Gallery submission: courtyard

# 1 01-03-2004 , 10:12 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: San Antonio, TX

Posts: 346

Software used: Maya, Photoshop

It's supposed to have a kind-of watercolor feel, but still maintain it's 3d-ness. I think NPR is going to be the next big thing in 3d. (I know it sounds silly, let me explain. Or you could just skip this part and look at the image if you like.)

When photography came out, everyone wanted it to look like paintings. It was only after a few years that people started realizing that it could be it's own art (namely, photography) that didn't have to look like paintings. There's nothing wrong with photographing to look like paint; it's just not the only way. The same with CG: right now, everyone wants CG to look photorealistic. Before I get flamed by every artist on the board, let me say that I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST PHOTOREALISTIC CG, I do it myself sometimes. I just think there's more to CG than photorealism.

okay, I'm done.

Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name: court_dreamy.jpg
Views: 670
Size: 93.3 KB
ID: 13694

Grinning Idiot Films

Our Pal the Atom

Last edited by carrot juice; 01-03-2004 at 10:21 PM.

Quote

# 2 01-03-2004 , 11:06 PM

Subscriber
Join Date: Oct 2003

Location: Paris, France

Posts: 418

So what you are saying is that you are heralding in a sort of New-Wave of CG. If that's the case, I must warn that by playing the "not-realistic-it's-art" joker you are setting yourself up for criticisms about your vision, interpretation, etc. etc.

I guess for me, it's enough to know that at some point you dropped the photorealism when you realised that there was another potential for the work. I like what you've done but I wouldn't frame it and hang it on my wall as it just doesnt capture me.

That'll do donkey... that'll do...

Quote

# 3 02-03-2004 , 12:33 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: San Antonio, TX

Posts: 346

I guess, but I certainly wouldn't claim to be heralding it! I'm just standing on other peoples shoulders. I guess my real goal is to make something that feels more artistic than photorealistic while at the same time staying undeniably 3d, so it will hold up to animation.

Grinning Idiot Films

Our Pal the Atom

Quote

# 4 02-03-2004 , 04:35 AM

Subscriber
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: with PonysGirl

Posts: 2,573

Carrot, I'v seen this work in the other thread and It got fairly photo real. I have respect for someone that can do photo real but thin decide to add some artistic twist for a effect. Rock on !

Quote

# 5 02-03-2004 , 05:43 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: San Antonio, TX

Posts: 346

Thanks, man!

Grinning Idiot Films

Our Pal the Atom

Quote

# 6 03-03-2004 , 10:17 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 800

i dunno man... it doesnt look bad.... and i agree with your statement about photorealism... i don't see the point of photorealistic 3D stuff... mostly it pisses me off, why do people try so hard to create a photorealistic person when they could just take a photograph? I say that mostly about Final Fantasy the movie because they sure looked real, but they screwed up on the animating, they didnt look alive, they looked like the living dead user added image

Movements were in alot of places rigid and stuff... they coulda probably made the movie cheaper using real people and partial sets and lots of CG.... but then saying that, sometimes CG needs to look real, for so that you cant have a bloke in a film running around on a fake-looking cg world... unless it's TRON user added image

anyways rambling over user added image

I dont like the piece, but that's just the photoshopping, i think probably under the filter it would look nicer.

Quote

# 7 03-03-2004 , 03:34 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003

Location: Lisbon

Posts: 71

I do nothing have against your work and vision i just have the feeling you loose your 3d work, detail and esence.

But keep going, improve it and pherhaps other may gett adict to the MOVE user added image

just feel and keep doing what you do even if other say don´t.

Hugs, remember Van Gogh user added image

unique style

weld some pixels !!!

Quote

# 8 03-03-2004 , 05:27 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: San Francisco, CA

Posts: 72

The key to being able to pull it off, is to be able to be very good at making photoreal, cartoon, etc...

THEN choosing one style and making it your own.

Picasso was an amazing painter... what was his quote? "At the age of 12 I could paint like michaelangelo, but it took me a lifetime to learn to paint like a child" something like that.

If you want to make CG look like paint, you should also be able to make it look like a photo if anyone ever calls you out user added image

"On the other hand... the early worm gets eaten."

Quote

# 9 03-03-2004 , 06:34 PM

Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2002

Location: London, UK

Posts: 2,800

don't see the point of photorealistic 3D stuff

Originally Posted by

I see you've never worked in film then.... user added image

The problem I have with this is that it's an easy escape for people. They can pass off mistakes and laziness as "art". I dunno I'm not trying to be mean but the whole NPR thing is not my thing at all (saw too much of it at Uni last year and now it bores me). If you want a job and you can do photoreal then you are sorted. If you want to be an artist and express yourself in a NPR kinda way then more power to you but unless there is a project gong with a similar style you're simply not going to get many interviews...

just my two pence worth
Alan

Technical Director - Framestore

Currently working on: Your Highness

IMDB

Quote

# 10 05-03-2004 , 07:54 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003

Location: florence OR, USA

Posts: 958

Hey,

I like your picture, but I think the watercolor effect is a little too much. Try reducing the effect little.

keep up the good work user added image

I am creating an illusion.

Homepage https://www.freewebs.com/vedickings/index.htm

Challenge WIP https://forum.simplymaya.com/showthre...threadid=17391

Quote

# 11 05-03-2004 , 10:03 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: union city, ca

Posts: 390

zyk: animation in FF was great..its the story and acting of the cg characters that killed it.

anyway, i like this piece carrot juice. i see things as ART, not necessarily 3D. and I WOULD hang this piece, because of the way it looks and the feeling it gives ME.. its different for everyone, a dab of paint thrown against a canvas might seem noobish for some people, but others might see it as a design, with a meaning or something out of it, im like those people user added image

keep it up carrot man!

<a href="https://forums.simplymaya.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16675">May/June 2005 Challenge Entry</a>

Quote

# 12 05-03-2004 , 01:29 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004

Posts: 9

Something to think about...

Don't missunderstand the things that I'm about to say, I just want to give you some honest critisism.

#1. I'm sure you put alot of time and effort into this piece, and I'm not knockin the NPR... but because of it you can't see all the hard work you did! I would try to tone it down a bit, or maybe use it in simpler scenes.

#2. It shouldn't matter if CG is photorealistic (I know you all said the same thing) It's all ART.

#3. This scene makes me want to plant/defuse the bomb! ^_^ (A little counter-strike thing for those who play it.)

Anyway for me this scene is kinda empty... It's in a way lifeless. As if everyone just went home... kinda lonely... I like it. Keep it up!

Quote

# 13 05-03-2004 , 04:55 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: union city, ca

Posts: 390

gotta agree with #3...ok im done user added image

<a href="https://forums.simplymaya.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16675">May/June 2005 Challenge Entry</a>

Quote

# 14 05-03-2004 , 06:17 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003

Location: San Antonio, TX

Posts: 346

Thanks for the comments people!

For me being able to actually see the detail is not important. Part of the wonder of NPR is that you can just hint at detail without actually modelling it fully- much like making little squiggles to represent complexities in traditional media.

This can backfire a bit in a scene like this if you're trying to show off detail, because fully modelled detail ends up only being hinted at, but I don't mind that. In fact I like it.

To adress another side of the issue: yes, it's photoshopped, no, it's not particularly cutting-edge or technologically innovative. If my goal here was to showcase top of the line 3d, then I failed miserably. But that's not my goal. user added image

Have a lovely day!

Grinning Idiot Films

Our Pal the Atom

Quote

# 15 08-03-2004 , 10:02 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003

Location: Miami,Florida

Posts: 64

Originally posted by Zyk0tiK
... i don't see the point of photorealistic 3D stuff... mostly it pisses me off, why do people try so hard to create a photorealistic person when they could just take a photograph? ...

Originally Posted by

i have to disagree.
so if John Doe create's a model of his next door neighbor, and he makes the neighbor looks as realistic as possible (because that's what he wants) you think think his efforts are pointless and they piss you off?? what if he did the same with a character he created, would you still feel the same?. should ART have such limitations? ..i think not user added image

nice peice carrot juice, alway good to see something different. user added image

Quote