Wouldn't it be an idea to open a pinned thread in which users could suggest things/ topics they would like to learn more about? There propably would be a huge variety of ideas and a course takes some time but it might be helpful for instructors to see if a large amount of users want to learn more about a specific topic. I for example would love to learn more about creating game assets (similar to the weapon course) or how to build an atual scene full of assets. Also a course on how to create an interior visualization and use textures and lighting to make it look as photorealistic as possible (similar to the architectual visualization course) would be awesome.
Just an idea on how the website could be improved.
Unity Livestream Request
Sometimes you guys do a movie review of short films made with Blender.
But how about doing some reviews about short films (and games!) made with Unity?
Would love to see that 😊
Pssst, the first Adam short would be a great candidate to kick this off...
ssmurfmier1985 I don't know of many movies made with Unity other than the Adam series but for the game side of things it's definitely something we've discussed in the past. We're discussing a few new more live stream "show" ideas that are a bit lighter in mood and more relaxed and reviews and possibly "lets play" type streams are on the list.
@theluthier some people here are doing anatomy stuff and so on. You have a realistic character modeling course, but it looks like it more about pipelines and workflow. It's super cool but is not particularly aimed at anatomy. I think it will be cool to look at anatomy course by you, for it seems like you are the main digital sculptor on CGCookie :D
And the second part about it may not be pleasant to read, but I want to be honest with my opinion. CGCookie have an anatomy course on it's YouTube channel in CGC Classic series. I find them confusing. Let's be honest, that's not the result I want to aim.
This is.
It's from Grassetti's course on anatomy with ZBrush. It will be cool to see something like this for blender.
nekronavt Indeed I see a lot of requests for anatomy videos here. Doris' videos were great for getting someone pointed in the right direction but they were not the same visual quality as Grassetti's course, that's for sure.
Let me ask: When you (and others) say you want an anatomy course, do you expect to learn comprehensive anatomical bone names, muscle names, ligaments, and so on as a means to illustrate the 3D forms? Or do you simply want to learn how to form those shapes with or without the complex terminology?
@theluthier I can't answer for the more serious sculptors like Pavel that want to specialize in this, but I am aiming to make some stylized characters for animation myself. And I believe knowing anatomy would really help even in that style to make it look believable and tangible. For me I rather learn how to make the shapes without all the difficult naming conventions. All the difficult names would turn me away from such a course. But again, I am not aiming to becoming a sculptor, I just wanna learn how to make a good looking character with good proportions in any style.
ssmurfmier1985 Ha. That last sentence... I'm sure the way I'm interpreting it is not quite what you intended, but it made me laugh. That's all I want too. @theluthier I definitely think there is a lot to be gained from being able to name the muscles and bony landmarks. In one sense, their latin names aren't all that important, but being able to call them something helps make them concrete and memorable. "the teres major inserts onto the humerus from the base of the scapula" is much more descriptive and evocative for your brain than "there's kind of a bulge here," not because of the fanciness of the names, but because having names at all cements in your mind what's really happening with the shape. That being said, I think the classes in the realistic character course do a pretty good job of explaining your system. All bodies are different, and I do think just a little anatomy knowledge can go a long way, it just comes down to practice. I also think that knowledge is pretty accessible elsewhere, but there has also been a big demand for it...
@theluthier As a digital sculptor (if I dare to call myself that) I want to learn more about shapes, but I think it's easier to learn something when you know how to name it. There is a difference if you know that it's "latissimus dorsi" or "serratus anterior", rather than "that big muscle on the back" and "that fan-shaped thing, that is mistaken for ribs". So I think there is must be a compromise. Tho knowing latin names is a nice way to show off a bit 😂
I try to learn Latin names, but not the way I sit and just try to remember everything, it comes with time in itself.
PS. I second everything that pprocyonlotor said.
@theluthier I feel its important to learn anatomy by their proper names. It helps differentiating the parts which makes stuff easier to remember. It also forms a shared language with other artists and, potentially, the art director you will work for. Its important for both receiving feedback as well as giving feedback.
"the teres major inserts onto the humerus from the base of the scapula" is much more descriptive and evocative for your brain than "there's kind of a bulge here,"
There is a difference if you know that it's "latissimus dorsi" or "serratus anterior", rather than "that big muscle on the back" and "that fan-shaped thing, that is mistaken for ribs".
I feel its important to learn anatomy by their proper names. It helps differentiating the parts which makes stuff easier to remember.
First of all I completely agree with you. The main reason I think the names are important for communication: Teacher communicating to student, student researching body parts for themselves, artist to art director, etc.
<vent>
Second, this is precisely why I've avoided doing a focused anatomy course. As an artist, I have never needed to learn the proper names to be able to form an anatomically correct/believable human body. Instead I learned that all the information you need is embedded in photographs/illustrations and the ability to interpret lighting and shading into 3d form. And as a bonus, visual interpretation works for every kind of modeling beyond anatomy.
However when I started teaching human body modeling/sculpting I realized it's terribly inefficient to describe the human body without knowing the proper terms. But have you ever tried to learn anatomy from googling and youtube videos? 1) The names are in a different language and you're never sure if you're pronouncing them correctly, which is a major backfire perceptually to know anatomy names but pronounce them wrong. 2) Similar diagrams will point to seemingly the same area with a different name. So you never really know which is the right anatomical name. And there's hundreds of anatomical terms to sift through in this way.
We all know that there's a ton of foreign and uncommon terms to use in order to interact with computer graphics: Fresnel, refraction, dielectrics, retopology, vignette, chromatic aberration, diffuse, and on and on. But the volume of anatomical terminology combined with being in a different language makes the learning curve particularly steep - And the benefit is ONLY to inform human characters. To achieve this I would have to do an exhausting amount of research, video watching, and cross-referencing to develop a reliable list of terms. Then I'd have to make flash cards to commit them to memory. And all that effort just to communicate anatomy efficiently, doing very little it terms of actually forming the shapes themselves..
Usually people point to Ryan Kingslien as the standard for anatomy sculpting education. And it's well deserved because his stuff is as good as it gets. But when you google Mr. Kingslien you'll find that he's entirely attached to human anatomy. It's his whole career. So it makes perfect sense for him to know anatomy terms and spout it proudly because it's all he outputs. You don't go to him for advanced shader creation or cloth simulation or how to create a short film, animation, or photorealistic environment creation.
I've always known that human anatomy/characters is one small piece of the broader CG journey; it's never going to be enough for me to only do that and I expect most of you are in the same boat. All the more lowering our collective need to learn and store such terminology.
</vent>
I hope you don't mind the transparent venting...You guys are completely justified to ask for an anatomy course that's competently commentated with comprehensive terminology. (How about that alliteration?) And I'm not saying that I won't scrape together the determination to accomplish what I just vented about. But please understand that you're asking for a tremendous effort compared to other courses. I know the demand is high and I've been actively pondering the prospect for years. I think ideally I will be able to create a course or workshop (or both) that's supported by competent anatomical terminology but is also true to myself in shedding light that the benefit is very limited for actual shape creation.
Wow, that turned out to be a lot. Thanks for listening ☺️
@theluthier given that, I personally don't think the course would be worth it. CGCookie is a small crew, and so every course comes with an opportunity cost. I would much rather get a stellar course on a subject that you are passionate about teaching than a "pretty good" anatomy course where you spend extra and arduous amounts of time in prep. Not that I don't think you would do a good job. It's clear that you put a lot of planning into your courses and care deeply about the quality of your work. But like you said, the subject is available elsewhere, and cg is a broad field. Anatomy maybe something of a gap in the CGC curriculum, but as this thread attests, there will probably always be gaps somewhere or other. I would most like to learn from you what you would most like to teach.
@theluthier I agree with John. I'll be looking out for your rock ground shader forge chapter 😊
@theluthier
As an artist, I have never needed to learn the proper names to be able to form an anatomically correct/believable human body. Instead I learned that all the information you need is embedded in photographs/illustrations and the ability to interpret lighting and shading into 3d form. And as a bonus, visual interpretation works for every kind of modeling beyond anatomy.
I could not disagree more. While learning anatomy has many benefits the main two as far as I am concerned are these
There is a definite difference in the work of someone who is a master of anatomy and one who just works by eye without a deeper understanding of the actual mechanics. The body is a functional machine, its appearance reflects that.
When it comes to anatomy its so powerful that I would almost consider it a shortcut/cheat to boosting your skills to a whole new level. I know nothing else that will give as clear a boost to the quality of your work. It was for me and I only seriously went for the head, the difference before and after was pretty nuts.
But please understand that you're asking for a tremendous effort compared to other courses.
This is a very honest statement. It is a gigantic effort and, don't take this the wrong way, in my humble opinion, outside of CGcookie's offering. CGcookie offers great value for money but this is something for a specialist. I personally would not expect a high quality anatomy course from CGcookie.
Not only that, if I would go for an anatomy course I would specifically look for an artist who is a master sculptor and whose sculpting work I adore. Screw how good he is with materials, lighting or even composition, just mindblowingly good sculpts.
These are just my two cents.
Oh, and just for clarity. None of this means that I find Kent's work below par. What I have seen from his stuff on character looks really great (loved the part on lighting a character; I learned a ton) It's just that if I would want to learn anatomy I would choose to get it elsewhere. :)
@theluthier wow, that's a wall of text, thanks for such a detailed response!
I completely understand your position. You've already done a tremendous job for existing courses and still doing with live streams and so on. It seems to me now like I asked you to drop everything and just dive into anatomy terminology like you have nothing else to do, which was a bit selfishly I suppose, and now I feel bad for this.
Maybe someday I'll be able to create my own course on it since it seems like I'm pretty much obsessed with it :D
@bowse oh, I understand, that there is plenty of anatomy tutorials out there. I was talking just about cgcookie and blender. But if making such a course is not worth the effort, I'm okay with it. :)
which was a bit selfishly I suppose, and now I feel bad for this
nekronavt Not at all - do not feel bad! I vented a little too hard if that's the result. I'm going to see if I can hack my way to a competent anatomy vocabulary and get a course out in 2019. Fingers crossed! 🤞
@theluthier
Not at all - do not feel bad
Phew, that's a great weight off one's mind 😀
Maybe some anatomy workshop this year? :) I think it can be a great way. Even without a workshop some CGC fellas doing anatomy stuff in their polybooks and by analyzing and criticizing it I learn myself. Can't imagine how it scales with a large number of people involved.
I could not disagree more. While learning anatomy has many benefits the main two as far as I am concerned are these
- Creating a sensitivity to details that you normally would not even notice (essentially improving your artists eye)
- Becoming less dependent on reference. (use it but don't be dependent on it)
3dioot We'll have to amicably leave it at disagreement, at least in this specific context. I agree whole-heartedly with your first bullet, that training your eye to notice detail is crucial. I just don't agree that studying/memorizing anatomy terms and structure is the only way (nor best way) to develop that skill.
My career as a 3D artist specializing in characters is built on 2 priorities:
#1 has always done the most for me with helpful assistance from #2. #2 does little-to-nothing for 3D artist if #1 is lacking.
Becoming less dependent on reference is a rose-tinted goal. I used to think that's what great artists did but I couldn't disagree more at this point in my career. Talk to master artists and you'll find that reference is a constant. If you've ever watched the extensive Lord of the Rings BTS, you know what I mean. The most recent example I've seen is Riot Games' youtube series overviewing game art where concept artists discuss how important reference is. Based #2's logic, as masters of their craft, these artists should be treating reference as optional at most.
The only situation I think #2 holds true is, again, in the case of a Ryan Kingslien. As someone who sculpts humans the vast majority of his career, I agree that by now he surely doesn't need to look at a single reference image to sculpt a believable human body. Likewise for the artists out there that find satisfaction in creating one thing over and over, #2 should hold true for them. Where's the fun in that though?
@theluthier
I don't see how were disagreeing unless you read my second bullet as someone choosing to work without reference while they have the option to do so. You do not always have perfect, unlimited reference at your disposal and its at these moments that having an intimate knowledge of the subject you are (re)creating helps immensely. :)
Based #2's logic, as masters of their craft, these artists should be treating reference as optional at most.
I don't think I've implied that. In fact I thought "use it but don't be dependent on it" would emphasize I do not. /shrug
With that said you made your opinion on the matter very clear. You certainly don't consider it the holy grail. Noted. ;)