how do you even model something like this it's impossible
>>1030733is it weird I can look at this image and tell it's 3d not real? the machinery has an almost clay-like surface rather than than worn painted metal and the reflection at the base of the wood piece is too sharp for what real scratched metal provides. That's saying nothing about the lighting and shadows feeling completely off, the rounded edges on the top of the cross but not the bottom (the imperfections are TOO intentionally imperfect), it reeks of graphic design from someone who has seen pictures of a wood workshop but never actually been inside one to recognize the lack of wood dust anywhere is a dead giveaway that no real work has been done on that machine. Seriously, I could have started with that and forgone with the rest of the post just to say that. But because I'm wasted I'll continue. The shiny underside of the machine is another giveaway. Why would the piece MOST exposed to wood dust particles be the shiniest? is it safe to assume this is some redditor and you find it impressive anon? Embarassing that you didn't make it AND that you find it impressive but that's what you get with no real world experience
WOah, so hard, what is like being clinically retarded op?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY3nH3_RiDU
>>1030734actually trolling, or just delusional?
>>1030733I asked my uncle who did subdivision modelling on Concord on how you'd make this and he just started crying and saying they can't, they don't know how to do it anymore
>>1030733which part?
>>10307331. use a reference2. model it3. does the match the reference? probably not.4. use a reference5. model it6. does the match the reference? no.7. use a reference8. model it9. does the match the reference? no.....69. does the match the reference? kinda. it's good enough.
>>1030835The tucked penis.
