Online 3d art is all crap!

The BBQ Pit
1

Searching the internet for awe-inspiring imaginative high quality computer generated art is futile. There is none.

It bugs me that I have the imagination to create some pretty magical scenery but don’t have the software. The people who do have the software have no imagination. And often they are lazy when it comes to quality of their ‘art’ They just create a feeble scene, plonk a poser model into it (with little attempt to alter the pose and/or expression on the face).

I’ve seen the odd rare picture where someone has actually used their imagination and created something that isn’t just a (bad) show off of the software’s features. Like one picture of a livingroom/kitchen with amazing lighting. It was like someone asked themselves “what would be my ideal living room?” and then created it.

Designers IDEA first! not software first. Come up with an idea that is independant of your knowledge of what the software can do. then get the software to do it. Don’t use the software without an idea, browsing through it’s models/features/techniques saying “that looks cool. I’ll put that in my picture”
Has anyone here (SDMB) ever found online 3d art that has genuinely impressed them? If so I would like to know about it. the url would be appreciated

2

Yeah, but don’t those Poser babes have BIG BOOBS! Damn, some of them make Lara Croft look flat!

I have found very little online 3D stuff that was remotely interesting. Like you said, it is primarily a D&D scene with a busty virtual woman or two. The women look fake. The scenes look fake. The surfaces look fake.

3

Well, I like Digital Blasphemy for 3D wallpapers.

4

Oh arse! a pay site.

Well good things don’t come free.

The free galleries are good though. Some things in there like this come close to what I mean.

Riven had some very impressive cg art in it (I know the game was crap). It’s just a damn shame it was all rendered at such low resolutions.

5

This one is good too. I know it is essentialy just a show off of what the software can do, but it is a good show off. It is impressive at first sight. that’s all that matters.

6

I make some of that digital computer generated type art.

It’s not the greatest stuff in the world, nor am I the greatest artist in the world.

But anyway, thanks for calling it shit (I know, you haven’t seen it). I’ll continue making it because it makes me happy to do so.

7

It’s not art. It’s just showing off what the software can do. And the software isn’t intended to create art, by which I mean something creative. It’s just pretty photo-realistic and exists to show customers what their real buildings will look like. But these guys have some nice work online.

catsix, is any of your stuff online? If it isn’t then it isn’t addressed by the OP. If it is would you like to give us a link? I’d like to see it and have NO intention of saying anything bad about it, even though I have no desire to sleep with you. :wink:

8

I didn’t call it shit. I called it crap. And since I haven’t seen yours how can you be offended?

When I said “all online 3d art is crap” I was being rhetorical, not literal. That wasn’t a scientificly backed up fact. It was an opinion I had after spending ages browsing the links from one site to sites of 3d art.

If I believed it was literaly all crap I wouldn’t have asked the group if they have seen any good online art.

If (emphasis on that word) you are one of those people who create something unimaginative to simply mess with the features then you deserve to have it called crap. I have done the same with shareware versions of truespace. what I have done is crap. because it was just me messing with the features.

I quite like one thing I did though, with the truespace standard picture (a ‘wood’ man with a bowler hat on bowing, the words ‘truespace’, and a head)

I changed the pose of the wood man to sat down with his head in his hands, made him glass, put all the words on the floor, changed the floor to wood, and put a glass ball in for good measure. I like it not because it’s impressive or a good picture but because it implies that something happened. (all the words fell and the ‘guardian of the words’ was so upset by this that he went and sat down with his head in his hands, and turned to glass for no aparent reason, and a glass ball appeared)

when I get home (I’m at work) I’ll upload it to my website so you can laugh and say “you must be joking” in this thread.

9

You know, I started a semi-related thread on the “other” boards (the one we used while the hampster over here was recuperating). It was about “traditional” artists who traced instead of learning how to draw. (I’m big on drawing, myself.) I’ve seen a lot traced artwork (not all traced artwork, plenty) that is flat and a little mindless in its execution. Developing the drawing skill makes the artist interact with what they are seeing in a more consumate way than if they just stick to mindlessly tracing. At least some of the time. :wink: I also mentioned that I saw a lot of “rasterbators” who knew how to use spiffy 3-D software, but didn’t have anything interesting to show, or to say. They’d just mastered the functions of the software, that’s all.

Of course, I had people who disagreed with me, on both points. :slight_smile:

The thing I was trying to say was - if you use technology to get a nifty-looking image, but you have no sense of color, or composition, or imagination, then what’s the point? Software these days can “hand hold” you through the process, to a certain extent. (Depending on the software, too.) Now, granted, I don’t know much about this 3-D software, since I don’t use it. But if I see a 3-D image that is boring and blah (but technically nifty) it’s still boring and blah. If it has a “canned” look, it does.

On the other hand, I just noticed that a message board for 3-D software enthusiasts linked to my art site. (I have a new art site, where I have art tips and tutorials.) This person was trying to create a face with 3-D software, and was having trouble getting it to look real. (I guess he wasn’t using a “canned” face provided by the software.) So he posted his 3-D face, and asked for advice on how to get it to look better. Someone linked to my art site, which had helpful information on the structure of the face. (I found out this from my site traffic tracking software. And yes, I was flattered that they linked to my site!) Anyway, the thing that hit me was that even though this person had this spiffy software, he STILL needed to consult outside help (like my site) to understand how to get a face looking realistic. It looked like a really challenging task he was undertaking. Made me glad that I just stick to drawing with pencil, paper, (and Photoshop… :smiley: )

I think if someone’s got something creative to offer, it’ll show, through whatever techniques they use. They’ll learn how to use the software, and they do fabulous stuff with it. But, just because you can use technical “shortcuts” to get a technically spiffy looking image, it doesn’t make you an artist. You have to have something unique to offer. Some people have developed this something unique and special, some people haven’t. (I’m sure catsix has this something special! :wink: )

10

there are loads and loads of computer artists creating amazing work!

here is one such link:

http://www.computerarts.co.uk/

computer arts is a great magazine, btw, for this type of work.

11

haha Yosemite…
what a person to run ito on a simulpost! :wink: :smiley:

great minds think alike, eh?

:smiley:

12

catsix, I think I got the wrong smiley. The “winky” smiley makes me look like I’m being sarcastic (or maybe I’m just being paranoid) about my confidence that your digital art. But I’m serious - I’m sure you’re fabulous!

BNB: yeah, I knew you’d come 'round here! :smiley:

13

I used to create unimaginative crap when I didn’t know how to use the software and I had to learn. Now I do and I actually put a lot of time into every image, so they don’t come out looking like I went through the ‘wizard’.

Some of it was online, but I’ve since taken it down because I got really tired of people clicking the email link on my website just to tell me that my images were shitty.

So, sorry if I was mean, it just bothered me that people went so far out of their way to find my website and tell me how much I sucked. Like if they don’t like it, fine, but they didn’t have to attempt to hurt my feelings.

It’d be like me walking into a gallery where someone displayed their photography and deliberately making a point to tell them every single photograph was shitty before walking out. That would be kinda rude.

Anyway, I don’t really know if I’m ever gonna put it up again. Not sure I want to see it get dissected. Sorry.

14

I just don’t like their search function

15

I just don’t like their search function

16

I just don’t like their search function

17

archmichael: I’m a little unclear on what your point is. Do you like the search function, or not? :smiley:

catsix: That SUCKS that people did that to you! How tacky. I’ll bet that they’re all snot nosed kids who email you. Some (immature) people are so competetive, and so mean, especially when it comes to creative stuff.

I have had my artwork on web pages for a few years now. No one has ever written me mean email. I do more “traditional” (pencil, paint, etc.) artwork. I suspect that other traditional artists who see my work are not as geeky as some software artists are, so they don’t feel the need to send me immature, mean emails. Just a guess.

18

I have no idea … I mean it wasn’t great artwork, and basically I put it up there so that my friends could look at what I was up to.

Nobody ever said anything mean about the poems though. I guess they don’t suck as much as the art. Anyway, sorry for soundin like I was accusing people in here. Cause I wasn’t. Just venting.

19

I like making webgraphics-pixel art-, those cute little cartoon pixel dolls-NOT the crappy ones, but I do ones in period costume, I like color tinting old black and white photographs of royalty, and I do trace when I sketch fashions, because I SUCK at freehand, mostly I want to get an idea across.

Here are my dolls:
http://players.gamernic.com/Guinastasia/mydolls.html

(Just shut up, okay? They’re a lot of fun! And scroll down to the bottom, the better ones are farther down. The one at the top was made for Fathom-to demonstrate my “fancy pants”.)

And here is a friend’s site with some of my colorized pictures:
http://www.livadia.org/mashka/coloralbum3.html

(Note-yes, she calls me “Katia”, rather than “Kathi”…long story).

20

Like Titanic much? :slight_smile:

Actually, those are really good – probably cause my sister’s into the same kinda thing and I’ve seen a LOT of crap ones :).