[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] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/3/ - 3DCG


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: 1565839860517.gif (1.99 MB, 394x369)
1.99 MB
1.99 MB GIF
- What would you like to get explained?
- Do you like it fast or slow paced to easily understand?
- What do you like the most in tutorials and what do you absolutely hate and should be avoided?
>>
File: Jesus.jpg (205 KB, 1073x1080)
205 KB
205 KB JPG
All I want is a facecam.
>>
>>701028
>no facecam
>Start with real basic stuff (shortcuts, tools...)
>explain some basic technique, the correct method to do something (you want to crease something in a certain way? Try this...)
Then build from there
>>
>>701028

Proper game art stuff like designing an rpg character blendshapes. Fitting armour. Damage, wading in water, decals etc. Slow paced with all the steps instead of skipping. I like when the tutor explains why they are doing something instead of a watch me do these random things. What should be avoided is timelapses.
>>
>>701028
I want to see all the super crucial and informative aspects that the tutorial maker always skips over.
>>
At most a tutorial should take 5 minutes.
It should be less of a tutorial too. Just new techniques and shit.
Proper edge flow would be a good one.
>>
I wish there were more tutorial or courses focused on technique and workflow without wasting time explaining basic stuff like shortcuts or what's a normal and whatnot.
I was watching a tutorial on drivers the other day, something which clearly shouldn't concern beginners, but the guy kept wasting my time explaining the most basic stuff anyone interested in the subject should already be familiar with.
>>
>>701028
I HATE how every shitty tutorial they seem to mess something up but can't be bothered to go back and crop that part of the video out. Littleraly that kind of editing could not take more then a few min. When I see something for the first time I try my best to remember it that way and by messing it up I'm getting into bad habits. Ex. "The important thing to do is to edit the Turbulence and crank that high it will effect shape of the fire..... *spends 2 min turning sliders up and playing fire animation* oh wait no it was actually BUOYANCY, that's what we should edit to affect the shape"
>>
Ian Hubert quick tutorials are the best format
>>
When tutorials follow most of a professional workflow, but Suddenly decide to ditch one key principle of it. Btw there's such a lack of good tutorials on blender no wonder it took me ages to get a hang of it.
>>
>FLUID SIMULATION TUTORIAL!!!!!!!!!!111111
>it's another fluid fills a cube video with literally none of the start preset values changed

Tutorial parrotting is the absolute worst
>>
>>701028
Crash course on the essential for making porn.
>>
>>701163
Yeah how the fuck does it not exist when there's so much CGI porn out these days.
>>
>>701213
It has a lot to do with how there is no particular pornographic workflow involved with making porn as opposed to have characters doing other stuff.

If you need a fucking tutorial (not meant as a cuss, but as a literal fucking tutorial) to make a shaft go in and out a hole you're experiencing problems no CGI education can address.
>>
>>701163
Just watch porn and recreate shit you find erotic. If you need help animating, no porn tutorial is gonna help you with that, just learn to animate. It's all built off the same stuff.
>>
>>701216
>If you need a fucking tutorial ... to make a shaft go in and out a hole you're experiencing problems no CGI education can address

my sides has officially left this solar system
>>
>title of tutorial in english
>even fucking video description in english

>video in russian
>>
>>701213
Because they have already acquired all the other skills needed for that type of animation. And where are they gonna host those videos? Fucking YouTube? Pornhub?
>>
>>701028
show me the end result
get to the point
tell/show me the why not just the how
have some bantz at the end of the video
>>
File: 1500798998377.png (153 KB, 384x390)
153 KB
153 KB PNG
>>701163
>>701213
If you're unable to adapt universal modeling skills to your shit (which is really not rocket science) you're the picture perfect brainlet example and you could just as well just throw the towel right now. 3DCG will never work out for you.
>>
>>701163
It's strange that https://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph5b7ea0e86001b
is the only tutorial of that kind
>>
>>701120

There are quite a few times I've learned things from tutorials because they make a mistake explain what the mistake was how to correct it and what the correct action is.
This is very useful with programs that do things in nonintuative ways so the pitfalls are more likley to be encountered.
>>
>loud lips smacking after every second phrase
>>
>>702568
just keep t r y i n g
>>
>>702568
I never mastered modeling and I worked in a Berlin-based VFX studio for the past 15 years. So I must do something right.
>>
>>702592
What's your position and how much is your salary?
Whats the usual average salary of an Artist who is starting in VFX?
Greetings from another Berliner.
>>
>>702592
>supposedly worked for a VFX studio for 15 fucking years
>still does not know how to adapt concepts shown in tutorials to your particular projects
So you were responsible for cleaning the toilets then?
>>
Are you supposed to watch a bunch of tutorials first and then copy what they did or watch, stop, copy, watch, stop, copy?
>>
>>702729
Watch some tuts to get yourself up and running. Copy if you want.
Do some personal projects and struggle for a while, do some more personal projects and struggle some more (only this time look up shit that you want to do). Instead of copying those tutorials, work them into your project so you're not just "painting by number" you're actually learning something. Then go back and do more personal shit.

Then later when you actually have a good grasp on what you're doing, just start diving into theory and stuff. Edgeflow, unwrapping, lighting, all sorts of subjective shit.

Honestly I don't think I've ever straight copied a tutorial. That shit's retarded and you won't learn anything.
>>
>>702772
>Honestly I don't think I've ever straight copied a tutorial. That shit's retarded and you won't learn anything.
so you've never actually followed a tutorial then? Why?
>>
>>702793
It should be pretty obvious from what I said previously.
You're not learning anything, you're just doing some paint by numbers bullshit. All you're doing is recreating someone else's work blindly without knowing why you're taking those steps. If left to your own devices you wouldn't know where to begin if you had to make it all by yourself. Learn by doing, but not by others doing. You're going to be able to look at an object and know exactly how to make it by working on your own stuff and learning, easier than you would had you just followed along some tutorials.

As I said, if you need to follow a tutorial to get up and running in a program (figure out UI, navigation, etc), then fine. I'll watch some videos going over that sort of stuff and workflows if I'm starting up a new program (though I won't actually follow along and do it myself), but that's about it.

Not to mention most tutorials are made by people who don't know jack shit about what they're teaching, do it for the views and ad revenue, stumble along without any fucking idea of what they're doing, and have never actually created anything in a professional environment ever. There's very little useful information available for free on YT. If you have to have tutorials or something, do one of those structured courses. I can't give you any recommendations or anything because I never bothered with that shit.
>>
>>702798
i get all my tuts from CGP
>>
>>702806
Good for you.
>>
>>701028
>- What would you like to get explained?
give me something about how the topology on a low poly game mesh should look like
do i prioritize quads or triangles
does it matter? when to pick what?
how dense should my topology be?
should i pick floating geometry over lets say extruding/beveling
>>
>>702839
just to clarify im talking about low poly mesh that is about to be baked with high poly , not just low poly with pastel colors
>>
>>702840
You essentially just build it to capture the general shape of your highpoly using your polybudget as intelligently as you're able to.

If you're not gonna subdivide the mesh you're essentially free to using triangles wherever you need to
but you still wanna avoid poles as much as you can to avoid pinching artifacts in the shader which limits where it'll be a good idea to use them.

just try various things and see what happens, look at assets on artstation or ripped gamefiles from your favorite looking games for ideas.
Once you see the wireframes you'll start to pick up the general theme of how to go about it and notice smart compromises and tricks employed by good artists.
>>
>>702839
you can find examples of wireframes used for final production of games.
https://polycount.com/discussion/141061/polycounts-in-next-gen-games-thread
>>
>>702843
>using your polybudget
how do i determine what is a good amount for different objects? is there an avarage number that i should try to stay around for lets say a props? (ex 9-11k?, more than that and its too much)

>>702843
>>702845
>look at assets on artstation
>you can find examples of wireframes used for final production of games

sure there are plenty of examples of various completed projects, but if im not redoing it 1 to 1 or if its not something like a human body (where the base is very very similar each time) it doesnt really help.
im trying to understand what should be my focus and whats important when building the mesh, so i can understand how it work and i how i can use it rather than looking for examples from which i can copy.
there are so many tutorials on how your edges should float so you would have the best topology and so on and so on, but there is barely anything on low poly meshes

do i just wing it and make it whatever as long as it doesnt pinch and its close to the high poly
>>
>>702849
>how do i determine what is a good amount for different objects? is there an avarage number that i should try to stay around for lets say a props? (ex 9-11k?, more than that and its too much)

Not really it's just dependent on how much stuff you need to render on screen at any one time.
This will vary depending on the culling and occlusion and batching of objects etc.
To figure out what is fine and what is too much you need to stress test your engine on your target hardware.
But say you can draw a few million triangles at 60hz, you don't wanna create a scene in which you know you're gonna end up high above that number.

So just how light something needs to be depends a lot on how many times you're gonna instance that thing on the screen at once.
Now 9K or 11K doesn't matter one way or the other if it's just that one of the things on screen, ain't gonna make a noticeable difference.
but a hundred instances of that 9K object is 900K polys and a 100 instances of the 11K object is 1.1million, then it becomes a difference that matters.
>>
>>702825
my tuts I get from CGP are like $100+ courses. I dont know why you wouldnt follow along. They are nothing like youtube pajeet tuts
>>
>>702867
Pajeet > blenderguru desu
>>
>>702867
Because I'm past that point. I don't need them. Most of the shit I have to work on and improve is theory and workflow based. That's all shit that gets better with practice.

Not to mention those aren't tutorials, those are more like courses.
>>
>>702900
so you draw the line between a tutorial and a course?
>>
>>702999
A course is something designed and structured from beginning to end like a class.
A tutorial is just some dude on youtube or elsewhere fumbling around. It's "do this and follow exactly", where a course is "here's what's being done, why it's being done, and how to do it". It should be as similar to taking a class as possible.
A tutorial is the same as asking your friend sitting next to you how to do something. They might know what they're talking about, but generally they're in the same boat as you and don't know jack shit and pretend to know things. Then they tell you exactly what to do behind your shoulder and you repeat their actions word for word, but it's not clear why you're doing these things, only that this person is telling you to do these things.
>>
>>701036
please no
>>
>>701028
Go away cgmatter, make your own YouTube demand
>>
>>702562
>Tut part 1, 30 min
>Tut part 2, so ive made some adjustments
>completely different redone model
>>
I like this guys tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imkSdlbXB_U
>>
>>702869
lolno
>>
>>701028
the whole production pipeline of an animated short from start to finish as one man band
>>
>>706501
do people actually follow his tutorials or do they just want to be entertained?

I don't use blender so I don't know if what he does makes sense
>>
>>701028
No bullshit. No personal opinions. Just explain the steps with no tangents or mistakes or skips.

See PixelFondue for an example. It's the only channel I came across that I did not have to increase the speed 2x, or downvote for wasting my time.

And DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT record audio while you're coming out of a cold, or the flu, or pulmonary embolism. Nobody cares that you are sick, were sick, or that you're currently dying. You pull that shit I am going to flag your video for abuse.
>>
>>701028
I prefer the video to be a fast edit to skip all the small moving of vertices that fill up the time.
Using After Effexts to add text with explaintions of what buttons pushed, tips or guides.
Voice over narrating the fast pased video.

I can pause or rewind, doesnt bother me. I just want quick, to the point videos. FUCK!
>>
>>709997
these are super inspiring, since he actually shows lazy workflows that work and you can adapt them to any 3D software.
He did a longer talk at the latest Blender conference; it is like 3D standup comedy - very entertaining, also very inspiring.
>>
>>701028
More tutorials on the less technical aspects like composition and generally things that improve the creative choices you make, as opposed to just teaching how to practically implement an idea.
I know that these principles are universal to visual arts, but having them explained from a /3/ perspective is super useful for those of us who are self taught and are more used to thinking in terms of software.
>>
>>701028
I don't like when tutorials are like 3 hours long, and I also don't like when they're 2 minutes long. Ideal length is about 30 mins.
I'm desperately trying to learn how to do UV unwrapping in Cinema 4D, for a custom asset in the game Cities: Skylines. Just a simple eatery/diner.
However, whenever I look at a tutorial, it's either for a primitive cube, or it's at least 1 hour long. The hour would be fine if they didn't also slooooowly explain what a cube is at the beginning.
Help me bros.
>>
Lazy Blender tutorials are pretty kino desu, even though I'm not a Blendlett
>>
>>709997
I use C4D and I've been able to translate his techniques into my own workflow. It's usually pretty universal stuff.
>>
I want more tutorials on how to create 2D looking 3D. Which is a better method; manipulate 2D textures on a 3D plane like Live2D Euclid, use a specific shader like a toon shader, or draw directly into the viewport with tools like the grease pencil in Blender? Which shaders are the best for this for different art styles? What programs are the best for acheiving this look?
>>
>>702568
Agreed, but it'd be nice to have a tutorial on how to rig stuff like pussy flaps.

I did it with bones and shapekeys but it'd still be cool to see how other's come up with their solutions.
>>
>>710985
C4d has the absolute shittiest UV tools in the industry - gets even BTFO by Blender. Just so you know - if you hate Unwrapping and find it frustrating, it's because it is 5x more frustrating then it should be in C4d.
>>
>>711012
Oh fugg, seriously? I saw a video by a youtuber named 'Digital Meat' that also said that C4D's UV tools were quite weak. He recommended some auxiliary software to do the job, but desu I can't be bothered finding a torrent and then learning a whole new program. I just need to know a couple of things. Dunno if you can help or not, but any answer is greatly appreciated.
>do i need to greatly simplify the topology with a retopo tool before doing UVs? Polys have already been converted to tris
>how does the size of each UV island effect the outcome?
(it already makes no sense to me how they can be moved to anywhere you want)
>how do I go about making luminescence, normals, reflections, etc if it's all on 1 map?
Either way, thank you very much for the reply.
>>
File: 34435.jpg (255 KB, 1440x900)
255 KB
255 KB JPG
>>711013
To add:
I've ran my building through a polygon reduction modifier to bring it down to 1k (although I since learned that 2k will be fine), but these awful triangles really muddy the waters.
Would a retopology tool help make this mesh easier to work with?
>>
>>711013
>>do i need to greatly simplify the topology with a retopo tool before doing UVs? Polys have already been converted to tris
Not necessary as long as you can manage the amount. There is also no reason to convert to tris. Just convert the n-gons to tris and you should have no problems.
>how does the size of each UV island effect the outcome?
The UV space is equal to the amount pixels you have in your texture. Smaller UV islands = less pixel.
>(it already makes no sense to me how they can be moved to anywhere you want)
You can model what you want, why shouldn't you be able to throw the UV's wherever you want?
>how do I go about making luminescence, normals, reflections, etc if it's all on 1 map?
I am not sure i understand exactly what you mean. Each of those gets an dedicated texture, all are using the same UV map.
>I've ran my building through a polygon reduction modifier to bring it down to 1k
Don't do this unless you know what you are doing.
>but these awful triangles really muddy the waters.
Actually they don't, you just don't know what you are doing.
Just convert them to quads, nobody really works with all tris unless its lowpoly.
>Would a retopology tool help make this mesh easier to work with?
No, the mesh is fine, you just need to learn the principles of UV unwrapping and proper workflows. Also retopo is a manual process to createe a lower resolution mesh on top of an high rez mesh mostly used for characters and organic stuff.

Look man, if you don't know how UV'ing works you can watch a tutorial in any 3D program as long as it is about the fundamentals, but i would
strongly suggest to learn as much as you can before wasting anymore time stumbling in the dark.
You need to have this knowledge - i can answer 100 of your questions and you would still not be able to unwrap properly.
>>
>>711013
>He recommended some auxiliary software to do the job, but desu I can't be bothered finding a torrent and then learning a whole new program.
If you want to stick with 3D you will inevitably run into more UV issues and trust me when i say, YOU WILL rip your hairs out if you stick with unwrapping in C4d.
I've been through it, never again, but hey - it's your life, you suffer, not me.
But learning a small program dedicated to unwrapping is the same as if you learn how to do this shit in C4d, but instead you'll have the full power of a proper unwrapping tool and these tools aren't THAT hard to learn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WHp5yduzvA
>>
>>711047
Great reply. Thank you very, very much indeed. Luckily I'm extremely anal about making everything in 100% quads, so it's looking like the work load will be a lot less than I expected. I've just never had to do a UV before this. I'm pretty good at hard surface modeling for standalone images and such, but since this is the first instance of any of my modeling requiring a UV, this is the first time I've actually needed to know this stuff.
Either way, I greatly appreciate your answer. I've been monitoring this thread for hours and this reply gives me all the answers I needed. Thank you again, anon.
>>
>>711048
Shit, this is the exact video I was watching before you replied. I'm gonna get it.
Thanks again m8. Your answer has been of tremendous help to me.
>>
>>711050
Good luck with your house.
I personally hate unwrapping even after mastering it (it's a fucking waste of time and i hope AI solutions come sooner than later)
So i always preach to people to use the best tools available so that unnecessary Unwrap suffering can be avoided. There also exists some weirdos who actually enjoy it. Stay away from these folks (they are probably crazy).
Rizom UV seems excellent, you're in good hands.
>>
>>701028
I'm new to 3D and I'm learning on blender.

What I like is when a tutorial goes at a faster pace. if I need to slow down the video or pause it I can but I end up watching all my tutorials on about 1.3 playback, even the ones not on youtube. It shouldn't be so fast that it's impossible to follow but it also shouldn't be the speed of a kids video.

I dont like tutorials that just tells you to push buttons with no explanation of why or what they do. I want to know why you are doing the things yours doing, I dont want to just follow along.

If it's a modeling video it should cover all the basics too. Modeling, uv mapping, animating, lighting, rendering and so on. I want to see what I've made get taken through all the other steps too.

I've read this a few times in the thread and I kind of already said it too, but i want more technical tutorials. Explain your technique, explain your approach to topology, explain how you manage ngons and triangles when they come up in modeling, just explain things more.

Also I wont watch a video with a face cam. They take up room on the interface, it blocks buttons being pressed and It's just distracting. Also if you pause a video on youtube the text will pop up and block the top bar and interface. Theatre mode fixes it but it's still really annoying when you need to see something clearly on the interface which wouldn't be a problem if they explained it better to begin with.

And you should speak clearly and edit out mess ups or distractions like clearing your throat. I'm watching one tutorial for something else that isnt 3D, it's really informative but the guy sounds fucking disgusting. Wet mouth like, clears his throat constantly, it's just generally unpleasent to listen to
>>
>>701055
> Proper edge flow tutorial

Absolutely this. It seems advanced character topology is tightly held proprietary studio knowledge. I want to see how to build and use muscle-flow meshes.
>>
>>711055
Thanks again, friend. I have dedicated my entire morning to slugging through a bunch of UV videos, all the way from square 1. I figured I might as well go over the fundamentals even though I already had a decent enough grasp on them, just to help consolidate all this new info together with it. I spend an inordinate amount of time learning stuff, but UV seems extremely important.
>>
There's not a great deal of tutorials for the correct workflow for human faces/bodies. My guess is that nobody really wants to share their techniques, but even some tips on general methodology would be great.
>>
>>711170
That's because you are a lazy fuck and you didn't search properly. There is tons of material out there.
>>
>>711178
It's hardly a case of being lazy. Any time I am awake, I'm learning something or working on something. Search engines became almost unusable pieces of shit a few years ago, and any tutorials I find on it are either incredibly advanced, or incredibly rudimentary. If you can point me in the direction of a good place to get started; I'm all ears. If you just want to be an unhelpful faggot, then continue.
>>
>>702867
Personally if I'm following a course or tutorial I create a similar project and follow the workflow and principles of the tutorial but not make the exactly same thing. That way I'm still figuring out how to do things myself and not just copy every menu setting and number from the screen. And also I can upload the model if it looks good without it being shitty_copy_of_that_well_known_tutorial_#1836
>>
>>701028
No fucking Blender you ngon faggots
>>
>>701028
Jokes on you.
Practically all 3D tutorials are useless if it comes to explaining the real workflow and teach you bad practices.

And I mostly watch them to see where the lasts update placed the common option or how to accomplish things in it (all view port movements).

With this out of the way:
>NO FACECAM!
I'm not here to look at your face stop obscuring the interface fagot.
>Slow explanations
I don't want the guy to rush.
>Actually explain the philosophy behind what you are doing.
No tutorial ever did this and the more they are away from this the worse they get the worst is some guy telling you to punch in some numbers who fix things and you have no fucken idea why or how this works.

>>701045
>time lapses
My dude time lapses are basically the guy showing how bitching great he is and the time laps obscures what he is a actually doing, its basically a
>Watch how great I am you filthy pleb and eat a dick and die.
>Welcome to the 3D industry fagot! Eat shit and die!

To appropriate ownage music.

Yep I'm telling everyone there are secret techniques that everyone (if they are not copy past retards who secretly copy other modelers without any idea how to do anything) is obscuring form you and deliberately teaching you bad workflows to hide how its really done (even in blender).

You actually need to get it on your own like I did by fucken self enlightenment in front of the computer or be part of the secret Illuminati who tells their children how to do it.

Its basically like HunterxHunter with the secret hunter exam only in real life.

Me? Oh I'm not giving you this fagot, I keep it for myself you can drop dead welcome to the 3D industry! Eat a dick! XD XD XD! Without this knowledge you will never accomplish anything. Have another timelaps ownage video pleb:
https://youtu.be/GYzb-oRoWao?t=77
>>
Stephen Knipping's Applied Houdini is the gold standard for me. Wish more were like it.
>Good pace, not impossible to follow
>Actually explains what he's doing and why
>actually makes things that look cool
>>
>>711772
>and why
This is the key.
Every tutorial should explain in detail (relative to the level of the tutorial of course) the WHY of everything.
Without this it's almost a waste of time, as you don't really learn the principles of what they're doing (which is what actually makes you grow), but only the "recipe" of what they make in the video.
>>
bump
>>
>>701028
I prefer tutorials that go from one fundamental to the next in different examples instead of having the end goal of making something, they can cover far more different problems than one project could run into. Daniel Thiger's SD tutorials don't go for making a complete material until part 3, even then that's just the heightmap and part 4 goes back to colorizing many different examples. I've found them far more helpful than the Allegorithmic Academy tutorials that jump straight into making stuff.
>>
>>711490
Why?
>>
File: jfrwhin5hj421.png (387 KB, 680x708)
387 KB
387 KB PNG
THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY 0 MARVELOUS DESIGNER TUTORIALS THAT ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT DESIGNING FABRIC PATTERNS AND HOW TO MAKE CLOTHES LOOK REALISTIC
EVERY SINGLE ONE IS SOME FUCKING RETARD MAKING THE SAME SHIRT AND TRACING OVER EXISTING PATTERNS
NO ONE TALKS ABOUT WORKFLOWS FOR RETOPOLOGY WITH THIS PROGRAM EITHER
EVERY TUTORIAL IS PAID AND IS USUALLY FUCKING TRASH
FUCK THIS PROGRAM SEEMS LIKE IT'S GOD TIER BUT FUCK RESOURCES FOR LEARNING IT ARE SO HARD TO FIND
>>
>>717470
Just study patternmaking. MD is basically a cut & sew simulator, so you need to know very little about the program itself.
>>
>>717470
Look for Clo-3d tuts instead. It's the exact same program from the same people, just a different skin and marketed to clothing designers instead.
You get a lot of interesting theory and stuff about clothing design that way instead of just 3d. Since it's actual clothing designers making the tuts and not 3d artists.
Still a bit hard to find decent shit on Youtube though.
>>
File: flat,1000x1000,075,f.jpg (84 KB, 904x864)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
"I actually don't work like this myself, but I will demonstrate this conceptual idea of a workflow to illustrate what I am trying to get across instead"
>>
>>717470

Fabric patterns don't actually work in Marvelous designer. It's just a pure hackjob.
>>
>- What do you like the most in tutorials and what do you absolutely hate and should be avoided?
If your tutorial is about an advanced subject there's a good chance I'm watching it because I already understand the basics so don't fucking waste my time explaining what a mirror modifier does or what's a normal.
>>
>>719367
I'm not very experienced with Marvelous but I haven't yet found that kind of problem, unless I understood you wrong. Can you give an example?
>>
>Hi, welcome to this tutorial on this action
>First, let's add a super basic cube to show what it does
>Now we do the action
>It's right here, click it to apply it
>That's it, you can see it does the thing
>Thanks for watching my tutorial, follow me on twitter, subscribe, and help me on Patreon

The only thing worse than long tutorials is overly short ones that are basically a "let's play" of them pressing a button. In all circumstances, you've already done that. You know what it "does", but not why it does the thing, why it's useful, how you can use it, how it's used in a workflow, and an example of what it would be used for on an actual model. Any fucking idiot can press a fucking button and infer what it does, most of the people watching probably already did that and are wondering why it's useful.

This guy is a big offender, but there's others too that fall into the same camp
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2VtUcCLjCQ

Yet for some reason they get comments saying "wow, thanks so much, this helped me", "woah you should be a professor" and shit like that.
Mainly I'm just salty that I still don't know what the fuck the cast modifier is even really for.
>>
>>719416
>Mainly I'm just salty that I still don't know what the fuck the cast modifier is even really for.
It looks like the product of a bored Houdini TD. So basically a cool gimmick for abstract motion effects.
>>
>>719387

Get a pattern for something like pants. In reality is looks like two legs splayed out. In marvellous it's two squares sewn together.
>>
>>719429
>two squares sewn together
Then something is wrong? I bet the stress display mode would show red all over the place. I usually begin my projects with actual sewing patterns and adjust them, so far it hasn't failed to simulate well.
>>
>>701028

>What would you like to get explained?

For starters basic character modeling, texturing and rigging followed by making a basic terrain (a room with a couple furniture) and then making a basic render with the modeled stuff. The idea is to explain universal concepts that apply to complex models on a smaller simpler scale, but on something more complex than just a cube. Then follow up with a few videos on variations. More complex terrain (outdoors or urban terrain), quadraped topology, and lighting in renders.

>Do you like it fast or slow paced to easily understand?

Too slow is boring makes the video too lengthy. I prefer videos being to the point. But I'll love to see tutorials where the instructor shows you why you do things a certain way. "To make X, you do it this Y way. Otherwise this issue will happen."

>what do you absolutely hate and should be avoided?

-long intro
-no speech in favour of crappy music
-low quality mic
-boring/monotone/nerd voice
-"And now we'll do the uhhhhhhh..."
>>
Who do you guys recommend for beginners? Do you guys have a Loomis?

Or
>>711745
is this guy right and it's all chaos with no hope besides learning by yourself?
>>
>>719448
just practice, a lot of my shit I've learned by just doing a lot of the same low poly models.

your brain will find a shortcut, always.

Modelling is just extrude vertex around 2D reference.
>>
>>719448
Anything from Gnomon.
>>
>>701121
unironically this
>>
Applied Houdini series by Steven Knipping.
-Starts from scratch.
-includes only essential content.
-Split into proper 5-10 minute videos per chapter.
-Visualizes complicated stuff.
-And he has fucking good reputation in the industry and doesn't care when his tutorials are pirated. Because lot of studios purchase his tutorials for training their juniors.
>>
Good facial rigging.
>>
It depends on what's being taught. But in general quick is better as long as the information is given.

I'm just starting out. I need some quick and punchy tutorials to get me started, I feel like I've learned a bunch about some things, and have a lot of short tutorials saved for when I get a bit better and understand more of what is happening. Right now I'm more interested in animation, so I'm looking up on rigging, posing and animating. Learning a lot from quick tutorials like Royal Skies. But when I get to implementation shitty interface and key config fucks me over. But every 101 video is some monotonous European who takes an hour to describe one panel. I'm not a 3 year old, I'm just new.
>>
>>722032
this
>>
Go fast, people who need to see some small specific thing could pause and you should say what you are doing in a way that even a deaf person could umderstand. Dont go through the entire process of creating something show some small parts where someone could do better. Assume someone has watched 1-3x 5-10min tutorials already.
>>
>>722722
>Go fast
>get a whole comment section crying about you being too fast
>a whole army of thumbs down
>video fizzling out into nowhere with 1500 views
>>
>>701028
I need a good course for sculpting female faces because fuck me I just can't get it right. Every time I sculpt it comes out male as fuck
>>
Absolute beginner here, I’ve got a question that’ll decide if I make this a hobby or really try hard.
Are there any websites I can send in a model in and have it 3d printed? I’ve found some that will design and print but I’m more interested in having something printed that I made myself.
>>
>>725394
Don't want to sound mean but if you can't even find this with one simple search and your whole decision depends on the answer, I'm not sure if you'll make it far with 3D shit.
Yes, there are several sites and Shapeways is probably the market leader in that area.
>>
>>725395
You’re probably right, though I suppose I exaggerated a bit, still not gonna give up (yet)
I’ll check out shapeways, thank you!
>>
>>725396
No prob and good luck
>>
The chad Grant Abbitt vs the virgin Blender Guru
>>
File: índice.jpg (8 KB, 282x178)
8 KB
8 KB JPG
>>701039
this!
>>
>>722722
>tutorials should be clickbait making of time lapses
>rather than a tutorial on how to create something, the tutorial should be incomplete
A tutorial by you would be the most complained about itt.
>>
>>701028
>Do you like it fast or slow paced to easily understand?
Fast paced as in, go straight to the point
>what do you absolutely hate and should be avoided?
White themes, small fontsize, recording the whole screen and not zooming to the important part of it, that shitty software that moves the recording area with the mouse, loud music that covers the instructions, writing the instructions step by step on a notepad screen, and that guy that makes pauses like "um.... uh.... eh...."
>>
>>701028
Skinning and paint weights.
>>
>>726651
every joint takes on a number of vertices. They all have a literal weight limit. spread it out evenly.

If you want to lessen the number of vertices a single joint influences, you have to assign the vertices that you don't want to be influenced by said joint to another joint down the line, and so forth.
>>
>>726666
Cool, but why the actual fuck do I have to make 300000000 fucking clicks on a fucking vert for it to change color?!!!??! That's the gayest shit.
>>
Every megabyte counts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EqLyGsu3AA
>>
>>701028
I'm new to this 3D shit, but it seems like you could explain every single detail about the software and still not know how to do anything. It's so weird, there isn't a whole lot of theory behind it or anything, just brute force your way through and hope for the best. Tutorials are fine in that sense, just mindless masturbatory repetition with no clear explanation. Bonus points if the guy talks about unrelated stuff in the middle of doing something complex really fast, like Blender Guru.
>>
>>726669
Select verts before going into skin mode.
>>
I'm following DK's character tutorial for like the tenth time in five years of progression and he keeps skipping over what he's doing on screen to ramble about things like tools. He'd be really good at teaching if there weren't these five minutes gaps of unwarranted explanations about other things.

And I still haven't made a head yet, goddamn, it must be me that's retarded. Maybe I should just give up and resign myself to being a 2Dlet. I can draw a head, but apparently I can't model one
>>
>>701028
When I first started 3D, I preferred slower tutorials, but now that I'm more technically proficient with Blender, I prefer fast stuff. Ian Hubert is fantastic. Short and to the point with (generally) useful things.
>>
>>726670
>B-BUT you NEED to have ROCK ESSENTIALS to have GOOD looking ROCKS! YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO MAKE THEM AND THEY WON'T LOOK ACCEPTABLE! >:^(
>>
File: 12857468746845.jpg (163 KB, 460x569)
163 KB
163 KB JPG
It annoys me that there are still people who think they can make tutorials while mumbling 2 meters away, somewhere in or out of rough direction towards their cpu fan spooling up laptop mic hole with recording set to 8kHz.
>>
>"ummm" and lips smacking every 3 seconds
>completely chaotic cadence and incoherent ranting
>explaining one thing and then SUDDENLY having an idea and explaining something sort of related but then without actually coming back to the original problem after minutes of ranting
>>
Animation tutorials. From bouncing balls to walking.
>>
>>728370
>keyboard audible during recording
>viewport zooms around constantly because tutorial man has ADHD
>CLACK CLACK CLACK CLACK CLACK
>"okay guys now that we've made a cube let's continue with the rest of the tutorial"
>>
>>702560
pornhub has a sfw section
>>
>>701348
It's true.
>>
>>728412
lol
>>
I hate when sometimes youtubers dont emphasize whether their tutorial is for (low to high poly)
video games or for offline/path tracing with ridiculous poly count) rendering (purposes. Afaik those workflows can diverge quite a bit.

That said, do you guys think Grant Abbitt is good? I like his vids except his front teeth are offputting lel
>>
>>729214
He's definitely one of the best for Blender
>>
>>702869
This. It's not that blender "guru" is bad, but he chooses most obvious shit to do a lesson about, when you stop being a complete beginner, his whole channel is useless to you.
>>
>>731642
Based
>>
>>701028
I love everything arrimus3d does on YouTube
Perfect tutorials
>>
>>706501
Useless tutorials
Way too fast and doesn't explain anything
>>
>>732247
They are mainly for entertainment purposes and to give you the rough idea of a concept, he even said so himself.
>>
>>732247
>way too fast
Any time someone complains about speed for things like this it's pretty much confirmed they're a brainlet.
That's a perfect tutorial, no nonsense, no fluff and gets you in and out the door in minutes. Unless you're looking to get your hand held at every step of the way, this shit is perfect. Just enough to get that quick solution or idea in your head. It's theory stuff.
If you can't wrap your head around something like that at 2x speed, you need to go back and learn the basics, which those tuts really aint. They're easy stuff to do and simple, but the reason they can be so fast is because they rely on a base of basic knowledge that you don't have.
>>
>>701028
- more specific things like making gushing geysers or making objects react to things like chains or ropes when tugged on. Stuff like that.

- Depends on subject, either way I'll be pausing the video. But for more in-depth things like simulations and rigging, make it comprehensive and multipart if you absolutely have to.

- Things I like vary from video to video, things I hate are more uniform:
>hard to understand accents
>going over the same subjects over and over again with no new information (especially true for fluid simulation tutorials for some reason)
>often feels like I missed a step once I finish the tutorial and still feel like I missed something even after continued rewatches.
>>
>this entire thread
>nobody mentions timestamps
>>
File: part-1-351x185.jpg (17 KB, 351x185)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>every tutorial MUST HAVE the tutor's face in the thumbnail
>>
Would anyone really be interested in conceptual videos that aren't really billed as "tutorials"?
I've been thinking of making a series that's less focused on specific things, but more broad in terms of not saying "do this, and then do this".
I've got traditional art experience and training, so I see a lot of tutorials focused on the technical aspect and not on the creative process.

Stuff like "Improving your art" where I go over tips and my workflow, world building, where to find reference, understanding the creative process, and other stuff like that.
Another one where I go over my texturing process from start to finish.
One where I make UV unwrapping easier to conceptualize, and how I go about it.
Color theory and composition, and how art fundamentals factor into 3d art in more than just the end render.
Graphic design for 3d artists: making logos for fictional companies, best typography practices, how to actually use typefaces.

That's all I've got for now (if you've got any more let me know), but anyway I don't know if people would be wanting vids like this. Since it seems like most tutorials are focused on teaching one specific thing like "how to make a table", and less theoretical.

My ideas for the vids sound kind of dry, and might be visually lacking since a lot of it won't be in-program showing how to do something, so I was thinking it might be kind of neat to have a mascot type character that animates with the video (kind of like Code Bullet if you've seen that), to inject some personality into it.
>>
>>734169

Do you want to make money or voluntary. Why not make a udemy video.
>>
>>734173
>Do you want to make money or voluntary.
I just want to share what I know. I make some passive income selling posters and shirts and stuff though. Maybe I could use the vids as a platform to do Patreon and stuff, but that would be later on (maybe having votes on topics, and releasing a vid on there in advance). If just to give some extra income to support putting time aside from doing commissions and personal stuff to work on the videos.
First and foremost though it's about helping people out to get better with art.

>Why not make a udemy video?
I don't really know much about it to be honest. Youtube just seems like the bigger platform to share info on. Udemy is a place to share courses and stuff too (I think), and my vids don't really fit with that in my head. But again, I don't really know much about Udemy in the first place.
>>
>>734057
>>
File: 1551155091213.jpg (22 KB, 720x545)
22 KB
22 KB JPG
>>735626
Why would someone with a mug looking like that decide to put it in all their thumbnails.
>>
>>735636
It helps with Google's search algorithms probably
>>
File: 1585803129248.jpg (67 KB, 357x756)
67 KB
67 KB JPG
I HATE when the guy is showing something using multiple software, and they just skip from software to software WITHOUT SHOWING HOW TO IMPORT YOUR FUCKING OBJECT OR FILE FROM ONE SOFTWARE TO ANOTHER

it's fucking not as easy as just one click send to... SHOW US THE FUCKING SETTINGS. I've spend hours trying to figure out in the begginning what settings to send my fucking fbx with texture to unreal when it was some stupid shit that could have taken 2 mins to show. fuck this
>>
>>735636
to show how utterly desperate you are for the adbucks



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.