[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] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / 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] [Home]
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG

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

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.
05/08/16Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!
[Hide] [Show All]

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: 3.jpg (3 KB, 145x37)
3 KB
So I was cleaning up my hard drive and I found my copy pasta of what used to be the board sticky.

Part 1:

/3/'s Official README.TXT
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 to the bottom for useful resource links.

1.) "How do I get started in 3D?"

There are many ways to get started, the quickest way is to actually start
with a 3D program. There are many to choose from, such as:

-3DS Max
-Cinema 4D,
-Softimage XSI
-Blender 3D (Free!)

Once you obtain one the next step is to start with tutorials. There are many
on the net, they range from text and image tutorials to video tutorials. You
aren't going to find a tutorial for everything out there, but most will explain
techniques that you need to adapt in order for you to achieve whatever final
result you want.

2.) "Wow! That's a lot of programs! Which one is best? I heard ______ is best."

You heard wrong, there is no one program that is better than the rest, it has
and always will be the skill level of the artist. Which program you choose is
solely dependent on your own personal taste and which aspect of the 3D industry
you want to be involved in.
Max and Maya are the most hyped and so therefore the most used,
they have the most available documentation online. The interfaces have
a steep learning curve, but there isn't any 3D program you can't learn if you take
the time to use it and follow some tutorials. Go with a generalized package, not a
specialist one.
72 replies and 56 images omitted. Click here to view.

I'm doing internship in some company, and I got a task to make 3D model of their factory. (It's framed as a way to have me get to know location of every machine and deparment there.)

Previous guy did similar thing, but in 2D, and there are no dimensions of the place. He also created a 3D model of few offices in SolidWorks. (In which I have only a basic skills.)

How to complete it?

Where, on internet, could I find help with this? (Sorry if this is the wrong board)
Depends, do you have access to building plans? Ideally in CAD format?

If so, you can use any modelling tool (Solidworks would be fine, as is Rhino, or Sketchup) to pull up the walls, add floor planes, and go from there.

If not then you're going to have to measure and draw your own plans which would take a lot longer. You can't really start in 3D unless you know the 2D layout so ideally you should ask for building plans even if it's just simplified ones like the ones they'd use for fire evacuation signs - you can model from one of those and a bit of knowledge of the actual thing.

If (and it sounds likely from what you said) you really don't have anything to go on, and drawing your own isn't an option, you can try to make an external model like your OP image based on google earth, and a bit of imagination/exterior photos/real life observation for the details.

As for online resources you just need to look up architecture modelling tutorials, the process of taking CAD plans and modelling a building from them is something I can help with but you need to decide what exactly you're going to be able to produce first and how long you have to do it.

Thanks for your response, anon.

>Depends, do you have access to building plans? Ideally in CAD format?

They didn't mention it. But I could ask.

I have 10 days for this, and I'm not completely sure if it's a serious task, since they said that previous guy did 2D layout for 3 years and made 25 version, and this is a position for a mechanical engineer, not a civil or construction.

File: WIP_CA.jpg (118 KB, 1297x752)
118 KB
118 KB JPG
Old WIP thread
139 replies and 54 images omitted. Click here to view.
how'd you make the hair? a bunch of tubes that you placed then dynameshed together?
Not that guy but you should look up some simple window details (by detail i mean, a 1:5/10 scaled section drawing) of some typical window frames and how they sit in relation to a rendered wall surface like yours. They rarely sit flush to the wall surface and there's almost always a 10mm shadow gap between the metal frame and the rendered wall.

Some general tips for >>561457
It's an ok start but you're heading towards a very bland and formulaic style of archviz that is kind of out of fashion for most practices now. Try to do some research and see if you can find some more interesting angles and lighting. Dezeen. Architizer and ArchDaily are good sites for interviews, one example: https://www.dezeen.com/2013/08/12/henry-goss-on-architectural-visualisations/. Look at how he focuses on light and texture instead of just plonking his model in 2-point perspective against a backdrop. In comparison the two images you posted feel like they're out of some cheap developer's magazine. I dunno man just try putting it at sunset instead and cast some nice shadows, add some actual garden interest etc.

In terms of the image itself, some technical things you can address immediately:

Biggest thing that stands out to me after the above is the lack of interior detail, you really need to add some objects to make it feel like less of a white empty box. Just use some standard pre-built furniture and place it like it actually would exist in a real house. Also add some interior lights and some blinds/curtains pulled open to frame. You want a soft, warm, inviting glow from the house even during the day.

Also the level of detail in your modelling needs to improve, as i said about the window details, but also smaller things. Like there would rarely be a white rendered surface, presumably plaster, meeting the ground like that - there'd be maybe 30cm of concrete base, or maybe that's sunken and there's a small area of pebbles around the house or something. (cont)

also your garden could really do with some work, look at the actual ground level building plan for your building (if it's a madeup building then look at some similar ones) and look at how the building sits in relation to its neighbours - it's what annoys me about images like >>561505 because you know there isn't a big plane of grass around the building, and that the wall on the right is likely a separating wall between two plots but they omitted the adjacent building to make it look like there's more space than there really is. That's a cheap trick and most professionals will see through it, it works on customers and that's why it's common but try to set a higher standard for yourself in your own work. Imagine how the actual garden would lay out and try to fit your camera angle into it well. Add some nice framing walls, hedges, trees etc to give the composition more asymmetry. You can do this in 2D comp as well if you have some nice high-res cutouts (theres loads of good websites for this, immediateentourage.com and nobacks.com come to mind).

Your sky is also pretty meh tier, first of all the resolution is too low, especially noticeable on the horizon trees, and also it's a blue sky with white clouds over green grass - i mean it's so bland and formulaic. Try looking for a sky from your actual location - a mexican sky looks different to a belgian one which looks different to a beijing one, there's different levels of pollutants, weather systems, light pollution etc which all add an extra level of realism. Again if it's a made-up building just look for an image that's a bit less bland, something with a late-afternoon warm glow would be nice. You will need to like the environment lighting to your HDRi image, or manually adjust it to look similar, to "bed" the building more into its surroundings.

I'm not trying to be overly critical, even if this is /3/, your image is a good start, just think more about what ties the building to its surroundings
cont (last one i promise)

... and also think more about how the actual architecture works instead of just modelling white boxes. Is your white surface made of plaster? Painted concrete? What metal are the window frames made of and how does it fit together?

You should also add some subtle weathering, particularly on smooth "modernist" architecture like this you get rain-streaks coming from the top edges, and glass is rarely perfectly clean. Don't go overboard as presumably you're showing the house in a good light but this can add another level of realism and makes it feel lived-in.

>>561505 also shows you roughly what glass should look like, it's a lot more reflective than you think and unless the space behind is brighter (ie, a lit interior room at night) you probably won't see into it if it's daylight outside. Interior spaces should therefor come across a lot darker and as i said before add some curtains or something.

Anyway sorry for the long wall of text but I thought you might like an indepth feedback. I'm a masters student in architecture doing archviz freelance in my spare time so i'm happy to help with anything else.
Nice, thanks for the in-depth feedback, I really appreciate it.

Okay, I'll definitely look up those links. Just to be clear, I don't consider this finished yet, I was basically just interested in my lighting and materials of a building at that point.

This is a house which is currently being built, the right side really is just an empty garden, but there should be some more houses behind it.

The reason why I didn't add more furniture and vegetation right away was because 3ds max started crashing, but since then I figured out how to handle that.

That HDRi image is the same as the one in this image >>561505
It's free and yeah, not of the best quality. I'm just going through some HDRI tutorials from "Mastering Vray" with Grant Warwick, so that will help for sure.

I'd prefer some sunset or night looks, yeah, but I have to find some good HDRIs for those, since the ones I have are just bad.

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

File: ynyab11dc231.gif (102 KB, 222x190)
102 KB
102 KB GIF
Hey, When I've rendered out footage in after effects the colour is about 3-4 shades darker than that of the preview window, any ideas? Im exporting as a photo jpg.
heavy compression hermano
Could be any number of things. You need to check your color management pipeline. Use exr or tiff as your file export format. Make sure single frames come out correctly in Photoshop before rendering a whole animation.
Check the colour space of your file and the colour space you're exporting to, might be downsampling 32-bit colour to 8-bit or something. Check the export options, I only get good results with certain filetypes/encoders so maybe you should try a few until you get the right one.

File: NewOP.png (2.43 MB, 1920x1080)
2.43 MB
2.43 MB PNG
Prior thread >>552549
Lazy pastebin, please respond with suggestions etc.
13 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view.
wow, V4 is lookin good
Yes, that's Lotus. "Future space mother" What?
Trying to make clothing with rigid parts. Rigidity map is fucking awful. Either it makes it never deform with the morphs or it just shits itself as soon as I dial it up. Anyone know how it works? Also, polygon selection is AWFUL.
protip: Don't use DAZ.
Poser then? There a port of G3 for it yet?

File: logan_2.jpg (790 KB, 1920x1080)
790 KB
790 KB JPG

Has anyone tried the new version of Arnold, leading renderer in the industry?
48 replies and 4 images omitted. Click here to view.
Cause he's a retard fanboy who's still waiting 10 minutes between each test render. Redshift hands down beats everything in terms of quality-speed.
>tfw am about to install 3ds max 2018
>tfw all my grant warwick "mastering vray" tutorials are now probably obsolete
>tfw not much arnold tutorials available
>tfw my progress will slow down because of this and I just started learning how to create cool photorealistic materials

I hope warwicks' vids will still be useful, I guess the concepts are the same.
Fucking Autodesk, back to 2017 version and Vray until they fix their crashing shit.
Warwick videos are still relevant and they always will be. He uses physically based workflows, his techniques are compatible with any renderer. His first videos will have you fake out GGX but the newest ones use the most up to date version of vray that comes with GGX out of the box.
>Redshift hands down beats everything in terms of quality-speed.

When you have at your disposal literally tens of thousands of renderfarms, you care very little about speed, this is why most of Hollywood uses either Renderman or Arnold, they are the best renderers in terms of quality, flexibility and ease of use.

File: 5_1(1).webm (2.49 MB, 1280x720)
2.49 MB
2.49 MB WEBM
hey 3/brossters I need some advice from you

soo I need some fluid simulations and not only, also sand/etc

which soft do you suggest to learn?
Realflow? or biFrost?

and if you tell me why I'll be very thankfull.

PS: this is some nparticles simulation I did with nParticles in maya
10 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
have you even switched to mental ray in rendering options?
+ tryi lighting scene with dome light at first . or when you are adding default light pump exposure to 15 k if nothing add another 0 and then you'll dial it down to desirable
Yeah i'm definitely on mental ray rendering option, I'll try the light dome, and I have no default scene lighting if thats what you mean. Thanks.
This is a newbie question and I apologize for that, but I just realized that the geometries I'm using are nParticles, do I have to convert them to a mesh or anything special in order for them to show up in render?
DESU I'm also quite noob, but I managed to render these particles with mental rey this final one is redshift though.
change particle shape to spheres and it'll render, I think it's not redering points. and you should have some kind of light, if your default scene light is off. but I meant point light or second one )))
I suck at remembering names

PS: start with something different... just to learn UI first basics of how to rednder, learn some minimal modeling(at least to be able to adjust primitive shapes to your needs) etc..
.why the hell did you started with particles? it's complicated mess.
I'm a biochem major and I'm using molecular maya plugin, I screwed around with blender for a couple of months but when I realized maya is free to students and there was a plugin supported by the top biology animators I jumped on it. The problem with redshift is I might be using these animations in publications so the licensing may get tricky. And thank you for the tip to change them to spheres it worked.

File: SQT.jpg (77 KB, 450x257)
77 KB
General or stupid questions
since don't see any on catalog
190 replies and 42 images omitted. Click here to view.
If you were really desperate I suppose you could go to the sketchup warehouse, where there's tons of models for basically anything devised by human hands on the Earth's crust, and take reference screenies yourself inside Sketchup, then work from that.

If you're thinking coffee mugs, desk lamps, apples, I dunno. Sketchup Warehouse has it.
Did some research and it's better to wait for Naples.
I was going up get a used Xeon but the new AMD chips actually look really good.
The only problem with Ryzen is that it is Dual Channel and 4 slots max for ram compared to my Intel Boards 8 Quad Channel slots.
I remember seeing videos of level design done in blender where the guy basically extrudes or stretches faces of the mesh, but the texture doesn't get stretched. Instead it adapts perfectly as if it was projected on the face. Unfortunately I can't seem to find anything on this with my weak google-fu.
sounds like a procedurally generated texture


Who can share these. why do I have to wait multiple months to try all if these even though i already pay for live. What the shit just let me download them all.
23 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view.
i've been here since 2011, never been banned once
>imitate 3D surfaces is not better than actual 3D surfaces.

Nigger what are you smoking
regardless if you are right or not it dosen't matter. a little rock in the pond in a open world game is only visible to the player for 1 second.
or better yet, i played rainbow six siege like few months ago on highest settings and all the props on the counter were rubbish. but because the player only pass by and see those coffee cops and train models for like 2 seconds it doesn't matter
also i suggest you look up some good designer artists, those who work at big companies.

i browse art everyday and i can't tell the difference between their materials and scans
You're arguing with an idiot who doesn't understand anything except that scans look realistic. 3D art can easily be made into photorealism through Substance, however it's the artist not the program.

File: 9seasonsMorty.jpg (36 KB, 779x723)
36 KB
What are you working on, faggots?
75 replies and 31 images omitted. Click here to view.
Hey I saw you on twitter

learn how to render food
Finished one of my first project yesterday
i like it
childish ik but you can I'm making $120 for this shit
I don't like the design but it's a good execution.

File: Spherical_Harmonics.png (325 KB, 1280x800)
325 KB
325 KB PNG


File: 1478689124889.webm (1012 KB, 406x454)
1012 KB
1012 KB WEBM
i can't wait.
>Unreal Engine rendering inside Blender
what is GPL for $500, alex?

File: sculptris-logo.png (20 KB, 153x167)
20 KB
Still part of my initial workflow. It's like a fucking sketchpad in 3D.
So sad that Faggologic just bought it to eliminate an opponent and to assimilate tech.
46 replies and 6 images omitted. Click here to view.
>Another part of the hate comes from a general rejection of paid software. It's funny when you see people blabbering around here about Maya costing $4k when Autodicks gives out student licenses to ANYONE with half a brain. And even if you pirate, like in the case of zBrush, these people give more moral fucks (on teh 4 chinz no less!) than the actual company.
>Trust me, if you are learning (and most of us are), Pixologic, Autodesk, Allegorithmic
>, etc. (Maybe Adobe not so much) do not give two fucks about you pirating in order to learn the tool. They expect you to. Just git gud, make a living, and pay your license.

I don't hate paid software I hate zbrush, give me a linux port and a proper GUI. Companies making 3d modelling applications just have a bad attitude in general, far too slow at fixing bugs, constantly ignore feature requests. Some of them should consider doing something similar to what epic did with UE4. Let customers have the source code but still retain copyright. That way bug fixes and usermade features can be fed back into development. The autodesk problem needs a solution their near monopoly is a disaster.
>don't hate paid software I hate zbrush

well you don't get to hate zbrush because you are pretty much forced to work with this tool if you want to have any sculpt that worth a shit. unless you are already familiar with mudbox and did the appropriate things to learn it but it would be stupid to learn mudbox when there is zbrush.
gotta agree with the poster above me. people pride themselves in pirating like they have they gave those corporations the middle finger. these people don't even care that you have been are pirating their software because your art most likely is piss. most people don't even make enough money to live off 3D art anyways
im not trying to offend anyone i just think that the idea of "pirate and make dosh" is a fantasy in most cases
There's Wings 3D.

Wings 3D isn't a sculpting program.

File: 2286.jpg (214 KB, 500x800)
214 KB
214 KB JPG
I am currently learning about shading and rendering, does this look real to you? I think I went overboard with the dirt and grunge.
looks realistic from far away since its a 3d scan but the mesh errors ruin it right away
Post refs, right now it looks like a blue plastic garden statue version of Buddha or whatever that's been sprayed with mud
The dirt on it really doesn't make much sense; the base looks pretty okay (if it were something that sat in grass), but the rest looks totally random

>but I'm not using refs, I'm just eyeballing it
Always work with reference images, even if something's stylized (which this isn't) you still have to have some foundation in reality and that means having images of real world things
Take it from me, OP. You can never have too much dirt and grunge.
I think the blue thing and the mud have the same roughness values, and the mud looks placed at random, try doing a curvature map for the placement.
Also, it needs some schatrches in the normal texture.
The dirt and grudge looks fine OP, aside from the obvious scanning artifacts it's a nice model

File: panic.jpg (232 KB, 900x540)
232 KB
232 KB JPG

What do you guys think about this?

No matter what flawed flowery excuses he tries to make up in the end I think this will severely hurt the careers of many 3d artists. Are we going to become obsolete for the most part?
Is the number of artists per project going to go down?
65 replies and 4 images omitted. Click here to view.
good animation still needs to be tweaked by a human.

and those vids you posted looks like garbage.

learn 2D animation and tell me a computer can replace a human.

they used to say that cars wouldnt be able to drive themselves. Now almost all human drivers will be replaced in the next 5 years.

Makes ya think.
File: 1473895869900.jpg (269 KB, 489x1200)
269 KB
269 KB JPG
no shit it looks like garbage, that's why i said 10 years from now. it's like you already forgot what you're trying to argue.
the important thing is there's an interest in it and people are going to constantly be improving on it.
also 2d has nothing to do with 3d being replaced. what is wrong with you? are you just doing this for attention?
Delighting is trivial, and hair can be added later.
Driving is not a creative field.

File: d93ba11991[1].png (70 KB, 794x632)
70 KB
very curious to see how many of you can actually create this shape.
282 replies and 102 images omitted. Click here to view.
>mastercam is you problem
I know my bus wasn't as long as the convoluted process you were trying.
But that's what I was going for to waste some time, how is this so hard to understand?
'bout as hard as you understanding 'nope'
yup, its still going. They've added grasshopper support which is pretty nice.
damn how did you get that kind of retopology

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.