[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/3d/ - 3D Art

3D art, modeling, tutorials, Blender

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject *
Comment *
File *
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 4 per post.


Let's keep it tasteful and as SFW as possible please. Please also visit: Art

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

 No.154[Reply]

Find Out How FX Experts Created Mars in The Martian

Visual effects companies Framestore and MPC were tasked with creating the red planet in “The Martian.” From realistic landscape shots of Mars to simulated gravity differences, see how it all came together with a shorter-than-usual timeframe for post-production.



File: 1445492712526.png (39.48 KB, 511x287, 73:41, u9rMg.png)

 No.152[Reply]

Splitting pieces of a mesh into a new object

How do I separate the armor piece from the model to make the pieces separate?

Press P> Selection to separate the selection into a new object:

 No.153




YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

 No.151[Reply]

SIGGRAPH Asia 2015: Wetbrush: GPU-based 3D painting simulation at the bristle level

Demonstration of work by Zhili Chen, Byungmoon Kim, Daichi Ito and Huamin Wang - proof of concept computer graphics research demos method of digital painting thats close to the real method. Source here:

http://web.cse.ohio-state.edu/~whmin/publications.html

http://prostheticknowledge.tumblr.com/post/131579383976/wetbrush-gpu-based-3d-painting-computer-graphics



File: 1444856816458.jpg (698.07 KB, 3702x2086, 1851:1043, Monument1.jpg)

 No.139[Reply]

Is SketchUp anything but basic shit? I've been using blender for small projects (ones that don't involve much/any animation, especially armaturing or kinetic whatever), but my boss wants me to start using SketchUp because it "looks nicer, faster" and "doesn't have all that damn time spent rendering".

I spent 20 minutes in it before I could figure out how I could translate across an axis, and none of the axes are labeled by anything other than a color. Moreover, it seems like you can't transform by values– you have to put a measurement on a face or edge, then manually adjust the size of it until you've got it about where you want it (you also can't seem to even view location or scale, nor dimensions any closer than 1/16th of an inch). Am I missing something, and all of that really vital shit is in here somewhere? I can hardly make anything with it.

 No.140

sketchup is a piece of shit that produces weird topology and completely broken meshes with weird intersections.

if you're a poorfag and you're serious about 3dcg you should definitely take the time to learn a bit of blender.


 No.142

SketchUp is what it is. I mean, for quick prototyping it is nice. If you don't already know Blender or anything else.

You need to be good enough at Blender to make your boss change his mind. :^)


 No.144

>>142

The only thing I don't know how to do in blender that I can manage in SketchUp is the dimensions tool– it makes a floating dynamic label for an edge or distance between two vertices that shows, in feet & inches, the approximate distance between the points you set.


 No.147

File: 1445215178687.png (41.13 KB, 410x472, 205:236, ss (2015-04-10 at 07.17.38….png)

I got into 3D through Sketchup and I really regret it. You can brute force your way into making slightly complex things but don't expect to do anything efficiently at all. Plugins expand upon the tools greatly but only by so much. It's a shame too because I keep masochistically trying to make things in it because I'm too used to the interface and quirks to switch over to Blender and my computer can't really handle intense modelling and rendering to begin with.


 No.148

>>147

How horrifying. Thanks for the feedback, folks.




File: 1444414127357.jpg (1.34 MB, 4000x1674, 2000:837, good-dino-v490_211apub.pub….jpg)

 No.136[Reply]

How the Making of ‘The Good Dinosaur’ Was Different From Other Pixar Movies

http://www.slashfilm.com/making-of-the-good-dinosaur/2/

Clouds in Pixar movies would usually be painted in by matte painters, using layers to create the illusion of animated drifts. But for this film, Pixar wanted to light the entire set and not have to go back and forth with a painter in the background. So they chose to populate the skies of the world with volume clouds.

The set team designed a library of different clouds with a set list of 11 different cloud types. Pixar’s artists and technicians also created a rain library, featuring different types of rain that could be mixed and matched and manipulated to create any desired look. The clouds would be combined to form unique looking formations, which were not just scenery in the background of the story.

The lighting team was able to have the volemetric clouds cast shadows on the ground, controlling the location of the sun to light each scene.

 No.138

it's about time, we've had pretty sophisticated volumetric particles and smoke for a while, I guess clouds are a pretty frivolous thing to use them for tho.


 No.143

>>138

Yes and no. It's little details like subsurface scattering and clouds that go to making it across the uncanny valley.




File: 1444316635117.png (59.05 KB, 638x390, 319:195, animato.png)

 No.135[Reply]



YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

 No.133[Reply]

 No.134

File: 1443903910194.pdf (351.64 KB, bridson-siggraph2007-curln….pdf)

Abstract

Procedural methods for animating turbulent fluid are often preferred over simulation, both for speed and for the degree of animator control. We offer an extremely simple approach to efficiently generating turbulent velocity fields based on Perlin noise, with a formula that is exactly incompressible (necessary for the characteristic look of everyday fluids), exactly respects solid boundaries (not allowing fluid to flow through arbitrarily-specified surfaces), and whose amplitude can be modulated in space as desired. In addition, we demonstrate how to combine this with procedural primitives for flow around moving rigid objects, vortices, etc.




File: 1442208196911.jpg (267.48 KB, 1280x599, 1280:599, 627360main_potw1209a.jpg)

 No.131[Reply]

I'm working on a project and I'm stumped. I'm curious about how objects would look in space if there was no star nearby. I know stars way off in the distance would add light, but I'm not sure how much. Would just using ambient occlusion be the best method for lighting? I honestly don't even really know how to structure this question. any help would be amazing.

 No.132

I doubt there would be much ambient light simply from starlight, but really, I think that depends on where you are in space. If there is no local start, but you are close to the center of the galaxy, then yeah, there'd be a lot of ambient light.

Sorry to be of zero help.




File: 1411436245175.jpg (72.01 KB, 446x655, 446:655, 1282024314607.jpg)

 No.20[Reply]

Wireframes and Topology
15 posts and 15 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.105

>>64
Eyelids/lashes need two bones, at least, not connected to the eye bone. One for top and one for bottom.

The eye-lashes should be sprites, on a single double-sided surface that has a slight curve. (five surfaces for realism, as lashes protrude at different angles.)

Weigh them with the exact same weighting along the length, to match the weighting of the eye-lid edge they touch. You don't want them to "bend", they move solidly because they are short and semi-rigid hairs.

Don't forget that looking up with your eye, also cases your top and bottom eye-lids to raise. What looks fake is when eyeballs move but the eye-lids do not follow the eye motion. Which causes everyone to leave eye-lids open wider than normal, making everyone look "shocked". That, or they never open the eyelids more, causing the eye to roll un-naturally up into the eyelid, blocking the pupil, which would make you not-see what you are trying to look at, and they compensate by tilting the head un-naturally when you would normally not tilt your head, because your eyes would normally see what you are trying to look at. Makes the characters look paranoid and retarded when you see them looking with their heads. Turning your head is not done until your eyes have reached an uncomfortable limit, or you are redirecting your full attention in a new direction.

Here is three videos… First one shows old-school "puppet eye motion". Shit looks fake, like an old puppet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrARqKYxzsk

Second shows "realistic eye motion" made for professional puppeteers. Often seen in animatronic shows that look real, and in many new movies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3BMrt3PD6A

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

 No.106

>>105
Also, this may help, if you "study eyes". Can't make them realistic if you don't know about them.

No, having eyes doesn't make you know about them. You are always looking at something and you need to know what they do when looking at something other than themselves, in a reflection.

 No.107


 No.108

>>31

Just a word of advice… I give this to all modelers…

Do not follow that bad practice of rigging models in that pose. It is great for building a model, but when you skin it and rig it, put a 50% bend on all joints, then export that pose as the actual model for mapping and rigging.

As it is now, this is the problem you, and all other modelers face, when using a pose like that, to output a final product…

When you bend the arm down, from a full-extension (well 85% in that pose), you are stressing-out and stretching-out the mapping on the top of the shoulders. Causing harsh and un-natural angles. While, you compress the arm-pit, which is unseen, but making it have massive detail in one unseen pixel and horrible "folds" as you lower the arm.

The elbows, same thing. They are at 100% extension here. so you are going to remove detail of graphic-mapping and polygons, causing unnatural elbow angles, while the elbow-pit, will compress and have uber HD graphics and way more polygons than needed, causing more unnatural folding.

Placing it at 50% bend, will only slightly distort the elbow on compression bending, and will not cause folding on the extension or on compression, in the pit.

Same with breasts… for uni-models. It is sooo horrible when people make models with prefab breasts. They can only be made bigger, and can never be made to move naturally. You need to make a male-chest, with greater polygons, and make a deform to "create the breast growth", so you can use that same deform to "make them move naturally". If prefab to a set size, deforming will never undo shape negatively if you don't have the exact shape the "formed it" positively. (Eg, eyeballing perfect breast-implants.)

In that model, by the way, the breasts would have been "pulled-up" by the flesh of the arm and shoulder being raised. Thus, lowering it would cause that form to be unnatural. However, her breasts are the same with arms up or arms down. (Again, here is where the half-bent compPost too long. Click here to view the full text.


 No.129

Any more rules for weight painting and ideal topology decisions? Like is there a set of heat map of sorts I can look at for where weights should ideally go on a per bone basis?… like to prevent strange anomalies and deformities during animation?




File: 1413311561215.png (197.38 KB, 294x256, 147:128, 1407223167167.png)

 No.85[Reply]

ayy lmao /3d/

can anyone create a hotwheels 3d model in the style of a Nendoroid?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nendoroid

I really want to 3d print a hotwheels nendoroid and sperg as fuck

 No.87

Do you have a 3D printer? I too would like to see a printed DEAR LEADER HOTWHEELS.

 No.126

get some good references; particularly the chair and I'll give it a shot. I'll even email it to him for a reaction and see if he'll feature 3d for a while.




File: 1426910210636.gif (1.77 MB, 782x570, 391:285, viewporn.gif)

 No.120[Reply]

First viewport bug i've seen in my 4 years of using blender.
Also general bug thread.


File: 1415072818915.jpg (95.31 KB, 800x640, 5:4, Scum.jpg)

 No.93[Reply]

Honest question: What's stopping me from exporting an obj file from student versions of autodesk programs and pretend I did everything in photoshop?

 No.94

I wonder myself actually.

.obj and .fbx you can open with a text editor. You'll find a comment line in the beginning that says something like "exported with maya fbx module" or whatever.

Open that file in blender or photoshop(does that take .obj files? i dont actually know), save and the comment line will change to blender/photoshop.

You can also just delete the comment line with a text editor but maybe thats suspicious, iunno.

 No.119

>>93
>>94

Absolutely nothing? The only reason to pay for software is for updates / services (cloud rendering) or because the DRM is hard to crack (not currently the case)

You should pirate retail software, if you ever work for a real studio or start your own company, they'll provide you a license.
In the case of Autodesk it's not even necessary to pirate, you just click the "Yes I am probably a Student" button and provide a bogus email (doesn't even need .edu) and download that shit.



File: 1421477146945.png (332.85 KB, 1920x1302, 320:217, 1305948014274.png)

 No.117[Reply]

tJdbGnybLzzAEuF


File: 1421477106776.jpg (457.39 KB, 1440x900, 8:5, 1304635818189.jpg)

 No.116[Reply]

lirMeOqcdJOjEMbS


File: 1416391807570.png (74.97 KB, 222x540, 37:90, larry1.PNG)

 No.100[Reply]

Would like someone to convert some 3DS Max files to Blender-compatible format. I can only give you a model I've made in return for you to toy around with. Would very much appreciate the help!

The files are here:

http://www.maxgilardi.com/artwork/Other%20stuff/KOTHMODELS.zip

 No.102

Blender can import 3ds, fbx, and obj.



Delete Post [ ]
[]
[1] [2] [3]
| Catalog
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]