[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]

4chan Virtual YouTuber Contest - Submit Designs Here

Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks Make sure to check your spam box!

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: 0.png (2.29 MB, 1080x1920)
2.29 MB
2.29 MB PNG
Welcome to /3/ - 3DCG, 4chan's board dedicated to 3D imagery and modeling.

If you're reading this, you probably got this linked to you because you posted a question that has already been asked many many times. Read ahead, and find your answer.

Scroll down for a useful FAQ and resource links
59 replies and 57 images omitted. Click here to view.
Click here to open this thread.

Homage to Escher...and a mystery/question.

I made this "scene" in Blender, re-creating the room from what I could see in the original Escher drawing, placing my camera at the right spot and taking the picture.

So it was fun and I share it here for the hell of it.


What was really intriguing was that I found one of the objects in the original is "impossible". In other words, to reproduce the object in the reflection properly, I had to distort it a LOT. Everything else could be constructed just as you would expect and they all reflect correctly.

Try to guess which object I'm talking about. I'll tell you in a minute.

So this raises the question did Escher purposely draw this object wrong or did he make a mistake? Is it maybe a small Escher joke? Has anyone ever heard about a problem with how this picture is drawn? Have I discovered something that was unknown before??

Ok, here comes the SPOILER:::

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
7 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
Ok, Here you go (in two posts):

"Sharp" means it is in full detail, crisp. "Shaded" means I've applied some "noise" to make it appear pencil drawing like. "Hard", when they are available, is strong effects to make it have a similar texture to the Escher original drawing.


Sharp, color

Sharp, BW


Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Part II

Here are "Making Of" pix. Colors are wack because wanted them to translate to proper shades of grey in finals. Keep an eye out for the Wonky Table, across from Bob's knees.

==="Making Of" pix

Bob's pose
Looking from one end wall
Looking from the other end wall
Fly on the wall perspective

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

Had to do something like that in art school an eternity ago. No computers so we had to unfold the image "by hand" to create a new drawing.
Ouch I feel your pain. Really. I do.
BTW. I started a thread over on reddit too. Maybe you wanna see it:


File: the price is right.png (1.59 MB, 1489x897)
1.59 MB
1.59 MB PNG
Stop doing daily renders.
I mean he's not wrong. At least about the part of most of it looking similar and safe. Most of the shit I see from those dudes posting dailies on Instagram are pretty boring. The whole sphere thing isn't an exaggeration. Hell, even Beeple. He's good, no doubt about that, but a lot of his shit is really samey, and isn't really worth a look beyond what you originally see when you scroll through it. A lot of the other stuff I've seen is pretty lackluster as well, though they get thousands of followers.
Those people don't have a ton of followers because they're all that good, but because of manipulations of Instagram's algorithm. It tends to favor daily posts.

Some of it is coming from jealousy I'll admit, but at the same time, I could post daily and rack up followers as well. I just got too much going on around me to really have time for it. After work I just don't have any motivation to do shit like that.

Doing dailies as practice though is alright. It's the same as doing sketches in your free time.
Oh hey, it's the "from now on I will let others talk for me and only upload twice a year because my paysite pays enough now lol" -guru

File: 1514745313207.jpg (7 KB, 281x179)
7 KB
Lost $8k in gpus to theft from crackheads. Getting them back is impossible. I'm literally going from a 1080ti farm to rendering on a single 750ti and integrated graphics.

What do, lads? Anyone ever experienced true loss like this?
9 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
why do you live in a ghetto when you are rich?
8k over 2 years isnt rich lad
There's a story there
better yet steal their crack and resell it to them for the price of a videocard!
>nvidia says


File: blender_logo_square.png (135 KB, 512x512)
135 KB
135 KB PNG
What are you working on?
What are you looking forward to in 2.8?
What do you need help with?
222 replies and 68 images omitted. Click here to view.
Eh, wouldn't recommend ProRender, especially for Blender. Its integration into Blender is iffy and it in general is a fairly half-baked engine. Most of its features, while beneficial from the surface, really are just tacked on and not properly implemented.
Cycles does support OpenCL as far as I'm aware, though. Many say it's somewhat slower than CUDA, but that's mostly anecdotal and mileage may vary.
File: 1475364859520.png (82 KB, 654x525)
82 KB
cycles baker was built to work with nodes so there is this thing where you have to select outputs before baking. blender render is built more like xnormal so its better.
i don't know how 2.8 devs are gonna deal with the baking issue once blender internal is gone
ayy lmao
post wires
Thanks, however that's what I have been doing
Thanks, this actually fixed it. What a weird thing, I had to click on the material output node once on each material even though that's the only output node in the tree. I thought it's enough to click on the texture node to tell it where to bake to
File: 0dgOAZ.jpg (299 KB, 1600x1000)
299 KB
299 KB JPG
how do i approach modelling some hanging cloths like in the pic? cloth physics? traditional modelling and then adding details like folds through painted textures?
tried the cloth simulator with mixed results and the second option gives me nightmares since i suck shit at painting

File: artifact.gif (2.11 MB, 686x511)
2.11 MB
2.11 MB GIF
There seems to be some sort of artifact/blockage over what is an open space, it seems to be flat and has no dimension, anyone know how to get rid of it?
smoothing errors? z-fighting? the OGL implementation being shit?
You got a subsurf on that, don'tcha?
You gotta have proper topo in order for holes in geometry to subsurf properly.

File: qstgr.jpg (52 KB, 782x543)
52 KB
been creating all the generals myself edition

previous: >>633468

This thread is for any simple questions you might have about [technique] or [software]. If you think you have a question that deserves its own thread, such as thoughts on [new technology], etc., by all means go ahead and create your own! Otherwise, please post in this thread.
89 replies and 21 images omitted. Click here to view.
File: not_oviposition.png (211 KB, 1011x637)
211 KB
211 KB PNG
I don't have a problem getting the tube to deform however much I need it to.
The issue is having the tube not act like a hollow object.

It's a simplification for now while I figure this out.
hollow meaning, solid walls. Not, without a hole going through the middle. Obviously.
what kind of topology/joint positioning do i use to get a knee that doesn't collapse when squatting like this?
is corrective shapekey the only way?
File: V98-KneeRigDetails.jpg (181 KB, 868x458)
181 KB
181 KB JPG
just have the outside faces of the tube be deformed by invisible sphere around the visible sphere deforming inside faces of the tube.

or play with lattices.

pic related solves it by having extra bone for the patella.
File: 3dsmax1-tube.webm (493 KB, 640x360)
493 KB
If I can do it in 22 years old software then you can do it in a modern version of C4D

File: 1532845689200.png (912 KB, 792x466)
912 KB
912 KB PNG
general-san's back at it

previous: >>635229

This thread is for comments and critique on any work that you're doing or have done. Complete pieces are allowed and should be posted in this thread as well.
187 replies and 89 images omitted. Click here to view.
The eyes aren't flipped, they're just plain wrong.
File: 086eff7t.jpg (47 KB, 644x412)
47 KB
Try adjusting the UVs to change the shape, the look derpy atm.
File: 0001-0049_(2).webm (1.58 MB, 1920x1080)
1.58 MB
1.58 MB WEBM
I'm at it again!
I tried to make the webm in good quality, I hope it's visible.

I think I got what I want, but anon's feedback is always welcome.
It's all in the facial structure and your fundamentals. If you never varied the way you learnt facial structures and all, all your characters will end up looking the same. Very prevalent in anime, where all the chicks pretty much look identical save for eye and hair colour. Of course, that's not saying you have to rebuild your basics from the ground up. It'd be easier to just modify after sculpting. Introduce variances, such as eye shape, mouth width, lip thicknesses, jaw squareness, chin pointiness, the whole list. Study faces and see how they differ from each other and start incorporating those differences. I'd also suggest having a base mesh that you just copy and modify as well, adding clothing and all that once you're happy with face (and body) shape.

What do you mean? High polys can really be as messy as you like, it's the low poly that matters.

The largest would be the eyelashes. That "forking" point where it splits into tails should always be on the outer edge, not the inner one. There's a small issue with shape, the lower eyelash should either follow the general curve of the eye shape or if you're going for a slight squint should be perfectly horizontal, rather than at the current slant.
The projection onto the model looks odd and far too tilted inwards, though I suspect that's probably because your field of view is too high. One of the issues with 2D > 3D many people don't get is that 2D is, well, two-dimensional. It's a flat plane and therefore should ideally be orthographic if not viewed with a very small field of view lens. Try orthographic projection, if not turning up your focal length to somewhere in the 200-300+mm.
I was trying to make that the low poly and have something like a rounded edge shader do some heavy lifting for me. I might try retopoing it in Houdini and see what happens.

File: 2494.png (122 KB, 750x650)
122 KB
122 KB PNG
Hi, guys, I've got minimal 3D modeling experience and was wanting some advice.

I basically just want a model remade based off of the attached picture, but with a higher poly count and cleaner textures.

How much would it cost to get someone to do this for me? I'm a broke freelance artist, so I hope it doesn't cost too much, but it is what it is!

Thanks so much in advance.

The model can be found here:

My guess is you need someone to make a completely new model from scratch, including textures. At that point the model you have there can only serve as reference. Expect to pay full price for someone making a complete model. Why not do it yourself? It's a good practice and you can't mess up much if you produce 100% from a reference.
Okay, I'll do my best! Maybe this thread will still exist by the time I'm finished. If so, I'll show what I came up with!

File: 234324243.png (430 KB, 978x493)
430 KB
430 KB PNG
can someone help a brotha out and render a 1920x1080 white goo (sperm looking) background like pic related just with no empty space.

Thank you!
File: seamless slime.jpg (128 KB, 512x512)
128 KB
128 KB JPG
off you go to photoshop

File: Mike-Hermes-web.jpg (46 KB, 600x600)
46 KB
"People have asked me to do more complex tutorials but I think that's rude. This channel is for beginners only. now give me money"

Mike Hermes is a real piece of work
1 reply omitted. Click here to view.
Are there any GOOD Maya youtubers?
I heard Andrew Price is pretty good desu~.
And 20 minutes on the most rudimentary of skills. That guy is a fake.
All of the best blender tutorials I ever watched, I downloaded from cgpersia. Who is this guy?

File: 1532562007870.jpg (89 KB, 968x1024)
89 KB
Is lewd 3D loli illegal to make and wank to?

It's not that I do, but people are saying that it is.
52 replies and 8 images omitted. Click here to view.
/l/ was not real pedo shit you idiot, it was 2d drawings. Any pedo posts were immediately deleted thanks to pedobear posters.

It seems like you found an old image of 4chan, and assumed it was a deep web.

That's right
>government faps
I'd like to meet this Mr. "Government" dude.
Snacks was a pedo. We all knew. We didn't care.
This thread is going too well for my liking.

its legal in merica. though obscenity laws always kind of leave it up to the court. guro 3d loli would certainly have a higher chance of getting you in any trouble than softcore solo renders. I wouldnt worry though, there are many people who make a living from making loli 3DCG porn

This is the most fashionable man on youtube.

say something nice about him.
fuck this was ment for fa
He looks like a One Piece character
didn't he notice?
his shirt got ripped, and is not even tucked in.

File: 1506273651722.jpg (71 KB, 590x537)
71 KB
If you want the best quality renders, can Arnold even compete?
10 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Can we stop talking about Cycles and discuss Arnold vs Renderman

Renderman is buggy, cryptic and full of bizarre glitches. It does have a nice stylish look though.
could you please elaborate on this?
i feel like cycles biggest problem is how it handles light. the portals option is misunderstood and garbage in general.
the light interaction with glass is none existent, it just makes glass blacker. also it does not simulate glare
I'm going to bring the sole argument that Blender/Cycles is terrible for rendering because it cannot manage a color space / exposure / gamma environment properly.

Relying on baseless "filmic" color managements and other tricks isn't physically correct and just adds to all the "cheats" proper 3D workflows have successfully got rid of over the years that Blender still uses.
Do you actually use RenderMan? Does anyone outside of (a handful??) of studios? Genuinely asking.
I have the impression that the user base is very low, and that it's destined to fall into disuse because of that.

Honestly I think we'd all be better off if blenderfags got their own containment board.

File: i_win_19-800x835.jpg (173 KB, 800x835)
173 KB
173 KB JPG

"I have been testing with a hybrid style that combines 3D “non-photorealistic renders” with hand drawings. Lately, I just make some “quick” 3D scenes with almost no textures and with one single source light. I feel pretty comfortable now with modeling and for me now it's faster and more precise to do a 3D model for the backgrounds rather than drawing horizon lines and suffering with vanishing points when trying to draw complex perspectives. Of course, the point here is if the background in question is going to appear in several panels or not. If so, then it's a huge time saver because once you have your scene modeled it's just a question of positioning the camera to generate a new view for a new panel."

40 replies and 15 images omitted. Click here to view.
those renders rely on high poly mesh, like zbrush sculpts, it is all just matcaps
I know, but HG is better.
HG is some of the worst kind of trash imaginable
This is actually really impressive, OP. Keep it up.
That fifth panel is particularly bad. No creativity or flow into that position from the fourth panel.

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.