[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

Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.

File: 1509186725550.jpg (284 KB, 1227x1840)
284 KB
284 KB JPG
New one. Anyway, I've been hearing various opinions about this, so I want to ask here - really, how important is it to sculpt small details like these on each environment asset?


I feel like the time it takes to do it doesn't justify the minor improvements. If it is for a close up in a film, then I guess it's another story, but I'm not sure what to think about game environments. Especially when I realised that I can use SP's masks and normals with negative numbers to achieve similar details on my models. And when the material gets on top, it is even less noticeable.
Got more pictures of this? I need them for reference.
File: 1526265609197.jpg (77 KB, 509x1423)
77 KB
The higher the quality the better, If your portfolio doesn't have such things you'll be int level max.
Sometimes I feel bad for using so much automatic unwrapping, but really, REALLY, for environment assets, you really aren't able to see it. Hell, I've been posting a lot of my work on various websites, inclucing close-ups, and nobody ever noticed.

I know that now you'll probably attack me and say to "post work" to prove it. I won't, but I will keep posting in WIP threads and you will still compliment it and never realize it. I feel the same applies to topology. I don't know why is that, but often I see anons posting some very nice modeling work, and for some reason, some people don't want to comment unless they see topo. If it works perfectly fine (not in theory, but in practice) in a game engine or on a static render, then why would anyone care about topology? It's like you're just trying to find a reason to shit on someone's work. I know it's important and it can cause many fuck ups, but that doesn't happen always, and I'm talking about cases where it doesn't create any problems.
Good topology practices are among the first things taught to a beginning modeler. Since many don't go much further beyond that stage, it's one of the few things they can consider when judging a work. It's understandable that they'll over mention it in comparison to other more purely artistic features.
That left hand tho. Fucking hell.
Someone have it for download?
i'm starting to get into modeling, where can i get good reference pics?
File: youhadonejob.jpg (106 KB, 1024x683)
106 KB
106 KB JPG
>asking for reference pics
>not asking for OP's model

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.