I haven't modelled in close to 10 years, I was a simple poly artist for vehicles and games.What do you think has been the biggest game changer and what is essential to learn? Whether workflow changes or software that's come along?I am getting back into the flow of it again but its taking time.
>>671768Not 1 thing?
>>671767More reliance on sculpting, PBR materials and (theoretically) moves towards non-destructive workflows (which falls apart pretty quickly in everyday application anyways)No, not much has changed for low-poly modelling itself.
Blender has become a program on par with Maya and 3ds Max, with more developed modeling tools, so now asset creation is cheaper and more efficient. There's also Eevee, a new viewport tech that no other product offers, and that will help tremendously at surfacing and lookdev.
>>671810>Blender>on par with Maya and 3ds Maxstay delusional fag
>>671810>Blender has become a program on par with Maya and 3ds Max
>>671808this>>671810not this>>671767For sure the biggest change in modeling as a whole has been all the sculpting tools and softwares that became essential for creating assets. They allow for easy manipulation and development of millions of polygons to reach standards that I assume would have been impossible to fathom 15 years ago.I would probably recommend getting comfortable again with poly-modeling in 3dsmax, and once you feel more at ease with your 3D perception/flow, try bringing one of your models in Zbrush. It's going to be a nightmare at first (the UI and mindset is really off-putting), but eventually it will unlock amazing potential for your work.Finally, consider better resources than /3/. This place is a dumpster fire, so things like Youtube and forums are going to be way better friends to tag along in your journey.Good luck!
Lowpoly is still basically the same as you probably remembered it. Only big differences I can see is a few different UV unwrapping upgrades to programs and use of Substance painter.For modern/highpoly a lot has changed and as mentioned before such as lots of sculpting-heavy and substance painter and PBR materials is a big change.
>>671801what are you expecting honestly, low poly work is the same, subdiv modelling is the same the onlything people are going to start looking for is procedural modelling.
>>671810>with more developed modeling tools,its modifier stack is laughable along with the other shit its missing
>>671810>There's also Eevee, a new viewport tech that no other product offersThat's false.>and that will help tremendously at surfacing and lookdevThe way Blender renders if inherently flawed, so it's not recommended for lookdev at all.
>>671808Sculpting and PBR sums it up pretty much. Zbrush and Substance Painter are a blast to use, you'll have fun.
>>671767More advanced tools to paint in 3D, rather than texturing in photoshop, Like >>671808said, Scupting. Many character artists I follow don't even bother to model characters and just sculpt them from spheres, and the make their mesh from that. Also UV mapping, and Rigging has gotten a lot easier. Also less FK animating, and thank goodness for that. That was a point
>>671767Not that much has changed desu, some minor niceties rather than any major leaps. I would not feel crippled using a 2006 version of these software today. Move from blinn/phong shading models to 'PBR' sorta revolutionize how good we can make things look, but from a artist perspective it's not any harder, opposite really. Just you have to read up and experiment a bit with the new shading models to feel at home again.
>>672258>desuurbandictionary : "If you want to sound like a complete fucktard, use desu at the end of your sentences while speaking in English, or use it excessively at the end of every sentence, even when the sentence doesn't require it to be used."
>>672338>wow, a word filter? what's that? senpai no baka desu
>>672338this board automatically changes "t b h" to "desu" you mongoloidlurk more
>>671810Blender works but can't compete to Maya LW and 3ds Max.
>>671833What do you mean by Blender renders inherently flawed? Are you referring to colour space?
>>672367yes, I'm referring to the whole "filmic preset" debacle that attempts to fix things in the most 1990s possible way
>>672541Isn't the Filmic look using OCIO? Because if so, that's not exactly 90s tech.
>>672553no it doesn't
>>672553I was just mentioning the 90s because most shading/rendering techniques back then used "workarounds" to make things work and fulfill the needs of the artists, even though the parameters or calculations didn't quite make sense. In that sense, Filmic is a band-aid on a much deeper issue.
>>672569It is, but lets face it, if you just create a pure CGI image/animation and adjust in post, then it doesn't matter for the "end user". Colored pixels on a screen. Using Cycles in production in combination with photographic elements - fuck no.
>>672603>if you just create a pure CGI image/animation and adjust in post, then it doesn't matter for the "end user"Humm, it's a bit of an understatementI'm sure the end user doesn't perceive the difference, but for production, I really believe that (even if you do heavily stylized stuff) a good engine with proper physical/photographic properties will really help the workflow... Of course especially with shading, lighting, and rendering AOVs that help the post prod in a coherent wayJust curious, why do you think Cycle is worse with photographic elements than on it's own? Isn't the "not achieving reality" and issue in both cases?
>>672613>why do you think Cycle is worse with photographic elements than on it's own?Because when its on its own and you can operate by simply eyeballing the end result it is contained and you can manipulate every pixel as you wish. Whenever you have to match the look of something you need precise data. >Isn't the "not achieving reality" an issue in both cases?It always is.The problem with hybrid Live action /CGI is the mismatch which can be jarring since our brains are so trained to search for "errors", which makes these things pop out more.>a good engine with proper physical/photographic properties will really help the workflow.Absolutely, especially when working in teams.But if you are alone and go 5% away from pure photo-realism it doesn't matter anymore.
>>672628alright mate thanks for replying and not being a total ass like most anons on this board haha
>>671767Zbrush was the biggest game changer. And it´s exports almost flawless to 3dsmax in realtime thanks to the GOZ system it has built in. Model a very heavy organic in Zbrush (10 million poly and the thing keeps running at top speed), paint it, make a copy of the model and z-remesh it to make a perfect duplicate with less than 20k polys, realtime, and all in an automatic process that take less than a minute. After that, the UV master plugin will make the better unwrap an automatic process could ever do, and tesselating/projecting the original model in the copy will add all the painting details and deformations to the decimated copy... and clicking on abutton will export the model to 3dsmax with no errors or changes. I like to convert the maps to .dds, since the actors usually go to very heavy scenes and MAPS are the biggest memory eaters. 3dsmax 2016 was the last i pir..., ahem, got, but the changes in the menus are always the biggest annoyance from one version to another. 3dsmax BIPED system is still boss when rigging characters for animations and keeps unchallenged from almost 20 years.
>>672347let LW die
>>671810Blender isn't as bad as the college cucks ITT who wasted their money say it is but it's definitely not on par, a bit off.
>>672666cursed trips and that image... omfg anon, why...
>>672697Ah, I see you have met 3DGuy.
I've done a similar jump, and the most important difference I noticed was (apart from Substance Painter) the prevalence of baking. Back in 2007 normalmaps were basically a gimmick, today they completely define what an object looks like. I know baking has been around back then, but it wasn't actually used for most things.
>>672338desu▲▲▲can you triforce?