749312]

What's the method for hardening interior edges without adding useless and damaging geometry to the rest of your model. (without using crease)

[Anonymous No.749313]

>>749308
You really are a complete idiot.

[Anonymous No.749314]

>>749312
Learn how to redirect topology. I recommend Jonathan Lampel's Mesh Modeling fundamentals on cgcookie.

[Anonymous No.749316]

>>748570
Yes, people are allowed to be retarded

[Anonymous No.749317]

>>749314
I understand the fundamentals. I'm looking for techniques to avoid redirection. Obviously I can just space the edges out where I don't need hard edges but it still creates artifacts and dense topology in unwanted places

[Anonymous No.749327]

>>749309
That looks like an amazing vagina. Show us the finished product when you fix the texture bake.

[Anonymous No.749350]

im starting a petition at an intercontinental level for people to stop using "3d animation" as a way to refer to it and start using "4d" instead

[Anonymous No.749352]

Why does my armature look like this when I import a dae file?
If I try to pose, it still works... but it is very annoying to pose like this, how do I make it look like a normal armature?

[Anonymous No.749355]

>>749317
Use a bevel, either the tool or the modifier with a vertex group

[Anonymous No.749357]

I want to bevel this edge, but then the quads turn out rather distorted. Is there a better way to do that?

[Anonymous No.749359]

>>749357
Oh, I think I figured it out. I beveled it first and then the rest.

[Anonymous No.749360]

fuck blender just crashed again

[Anonymous No.749370]

https://twitter.com/pablodp606/status/1271848041826398214

absolute mad lads

[Anonymous No.749374]

>>749370
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.749375]

>>749352
Under properties or Armature or something you can change the display to Stick or Bone or whatever

[Anonymous No.749377]

>>749370
I always wanted this, pretty much mostly because I love using the sculpting tools to adjust things and want to keep the parts I'm adjusting above the surface of the one below without shit clipping through.

The problem is, I don't see this working at all on sculpts because physics completely shit the bed at high polycounts.
I mean he already has my respect but if he could make it run well on actual sculpt densities, he'd almost scare me a bit. We'll see.

[Anonymous No.749381]

>>749350
What is 4d? What is the difference between the two?

[Anonymous No.749387]

>>749355
That just results in un-reconcilable tris or ngons, making even worse artifacts

[Anonymous No.749394]

>Failed to load blend file: Missing DNA Block.

[Anonymous No.749397]

>>749381
The 4th dimension is time. So 2D animation is actually 3D, and 3D animation is actually 4D.

[Anonymous No.749404]

>>749370
Once again. Why the fuck is this only in the brush and not the actual cloth sim?

[Anonymous No.749407]

Why the fuck is mantaflow so picky about its inflow object? I'm trying to make a scene with a syringe squirting some water, so I put a tiny cylinder inside the needle since you can't use flat objects as inflow anymore, but because the cylinder is so tiny, no water sim can occur. Its dimensions are 1.3cm. This is so god damn annoying.

[Anonymous No.749409]

>>749407
>I'm trying to make a scene with a syringe squirting some water
just admit it's a dong jizzing dude

[Anonymous No.749410]

>>749404
It's already using the actual cloth sim

[Anonymous No.749411]

>>749407
scale everything up, retard

[Anonymous No.749412]

>>749404
>Why the fuck is this only in the brush and not the actual cloth sim?
What are you talking about? Normal cloth sim has collisions.

[Anonymous No.749413]

>>749404
If you mean manipulating live cloth sims there is an addon called modeling cloth that does this.

[Anonymous No.749424]

>>749413
that cat is still working on it though, especially after he started again from scratch couple months ago.
I wouldn't say it is really usable as of now.

[Anonymous No.749427]

>>749410
>>749412
Actual cloth sim is fucking trash though. You'd be spending hours fucking with it to do even half the shit the brush does.

[Anonymous No.749436]

I want to model a simple character. I google up some refs. I get straight up 3d models as results, that already look exactly like what I had in mind, with same techniques. at this point I give up because there isn't really a reason to keep at it. is this why people draw their own references?

[Anonymous No.749448]

>>749370
>>749374
>>749377
Pyfw you realized he only made this to speed up his sculpts of waifus ripping off their clothes and skirts getting blown up.

[Anonymous No.749449]

>>749448

[Anonymous No.749470]

>>749448
You came to this realization right now?
Not a year ago?
Pffft.

[Anonymous No.749477]

hey guys,

I'm doing some simple archviz shots and I'm looking for ways to improve in regards to realism.

I'm going for a contemporary architecture / design magazin look, so the shots are pretty clean, a bit sparse and shot with a rather long focal length. this look allways comes of as a bit stilized and "unreal" but I feel like some materials could improve, maybe the lighting.

any tips are welcome

[Anonymous No.749529]

How do I attach 2 different meshes without losing their appearance. Boolean modifier is not good

[Anonymous No.749535]

>>748546
The thing is that the way the boolean modifier works, anywhere it touches the model, it applies it's material to the surface, as opposed to using the material of the original object. So you have to have to have the same material and turn off visibility in the object tab

[Anonymous No.749536]

>>749360
this has happened a few times to me. does the last update fix this?

[Anonymous No.749540]

>>749470
I'd love to see his private projects.

[Anonymous No.749543]

Any help here? Im trying to make the eyes and mouth textures to look more matte than the body but I cant get them to use another shader. Any idea? Im a total noob

[Anonymous No.749544]

>>749543
Also Im trying to rig this model but I cant for the life of me get the glove to fold correctly when he closes his hand. I fiddled around with the weight paint mode and I got most of the kinks ironed out but it still looks weird when in a punch pose. How can I make the surface to bend smoothly?

[Anonymous No.749547]

>>749544
Clean deformations is a very advanced topic that is difficult to get right. You need clean topology, bones placed carefully in the correct rotocenters and skinmorphs/blendshapes or extra bones to help correct a pose. For offline stuff the ability to use dual quaternion skins helps a lot if they're available in your package.

[Anonymous No.749555]

is there a way to check how many vertices i have selected? sometimes i get lost when extruding or i yank a loop by accident and only realize it later on

[Anonymous No.749559]

>>748519
>Do not poly-model characters unless you are a retard. Blender has sculpting tools, use them.

Op came out swinging with a hot take calling people retarded while outing himself as being just that.

[Anonymous No.749560]

Sculpting looks fun but I find it too easy for things to get blobby and misshapen. with polymodeling i just have to tweak edges until they flow nicely.

[Anonymous No.749563]

>>749547
I looked up that dual quaternion thing and found that I missed the "preserve volume" option in the armature modifier. Its looking better but still shitty. Im really new so I didnt get most of the terms you used there

[Anonymous No.749566]

>>749543
>>749544
>>749563
You need to make a grey scale image of the parts you want to be matte. Layer that over the rest.
For the gloves, you might have to repotologize the glove, 80% of animation is good topology

[Anonymous No.749574]

>>749566
So I think I got it. It was a lot simpler than I expected, I used the mixed texture alphas as a factor in the mix shader node to use one material on the eyes/ mouth and another in the rest of the body. Would this give me trouble later or is it ok?

[Anonymous No.749576]

>>749574
That is correct.

[Anonymous No.749578]

>>749576
Great. Thanks!

[Anonymous No.749581]

>>749574
>>749578

Np. Also another note: sometimes you will need a mask of a texture that has no alpha, and isn't black and white. Generally you can make one using a Color ramp. The color ramp will make the input grayscale, and also let you adjust the contrast until you have a black and white mask.

[Anonymous No.749582]

>>749535
Is that also for volumetrics?
Not sure if I messed something up but it didn't work.

[Anonymous No.749583]

About to dive into blender. I'm finding a lot of resources online use older versions or are youtube videos artificially extended with social media bullshit. probably going to watch the tutorials in the op. any other rec's?

[Anonymous No.749586]

>>748546
>to make something like this
Just invert the normals and use backface culling.

[Anonymous No.749587]

what the heck is going on with my mesh...one side is always in view and i looked into normals and the material and it all seems fine.

[Anonymous No.749588]

>>749586
I'm sorry, I'm pretty new at this.
Could you please elaborate?

[Anonymous No.749590]

>>749583
Almost all 2.7 tutorials will still be valid. Things might just be in a different place in the UI.

[Anonymous No.749592]

>>749587
found solution! Material>setting>blend mode

[Anonymous No.749593]

>>748519
Bois, any good tutorials on making multiple outfits for a single character? The problem I'm having is with rigging everything properly. I'm fairly new, so I don't even quite know what I'm looking for.

Do I have to weight paint the outfit from scratch to match the deformation of the body mesh?

[Anonymous No.749594]

>>749593
- Rig the body
- Attach close fitting clothing/areas of the cloth using Surface Deform or Mesh deform (if the body is rigged with a deform cage)
- Or copy weights from the body for close fitting clothing.
- For not close fitting stuff, you'll need to rig it on a case by case basis. Usually you add more bones that are controlled by the character rig's existing bones.

If you can give an example of the outfits, I can be more precise in how you'd handle any given part of it.

And its not a full tutorial, but if you are thinking about mixing rigging techniques or using cloth sim, see this thread for a general idea of what your options are and how to go about doing it: https://blenderartists.org/t/making-a-poseable-character-with-cloth-simulated-clothing/570752/8

[Anonymous No.749595]

[Anonymous No.749596]

>>749594
Thank you, what you said already gave me kind of an overview for what I want, that's all I really needed.

Just one more question, though, I remember in second life they used alpha masks to turn the body invisible so they could fit tight clothing without it clipping all over the place, this always seemed really cool to me because you could better shape the body according to whatever outfit the character may have, without being worried about clipping, but I've never seen that technique being used in pbr. Is this something I could do, or would it mess things up? If not, how do people generally go about making clothing that shapes the body? I guess I could use shape keys for that as well, but it's kinda cool being able to paint an alpha and being done with it.

[Anonymous No.749598]

>>749596
The Mask Modifier can be used to hide the geometry itself, or you could use transparency. And as you say, shape keys (or the rig itself in some areas).

[Anonymous No.749600]

>>748650
What do you mean by subdiv being broken?

[Anonymous No.749606]

>>749066
Or you can just... you know... sculpt the retopo'd piece.

[Anonymous No.749609]

What are the pros and cons of subvdiv?

[Anonymous No.749616]

wait, wasn't that fspy thing an addon for blender a while ago?
if it was opensource, why isn't it still available on shithub and continued by others?
I seriously don't need to download another gimped demo of some software that serves only one really niche purpose. the addon was perfect.

[Anonymous No.749621]

Fuck booleans.
The wall is literally just made out of cubes, so why do i get an union instead of the difference?
Boolean settings should be right and the bevel is applied last

[Anonymous No.749642]

>>749588
Do this >>749587 but on purpose.

[Anonymous No.749643]

>>749616
Fspy is its own program now that hooks into Blender.
So you just launch fspy, do your fiddly camera bits in there, then save the file, and import it with the Fspy addon in Blender.

It's retarded, but that's what they've decided. For what it's worth, it works well enough.

[Anonymous No.749652]

>Do not poly-model characters unless you are a retard. Blender has sculpting tools, use them.
retopoing sculpts to riggable characters you can actually animate or use in a video game scares me

[Anonymous No.749653]

>>749050
Posting images like this without typing out the URL should be illegal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28AlRLMlqW8

[Anonymous No.749658]

What the heck happens here?

[Anonymous No.749659]

>>749658
You might have hidden something in edit mode that you extruded, it would show up in object mode again. Try pressing alt+h in edit mode.

[Anonymous No.749660]

>>749659
Oh, right. Thanks.
I forgot I hid the lower part of the torso when making the leg separately.

[Anonymous No.749671]

If I wanna model some stuff for flat shading toon style, should I learn to sculpt or

[Anonymous No.749691]

>>749595
Blender Geeker Gate when?

[Anonymous No.749699]

can we work on the useful addons list in the OP?
I'd add:
Curves To Mesh 2
Speedflow
Half Knife (https://gumroad.com/l/yaxej))
Rotate Face (https://gumroad.com/l/rotate_face/))
UV Packmaster Pro
HDRI Maker 2.0
Anit-Tile (https://blendermarket.com/products/anti-tile))

[Anonymous No.749703]

First real attempt at sculpting

[Anonymous No.749716]

Holy fuck I hate this ear, been playing around with it for at least four hours.
Smooth it up, the form is lost. Draw more form - it's no longer smooth.

[Anonymous No.749718]

>>749716
It doesn't need to be smooth, it will be smooth after you retopologize.

[Anonymous No.749720]

>>749718
Huh, fair enough.

[Anonymous No.749721]

>>749595
blender: home to tranoids and mudslimes

[Anonymous No.749813]

need some help here, ive got an issue with making treads on this tank. Im putting the treads at the origin point for the circle like usual. But whenever I apply the curve modifier the following happens

[Anonymous No.749823]

New thread

>>749822
>>749822
>>749822

[Anonymous No.749843]

So I'm new to modeling people and I got to a point where I'm stumped and don't know how to make this shit not look like trash. Any good no bullshit videos on modeling characters?

[Anonymous No.749862]

Senpais I don't know how the fuck to do this or how even search for it, halp

I have 2 groups of objects: a complex one made of many groups, the other a simple plane. The complex one is in the origin, the plane is 17000 meters away from the complex one, I want to put the complex one above the plane, why the fuck is that simple function so fucking complicated ?!?!

If I put the exact coordinates of the plane; 17000, -3600, .3620 on the complex group for some retarded reason they don't end up in the same place, even if they have the same ordinates I don't know why.

I checked the measures of both objects and it should work, a 1m object above a 2m plane.

I can just use the move tool because the objects are so far away one of the other that I have to zoom out so much that the other become fucking invisible.

What I'm doing wrong ?


I need object A to be put above B because I need to use that specific camera with that specific view for post production, I can't move the camera because the perspective gets fucked if I do, I just need to move A above B in front of the fucking camera of B.

>Please_respond

[Anonymous No.750310]