[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]
Board
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



I mean in regards to texture creation. I'm currently using Substance designer and painter for my texture maps.

I used to make shitty textures in photoshop 2 years ago and never really spent the time to learn because...substance and DDO.

Does the industry still require you to make textures with photoshop or do most now use substance?
>>
I don't know about the industry perspective (still a student), but I can tell you substance painter is basically a shortcut of what photoshop does, with tools tailored specifically towards 3D texturing.

If you have a solid understanding of texturing, materials, maps, then you should be able to make a texture in photoshop. You might prefer to use substance because it's faster. Photoshop can still be useful for certain things you can't do in substance, and so is worth keeping in mind.

I'm told most of the industry uses either substance or quixel, with some preferring one side over the other. But learning how to texture in quixel shouldn't be hard if you know how to texture in substance, and vice versa.
>>
>>543014
2 words;

Quixel Suite.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ugVuyCXjss
>>
>>543031
did they seriously quote simon fuchs as "simon fox" lol
>>
>>543014
Photoshop is still the most relevant image manipulation software around. But using it for textures was never perfect since you work in a 2D space. Quixel, Substance and Mari change that, so Photoshop has take a backseat to the specialized tools.
The game industry sticks to Quixel and Substance while the movie industry favors Mari.
>>
>>543014

The short answer, anon, is that - yes, of course you have to be able to use shop to a fairly high level if you're going to be any kind of professional artist.

Even if a studio won't require you to paint directly into it to create textures (because they have quixel, substance etc.) you're of course going to have to use it for any one of a million tasks like fixing / combining / cleaning up raw assets.

No offense, but this is kind of a dumb question - I mean, even in boring office jobs now employers specify that they want people to have a basic working knowledge of shop, so of course a technology-based artist should have a *very* good knowledge of it.

In just about any workplace now, Photoshop is about ubiquitous as the photocopier.

Anyhow, why are you worried? It takes like two fucking days to learn.
>>
>>543111
>fairly high level
>two days to learn

wat
>>
>>543115
Yes, high level in 2 days.

Photoshop is Fisher Price level difficulty. 2 straight days of tutorials and if you don't have a pretty good grasp of it after that, then... maybe this industry isn't for you.
>>
>>543115

I honestly don't see what the big deal is. You basically need to know a handful of things:

1. The layers palette and layer blending modes and (less important) layer styles.
2. Masking workflows - (layer masks, vector masks etc).
3. The toolbox tools, and configuring brush setups.
4. I guess... the filters menu?
5. .... saving and exporting? Maybe?

That's basically all Photoshop is to 90% of users. All the bells and whistles functionality that has been added over the last decade are mostly tools that have a very specific function that only a fraction of users (mainly photographers) will use extensively.
>>
>>543125

6. The transform modes and tools.

This should probably be about number 2 or 3 on the list in order of priority.
>>
>>543111
I know how to use photoshop atm I use it in my day job. I retouch images and create marketing assets. Just when it comes to creating textures for my meshes i suck dick and prefer substance.

But yes I should probably learn how to do it in photoshop as well.
>>
>>543120
>>543125
That's not high level, though.
>>
>>543133

*photoshop* is not 'high level'.
>>
>>543148
And why exactly is that?
>>
>>543014
Heavily important if you're dealing with manual editing. If you're a game dev Substance will work just fine along with Megascans.
>>
>>543164

Well... ok, to give you one example; the layers palette. At it's core, this is simply a two-dimensional (top-down) hierarchical interface.

Any meme-generating neckbeard or vacation-photography enthusiast can get his head round this concept in two seconds.

Now... imagine if the layer palette was replaced entirely by a node-based workflow like in Substance or Nuke or whatever.
Myself and most others on this board would actually welcome that as it would greatly enhance the manner in which adjustment nodes and bitmaps and masks etc could be made to interact...

But do you think Photoshop would still be the most pirated piece of software ever if your average 'picks-up-the-mouse-between-pushes' computer user was confronted with that interface?

Non.
>>
>>543217
So why is the poster arguing photoshop should be known at a "high level"? Shouldn't they simply say "basic knowledge"?
>>
>>543228

Don't worry about eh?
>>
you will still need it for beauty shots regardless if its for 3D or not.

you can learn GIMP instead if you want. but the interface might trigger you
>>
you will be expected to texture in Photoshop 90% of the time. learn it
>>
>>543133
I've worked as a retoucher since 2009 and those are pretty much the only tools you'd use unless you're into some really niche stuff or want to to super high end skin retouching.
>>
>>543132
Then you probably dont need to



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[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.