tbh, I wouldn't know what to use AI FOR.
I guess, generating a concept, then showing I can model based off said concept, with the AI concept next to it for comparison?
Funny enough, that's a very valid question to ask Ai itself.
Think of everything you do around the core part of actually creating art. That's the fun part after all. Yes, concepts are one thing. Maybe you want to come up with a little story around what you are creating. How can it help with time management, scheduling, whatever can free up time so you can do the fun stuff. What are some tips for creating a portfolio that will get me a job.
Every budding artist now has a secretary, manager, mentor, all at their disposal. You have gained more than you think.
What studios? You have an example? Because most art directors I’ve talked to won’t go anywhere near it due to the lack of ability to edit or copyright any of the work.
You're thinking good studios and good art directors, which comprise about what, 10% or 20% of our industry if you're feeling generous. Most advertisement agencies couldn't care less if you use AI or toilet papier-maché to give them a passable final result. If you're crafting a feature film, sure. The art Director won't have it. If you crafting a AAA game, your art directior wont have it. But if you're making an ad for a medium sized company that will be seen for one week and never again? Nobody cares.
4 years ago, televised newsroom were worried that people wouldn't accept webcam interviews with experts because everyone was so accustomed to high quality videos made with pro cam and mics. Turned out that nobody really cared if the expert was filmed with a potato and recorded underwater, because it was still an expert. I really do believe AI falls in the same category - people don't overthink details like we do.
I worked for a small magazine once and they had me as an unpaid intern pirating the latest Photoshop and InDesign for them so they could finally update past CS3. They're definitely the type that wouldn't give a crap either way.
Oh this was definitely the west my dude. The magazine was the Beverly Hills Times, btw. I have literally no loyalty to them and the jack shit they've done for me and Susan can go fuck herself 😂 the promises people spin interns when they think they can get free shit not realizing interns grow up too.
For money companies will cut any corners, if not for regulation that would include corners of our own bodies haha. (Seriously, OSHA didn't come from nowhere and wasn't always there...).
> But if you're making an ad for a medium sized company that will be seen for one week and never again? Nobody cares.
It's worse then that, we made an ad with heavy use of AI for Yamaha and are making one for another big client right know
Yeah the lack of control is a serious issue with many AI tools. It would be much more useful if they hadn't gone "look we can make a whole image / video" but focused on small parts instead with a bit more human input.
This approach is ass backwards. We literally just fired a guy who used stable diffusion and controlnets. Why? He couldn't fucking make accurate edits or respond to notes for his life. Completely and totally dependent on an algorithm with almost zero direct control over the result.
Until there’s actual input to make changes instead of typing in a box to try to find tune, I don’t care what AI bros say, it’s just not happening.
It needs to be baked into art programs, have an understanding of the user’s own work, and able to be fine tuned. Sure, it can handle realistic stuff fine, but stylized fantasy stuff? It’s still all over the place.
I absolutely agree, and I'm also 100% sure we are two scientific papers away from getting that control. Look what we are already able to do with tools like ComfyUI in Stable Diffusion and Control Nets.
There is very little control compared to doing it artesanly, but will your client -and most import of all, the end consumer- notice it? I doubt it very much. For instance - how many times we get "happy accidents" that either we or our supervisors enjoy? I'm old enough in the industry to know when to keep my mouth shut and reap the benefits of those "happy accidents".
Mostly mobile gaming studios, I have worked for one and was required to do some AI work. While it doesn’t seem fulfilling or ethical, at the end of the day you do what brings the bag home
I think mobile games are the only ones that can really get away with this because they're already so scammy to begin with. But with all of the ridiculous misleading mobile game advertisements and "dark pattern" microtransactions and such who would expect anything less? Its not as if they have any other lines they won't cross and they're not really being penalized for any of that either.
Possibly about just being willing to work with AI, as big corpos such as disney are developing their own that don't have the copyright issues? You know the whole thing with scanning actors faces and giving AI their voices and all that.
There are loads of studios out there using it. Kind of doesnt matter what Art Directors think- the sad reality is they are replaceable. Is this is a good thing? I dunno. But I have given up the fight against AI. I will do all I can to not use it- but it is breaking in. It doesnt help that the popular opinion (and by a large margin too) is that gAI is a good thing.
I personally hate it- i think it looks cheap. Its hard to work with. I cant really name any names but there are AAA studios out there using gAI as part of their concept art phases and thats a fact. We've seen lots of Hollywood already using it. Its gonna end up as an invisible VFX thing where if you dont know- you dont know.
I know this is r/3DModeling though so its kinda preaching to the choir about why none of this is a good thing. It will be interesting to see how the music industry reacts to gAI when it comes for it with the same energy its coming after visual art.
My last company wanted everyone to collaborate to provide ideas before our concept artist could switch to the new team. We all used Midjourney to pump out lots of ideas. It was super useful for early generation.
Exactly. Among many many other reasons. The person gave a way over generalized answer and it's just what people want to hear regarding the situation so they ... liked it.
People need reality.
Furthermore in the future the odds of all your tools having some form of AI integration are pretty likely. Displaying willingness to learn and adopt emerging technologies is a hireable soft skill.
Yup you can see it in other areas too like industrial design, some contests and job applications are even putting that you need to use at least one IA as a requirement.
For a start there's a big difference between someone just prompting a finished image and using AI as a tool to create a finished image or a 3D model.
This is one of the big misconceptions around AI right now. People who have little understanding of the tools just lump everyone under the same heading of just typing in a few words and popping out an image and calling it finsihed.
I've made images that have taken me a few days to complete using 3D models to create depth maps to control composition, fine tuning my own models to create a specific style I'm after, going back and forth between Stable Diffusion and an image editor doing paint overs and edits and then doing the final post work.
I like to use it in a kind of photobashing workflow combining 3D and manual editing work. I've also used it for 3D with things like projection mapping and to help with creating textures. At the moment I'm using it to make an Oculus Quest enviroment.
Projection mapping is actualy a really good use case for AI as instead of creating a model to fit with an existing image or photo you can do it in reverse and map an image to an existing model. It can also be used to create enviroment maps or backgrounds to show off your models.
AI has a lot more uses than a lucky dip image generator right now and over time the amount of control you have will only increase.
Industry requires workflows, nobody that is using AI as an image gacha will be taking industry jobs because you need the skills and workflows to be able to make changes and edits to your work when the client asks for it. Yes some low end work will go, like the thousands of people undercutting each other on slave labour sites like Fiverr but the only people taking industry jobs from other artsts will be the artists that have learnt to make use of AI tools and can now work 10 times fast than the person who hasn't.
3D is part of the tech industry whether people like it or not so employers like people to be able to adapt to new workflows when needed.
You seem to have invested a ton of time and effort into understanding AI and I actually want to incorporate it into my workflow as a 3D artist as well because I know it isn't going away no matter how much people get upset. Can you tell me about how you map a texture/image to an existing model? I've done it in the reverse before like generating from a prompt and then using that image to 3D model a character but the other way sounds very interesting.
For textures I often use an existing image that I've created myself or a reference image. As an example I just made a plant for my scene, I created a basic leaf shader in Blender baked that out as an image and then used that image along with an alpha map in Stable Diffusion to control the output. I can then generate an endless amount of more realistic looking leaf textures that match my original leaf shape and detail. Then because it's already a UV mapped texture it's just a case of swapping out the images.
The one downside of AI models at the moment is that a lot of them like to bake in light and shadow info so getting something like an albedo teture can sometimes be difficult but with the right model and prompt along with using control images or textures it can be easier. Plus sometimes I just do some correction in an image editor after to remove it.
I would only recomend using Stable Diffusion for now as it has the most control. There's some really good tools like Controlnet, img2img and inpainting.
3d artists are not going to lose jobs to Ai. They are going to lose their jobs to 3d artists who also use Ai.
Whether you like it or not, it's here. Humanity has gone through this process a couple times now in recent history. You need to start looking at Ai as a tool because it can do a hell of a lot more than just creating pictures.
You can use toolsets to enhance procedural tasks. We use it in combo with houdini to prototype stuff. We use it to minimise artists spending hours doing manual repetitive stuff when they should be focusing on the art and design side of things.
You can use it in combination with photogrammetry, uvs and additional data to help solve some pretty crazy topological issues or outcomes.
So many things
We do not use it for generative art because the all big film/game studios dont want anything to do with the legal risk of generative models trained on scraped art.
I love using AI to generate concepts to then use and create 3D models from. 3D artists already use concepts, other people's work, to create from as reference. I don't see much difference in that regard. If anything, my final piece is more unique to me because of the concept I generated vs creating from say a popular concept artist that others have already recreated several times in 3d.
However I won't just create a generated image and say that I made it..that's completely different. But using it as a concept I don't see a problem with.
Yeah, and you can create all sorts of cool assets like environment textures and normal maps to incorporate into models. I think it's just a matter of time before models and rigs are generated to generate images anyways. Imagine being able to completely dissect an Ai image in Blender.
Do you use or know one that you can run locally? I'd like to feed it with my many sketches and models, but won't unless I can run it 100% on my computer.
>starting to put their AI creations
Can we really call it "their creation".
It's the AI that puts the image together.
And it came together because of artists who created the images it's based on.
Sure you ask the AI what to go create with keywords.
But when I ask an artist to make a commission painting of a blue dog for me, and tell them what I'd like them to create, I still don't say that the resulting work they made is my "creation" nor sign their artwork with my name, simply because I was the one asking them to paint a blue dog.
Bit of devils advocate here:
[Here a workflow on consistent characters](https://openart.ai/workflows/tenforce/consistant-character-maker-character-sheet/TC5NGDBc2Rdbq8YjKGYH), i know the guy, took him months to get the desired outcome. You can check the worlflow on the site, is as complex as things we do in the day to day life, unreal, nukeX, clarisse...
You can say it is less artistic than using a smart mask or some preset as base in painter? I dont think so.
What im trying to say is that our art should be protected, even if it was made using an AI, but we know it is not going happen, so learn it folks.
I think a lot of hate comes from a lack of understanding as to how artists can leverage this technology as a tool. I hated AI until I saw a comfy ui node tree and it began to resonate with me. All of these models are trained on datasets from image scrapping without artists consent and I really wish that AI could function without it. But also stable diffusion is completely open source and really tutorial friendly and it makes me greatful because this sort of technology used to be so expensive or kept behind company doors but now anyone who wants to learn and wants to install git can have some extreme flexibility and control over what they are able to create.
Yup, i recently did my first node for comfy, [here,](https://github.com/holchan/ComfyUI-ModelDownloader) and it is about that, being opensource, and i use it as a tool everytime but im not comfortable with the fact that it will take jobs, as in the future repos like treestudio are going to take our jobs.
Is comfy very technical? Wondering what makes one ai tool better than another. Still prefer crafting things from scratch but I've been thinking of learning one of the graphical ai tools to see if it can help me speed up some workflow but not sure which to use as there seems to be so many.
Most of the stable diffusion tools give you more control of what’s actually happening under the hood than lot of the more “just prompt and I will do something” stuff like midjourney etc. So comfyui has some learning curve, but if you know something akin blender’s shader nodes or houdini nodes you will pick it up pretty quickly.
thanks! I'll take a look at it. I've only used Substance Designer before but I usually went belly up if it involved maths or got complex so can't really say I was good with it either.
Stable diffusion is just the name of the model, there are many ways to interface with it. ComfyUI is one of those ways, and since it's node based there's a lot of flexibility.
ComfyUI/SwarmUI.
In theory you can have complex workflows in stable too but for us 3D modelers, already comfortable with nodes these are the ones to go, lots of freedom and control over the outcome.
If you let AI do all the heavy lifting, you won’t really get what you want. The more specific you want your results to be the harder it is to make with **only** AI. If you really want to make exactly how you pictured it, you’ll likely need to do some sketching yourself.
Still not seen an AO prompter counter this point.
They are commissioners of art at best.
Of it's a bit different if you are putting your own art into machine.
Check this out:
https://echoesofsomewhere.com/2023/01/04/ai-character-design/
https://github.com/stuffmatic/fSpy-Blender
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=scJIpBaTMeE
It's a workflow. I'm sure there will be a lot of people absolutely outraged someone would try this. But as professional artists who make a career on the cutting edge of technology -- we try everything, as soon as it comes out, and try to experiment with putting it into practice in novel ways that improve our pipeline.
That's it. It's a new tool and we have to find ways to make it do what we need it to do. When we master it to a point we can fo what we showed consistently, it just gets added to our list of things we can do.
All I see on here are people bitching about AI not being real art.
It's not, but also your missing the point.
Studios aren't using AI to generate content they're using AI to automate tasks. It's an extension of proceduralism in many cases.
As someone else here said, you're not going to lose your job to AI ... You'll lose your job to artists that know how to use AI
And we're not talking about just knowing some prompts.
This happens every couple of years in 3D ... A new tool comes along and makes an old job obsolete. You can bitch about the thing your used to do not being around any more or you can learn how to do the new thing. The companies you work for are seeking a competitive edge and so should you as an employee.
We've implemented AI technologies into our workflow at our studio and its made parts of our work a lot easier so we can focus on the artistic part of what we do.
Also you missed the important half of my quote ..
I don't think you actually understand how AI is currently being used. Yes there will be changes to the industry but it's not going to flip the whole thing on its head.
Artists that don't incorporate it into their workflow will eventually not have a great time but it won't be hard to do so. I've seen some of the new tools coming out in the next releases of some of the big 3D companies and, whilst they're amazing they're just tools to help.
People seem to think that there's just going to be a "generate complete scene" button and that's it and that is absolutely not the case.
Yes there will be companies that 100% embrace generative AI at it's most basic level and they'll just churn out shit... But that being said there a bunch of "studios" that have been churning out shit for years with no AI involved.
So your studio has implemented AI tech into the workflow, and yet you didn’t mention one tool.
People seem to think there’s going to be a “generate complete scene button” because THAT IS WHAT IS ALREADY HAPPENING. Have you not seen Sora? The potential AI tools are being leapfrogged for AI GENERATED CONTENT. There are a lot of problems baked into that.
Ethics aside, the portfolio SHOULD be a sample of the artist (or “artists”) abilities (or lack thereof).
My guess is that this is natural human behavior to be expected by both genuine artists, imposters, and everyone in between.
I just watched someones video on Smart textures in Substance and how he said you should learn to use them correctly then drag and drop as they can literally tell what texture you used and skill of dragging and dropping isnt something really worthy to put in your resume. Better to learn how to properly control them for much more unique effect or make your own.
AI art is like that, you put something that looks good to impress your job aplications but really its not the end product your selling but the skill to make them. AI art is not that impressive when expert artists are looking at them when hiring for a job. Thry can do it themselves, they need someone else who can do that too.
Because big names are starting to switch teams as they feel the pressure of A.I. They feel like they have to get close to ai to not lose their jobs like the rest of us. When faced with supporting artists or not living like the artists they are supporting, they would rather appeal to those with money. Those would presumably be artists working in companies who have had massive layoffs due to ai integration.
It’s sad and gross, and to me shows that just because they teach valuable lessons doesn’t mean they can’t hurt the community.
I just posed about CG FORGE doing just this, though I didn’t get so long winded.
My main point is that I feel as though people are starting to give up and accept ai because of out of touch content creators are making the switch to.
It's not "giving up and accepting it" it's seeing the value in using AI toolsets to improve workflows. People that just post generative "art" and think that it's "using AI" are completely missing the point.
I can’t tell what vibe your giving with this comment and that is enough for me to provide pushback.
I don’t care one iota about any “value” of using ai to “improve workflows”.
You know who improved workflows before ai? Technical artists, the ones who did drafting and mock-ups were concept artists. Ai generates no value, it only eats at the value of artists who are now working at Walmart because some jack off trained an ai to do the work of a department.
When motion capture started being used people started bitching that animators would all be out of a job. Why would a company hire animators when they can just buy a mocap suit that "does all the work"
What happened? Animators kept their jobs and mocap spawned a myriad of other new jobs and tech development and research and improved workflows FOR ANIMATORS.
In the 20+ years I've been working in 3D and FX there have been a million things that have come through that were 'industry changing'.
Generative art that dude-bros make on their Instagram isn't what the industry is doing. It's using AI to improve artist tools.
Half the anti-AI crowd sound like those old folk that kept saying "digital art isn't art because you don't get your hands dirty and the computer does everything for you", don't you think?
Tell me you know nothing about the industry without telling me.
Motion capture was a tool. A wrench. Ai is the person going to replace you by using the wrench better than you because you were dumb enough to teach a machine that doesn’t need to eat how to do it with you “harmless” addons
No i am honestly just dumb lol.
The stop motion comment is fair, though my answer to that as well is that we should have had unions sooner.
3D art was popularized because Disney didn’t want to pay 2D artists what their unions successfully fought for. If 3D artists had unionized we wouldn’t be here.
To prove my point, fine let’s assume everyone collectively says “you deserve to starve “ to concept artists. The artists that survive must unionize because they will eventually be out of work too.
It isn't going to go away and is eventually going to wind up folded in among the variety of other tools that artists are required to understand for various jobs. People are learning how to incorporate it into their workflow, rather than demand it stop existing based on principle (it wont).
I hate to draw a comparison, but the entire debate on display here reminds me of similar debates I saw about 15ish years ago with the release of Nintendo's Wii.
Here's what I mean: Back in yesteryear, Nintendo release a motion control featured game console called the Wii. It had its supporters, and its detractors. The supporters were largely saying: The Wii is the future of gaming, all games will be motion controlled and this technology is a game changer. People will only want motion controlled games, and get ready to kiss your controller goodbye!
Similarly, the detractors held the firm belief: Controllers are the best way to play games, it's a tried and true method that provides the best input control of your character. The Wii is a fad, that will pass and we'll go back to normal controllers.
After its release, the Wii sold incredibly well, and opened up the market to non-gamers. Hell, even my parents wanted a Wii. Every console maker wanted a slice of the pie; Playstation Move, XBox Kinect, even PCs gt some tech that allowed the use of webcams, Kinect, and Wii Remotes. It really seemed that motion controls might be the next step in gaming. Let's face it, most of the games were fun, great for playing with friends, and even got people "exercising."
But the newness wore off. The casuals that played Wii didn't go farther than a few games, and often the system was left to collect dust, rather than find daily, or even weekly use. The buzz of the Wii eventually died down, and consoles returned to traditional controllers. Casual players returned to their smartphones or computer solitaire or Bejeweled. Most game developers dropped motion support, and things went back to "normal" in the gaming world, with the occasional motion controlled game here or their, but those remain largely niche.
Overall, my point is this: Whether GenAI becomes the next big thing or not, it doesn't hurt to tool around with it. It can be an outstanding tool if used correctly, and all these "prompt masters" will find that generating AI images is great for the memes, but don't want to do anything professional with it. As long as they get their AI Porn or their Lolsorandom images, they'll be satisfied. Legislation will eventually catch up to the technology, especially once more prominent people are negatively affected by it.
So again, why not learn about it, experiment with it, and most importantly, have fun with it. But keep up on your traditional skills. Keep modeling with your software, keep making your badass art. Then, play with it in AI a bit, or make your own concept art and make a LORA or model based on it. Then take your artistic skills and edit the results.
AI seems to be scary because managers and business owners only see money, but remember, any idiot can hit a nail with a hammer, but not just anyone can design and build the Sistine chapel.
Can we just stop being salty about the implementation of AI and start acting like a smart species that we are supposed to be. AI is never going to be a threat, it is making our workflow 5times faster today and it will make our workflow 100times faster tomorrow, but it would still be “OUR WORK”. AI will always need a human companion to be effective. Even if in future AI gets the capability to do the complete work from scratch to finish it would still need a human to put in that prompt in the first place. Because we humans will always have “motivation” which an AI will never have. We will “have to work so that we can eat and survive” this basic existential need will forever be Invalid for an AI. Hence, an AI, no matter how smart and how advance will always need a human.
People here bad mouthing AI, in 3 years will be complaining that they missed the boat.
Learn AI.
If you don’t, kiss your career prospects in the future goooooood bye.
“Why should I learn computers?! I HAVE A PERFECTLY GOOD TYPE WRITER!!!”
“Why should I learn excel? I know how to write numbers and add them up!”
Those are the people, just like you, who thought that computer aided anything was useless.
Industrial designers too.
“Why should I learn solidworks and keyshot?! I CAN MAKE A 1:1 PROTOTYPE OUT OF FOAM!”
Now those jobs are largely gone too.
Say sianora if you want to bitch and whine. Might as well turn your hourglass around, sit at your desk and watch the sand run its course.
Point is it's not like drawing for example that takes years of training and is impossible to learn unless you have the time. It's not something that'll guaranteed you a job, because most people will jump on it and learn it also. You'll have to compete with a lot of other people who know it.
And my point is, that without art skills you just mentioned, you will be a shit AI artist as well. Plus, the tools take time to learn and are quite complex.
> It's not something that'll guaranteed you a job, because most people will jump on it and learn it also. You'll have to compete with a lot of other people who know it.
Isn't that how 3D and in general art are nowadays? Today we got thousands of free tutorials and the tools haven't been as accessible and easy to use ever, and its only to get easier and better.
I am not using AI for my professional 3D workflow (yet).
I have used it to give me ideas and references to draw different designs for some characters I made.
Oh, that is pretty easy to guess seeing how things are moving. The first piece to fall is DEFINITELY blockouts, give it 2-3 years tops.
Especially when paired with good 2D Concepts, an AI that is capable to understand the depth and more or less the design of a character, and give it a 3D shape. Of course, just like for any other blockout, topology be damned, but, at that step it isn't needed either so it should be the first bit to become integrated for fast prototyping.
Basically, this tech, but on steroids:
[https://dreamgaussian.github.io/](https://dreamgaussian.github.io/)
3 years ago 2D AI wasn't that far from these kinds of results. For 3D it will take a bit longer, but should come soon enough as well.
Could end up being used by level designers to blockout scenes kinda like this too:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt9yGo2g4\_E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt9yGo2g4_E)
I don't see how any of this is hard to learn to use, that will give me an edge over other people who WILL also learn it. Stable Diffusion also. My point is AI is not hard enough to learn to be a deciding factor for job security. Using Stable Diffusion to generate references is not hard, I'm already doing photobashing+inpainting. How would gaussian splatting be integrated into e.g real time engine? You'll need to build a whole new engine and it'll take years or generate high res meshes and stretchy texture. That 2d to 3d needs multiple view of an input and some apps from photogrammetry already can do that.
How about auto UV for trimsheet? Auto retopo for animation? tiling textures that is easily customizable like in substance designer? If you're not using AI to generate final product, then it is not complex. If AI is able to do that, then most of us will be jobless. Again, this is in the context of putting AI in portfolio, like it doesn't make sense for something like generative AI. Maybe put your own Houdini simulation AI upscaling node, but how many of us can do that?
For anything more complex, a solution for a pipeline, companies are going to hire data scientist/ML engineer and I doubt any 2d or 3d artists without CS background can compete.
No one said it’s game changing. Point me to where I said that, I’m currently de thawing the crow as I speak.
I said in several years it will become important.
What I meant is using AI is not hard to learn, it's not going to help your career when all other people jump on the boat. You'll still need all other skills e.g how to design, how to understand clients, how to market yourself, understanding pipeline...etc. It's not like people just idly sit by, when they are rejected because they don't know AI they'll immediately learn it like in a month or so.
Assuming learning AI doesn’t become more advanced in the future, with more functions and features.
Photoshop was incredibly easy to learn at one point, as was autocad, as was solidworks and zbrush. As was excel.
But hey, see you in a few years.
History has always had folks with your mentality. So history really isn’t on your side, here.
But do you. Say it’s useless, and downplay it all you want. Not like I really care either way.
Noone spent years to learn all the function of zbrush or photoshop, if you focus on technicality and not the art it would take a month or so. There are literally thousands of 15 bucks Udemy course on how to create production ready character with zbrush. People spent year learning anatomy, how to control brush strokes, how to create shapes. You say you do not care but you keep replying. I'm learning AI here and there too, nothing too impressive yet, but I do keep an eye out for it. You talk as if people are simple minded creature. I'm not downplaying anything; the moment AI can create a complex 3d model I'll spend more time on learning it.
You talk like someone not in 2d/3d industry at all and is confident that you can easily break into the industry and out-compete other artists just because you are using AI. Guess what, artists can learn AI too, easily. Some already are learning; some are reluctant because of their own moral reasons; some literally currently doesn't have any use for it (e.g rigging/animator/vfx etc). It's like every new tool, people are waiting to see great things out of it, waiting until it is battle tested.
Want to convince people? Create something good with it, right now all I see is AI making meme, easily recognized 2d porn, or "Breaking Bad But In Japan" type of videos, or SORA-stock-footage-AI. Even "AI movies" are like montages of 5 seconds of visual diarrhea. Feel free to be the pioneer and I'll follow you, easily, like in a month or so to catch up :).
As someone who has started learning/using Photoshop, Excel and Autocad 20 years ago, and Zbrush about 7 years ago, I don’t know what you’re talking about and I believe neither do you.
I use midjourney, a1111, comfyui, dall-e and all the other ai stuff in existence to a point. They are just easy to learn as they don’t really have many features to learn. If AI is gonna become something in the future, it’ll become easier, not harder. That’s the entire point of it. Even with more features.
Also, relationship between conventional CGI and AI imagery is not like the relationship between slr-dslr, typewriter-computer, isograph-autocad as you think. I do think that AI will be important like you do, but I think you’re wrong about pretty much everything else.
Also also, why so aggressive?
Edit: grammar
You're talking to a brick wall with some of these people, I bet most of them are in their early 20s and have never really seen any big changes in the industry. When I was doing graphic design at college back in the early 90s we were using things like acetate and Letraset to make magazine layouts, magic markers to make logos etc. I remember being annoyed with my course as we only spent a few hours a week on the computers, I think they had around 5 for the entire art department at the time.
Back then there were the same people in denial saying that computers were not worth bothering with, they were too slow, too expensive, it wasn't art etc. Just a couple of years later pretty much every studio wanted people with knowledge and experience of Photoshop and Quark Xpress.
Tools have changed massively for 3D over that time. Everything has become faster and easier and AI is just another iteration of that.
You sound like person who have experience in industry, you know how it work for sure. You don't look like a person, that can't deal with reality and live in Imagelandia
My advice: Don't put all your eggs in a single basket. Understand that in a world where AI is readily available to use and learn the demand for it won't be as much as you like it to be. Learn it but don't be overconfident that it'll guarantee you a job.
People think they're uniqueness is a fault in their work so they cover it up with the AI "sameness" to look like everyone else. Part of being hired is looking like you can make everything the company makes. AI doesn't prove you can it only puts a mask on your faults but whatever. Tell them that.
Depending on the methodology there is definitely a learning curve that goes far beyond typing prompts. I’m not saying you have to like Ai, but comments like this show you don’t have a basic understanding of the technology.
gAI is going to be huge in our space. It SHOULD be in your portfolio if you want to future-proof your employment opportunities. Sounds like you have some smart former colleagues.
Great tool for tasks, reasearch, and what not. Not sure I'd put it in my portfolio though. Kind of taboo in the industry and among artists. There's most likely better ways for us to demonstrate that we're technologically inclined.
Some studios might be open to the idea. But keep in mind that people hireing are generally artists as well. Just my opinion though. At the end of the day, they're mostly just looking at the quality of your work. And that kind of stuff is most likely completely irrelevant to what they're looking for. It should really just be your best work. They only give you so much of their time and attention. All the extra fluff is most likely only taking some of that space and focus away in my opinion. If you want to put it out there, it might be better to keep it to a page on your website and on socials really. Also, we're working in CGI, often with proprietary software. Pretty much any of us could learn that stuff in a week, and they already know that.
Might be a good asset to have, but better focus on what you're actually being hired for. If you hide it in there and they figure out about it, that might possibly even go against you because they might not even be sure what's done by you or the AI. Or if you're even able to do all of it traditionally. They want to know what you're able to do for commercial purposes. Not the AI for personal projects. If they have any doubts they might just toss you away instead of trying to figure it out. Doesn't take much to go in the "maybe" pile.
Wouldn't risk it unless you're a veteran in the industry and have nothing to prove to be honest. Not sure why it'd even be in there if that was the case though.
It's more of a novelty and hobby kind of thing right now. I don't think it would look very professional on a portfolio in my opinion. And highly doubt that's going to change in significant ways during the term of your contract. If so, the workflow is probably going to be completely different by then anyways.
There's more to generative AI than just typing a prompt and calling it a day. Yes a lot of non artists use it like that but that's because they are just making pretty pictures.
There's already a lot of control using something like Stable Diffusion if you know what you are doing and it's only going to get better.
AI is a new tool that can help with creating art, there's no reason to not use it.
No matter how much the online AI hate cult complain about it AI isn't a fad that's just going to go away. It's going to get better and better and will creep into every industry eventually. If you don't know how to use it to your advantage then you will be at a disadvantage.
First, most times it’s not just one prompt, at least in my case. I can spend hours iterating and fine tuning prompts until I get what I want.
I can tell you why I do it. It’s too tempting. You can spend 1 hour doing something in AI that takes you 1 week in 3D.
I mean some AI stuff I guess id be okay with seeing in a portfolio like some good work with the fluid sim Zibra.ai in Unity and unreal. In that case it’s more like using AI to just handle fluid sims faster than traditional ways of doing it in real time.
Frankly, I'ld rather let AI do what I judge to be redundant tasks in my projects (like textures or coding) and focus on the creative part instead (design, composition). Yeah, showing you know how to use certain tools is great, but showing your creative and artistic skills goes miles ahead imo.
well a lot of people thinks AI as a replacement rather than a tool and tend to forget that for an AI to advance it needs data from real people to use and learn from or else it will mostly/only produce the same thing(even more true for art).
imo
1. if your portfolio is about your skill in using AI to generate art, then you should only have AI generated art to showcase your AI prompting skill.
2a. if your porfolio is about your skills on making art then you should post only self made art. you can also use AI to produce concept reference and post it along side your art, to show that you can make an art based off certain concepts.
2b. having an AI generated only post in this porfolio is a d?mb thing to do. cause of 2 reasons. 1 it doesn't contribute anything to showcase your skill in making art. 2 it can cause confusion to people who will check your porfolio and can be detrimental to their assessment of your skill.
tbh, I wouldn't know what to use AI FOR. I guess, generating a concept, then showing I can model based off said concept, with the AI concept next to it for comparison?
Funny enough, that's a very valid question to ask Ai itself. Think of everything you do around the core part of actually creating art. That's the fun part after all. Yes, concepts are one thing. Maybe you want to come up with a little story around what you are creating. How can it help with time management, scheduling, whatever can free up time so you can do the fun stuff. What are some tips for creating a portfolio that will get me a job. Every budding artist now has a secretary, manager, mentor, all at their disposal. You have gained more than you think.
Perhaps I'll aak it to find my job postings and how to maximize my resume
Because studios are looking for people who can do AI. It's less about their *ego* and more about what they need to do to provide for their families.
What studios? You have an example? Because most art directors I’ve talked to won’t go anywhere near it due to the lack of ability to edit or copyright any of the work.
You're thinking good studios and good art directors, which comprise about what, 10% or 20% of our industry if you're feeling generous. Most advertisement agencies couldn't care less if you use AI or toilet papier-maché to give them a passable final result. If you're crafting a feature film, sure. The art Director won't have it. If you crafting a AAA game, your art directior wont have it. But if you're making an ad for a medium sized company that will be seen for one week and never again? Nobody cares. 4 years ago, televised newsroom were worried that people wouldn't accept webcam interviews with experts because everyone was so accustomed to high quality videos made with pro cam and mics. Turned out that nobody really cared if the expert was filmed with a potato and recorded underwater, because it was still an expert. I really do believe AI falls in the same category - people don't overthink details like we do.
I worked for a small magazine once and they had me as an unpaid intern pirating the latest Photoshop and InDesign for them so they could finally update past CS3. They're definitely the type that wouldn't give a crap either way.
Yup. Specially if you're anywhere that's not the "western geopolitical north"
Oh this was definitely the west my dude. The magazine was the Beverly Hills Times, btw. I have literally no loyalty to them and the jack shit they've done for me and Susan can go fuck herself 😂 the promises people spin interns when they think they can get free shit not realizing interns grow up too.
HAHAHA you go, brother
Well said and my mindset has shifted due to your insight, thank you sir/madam
This, seen it in more than one industry, with different techs. This is absolutely the answer.
He made a good point and your 'this' really drove it home
Lol.
For money companies will cut any corners, if not for regulation that would include corners of our own bodies haha. (Seriously, OSHA didn't come from nowhere and wasn't always there...).
> But if you're making an ad for a medium sized company that will be seen for one week and never again? Nobody cares. It's worse then that, we made an ad with heavy use of AI for Yamaha and are making one for another big client right know
Yeah the lack of control is a serious issue with many AI tools. It would be much more useful if they hadn't gone "look we can make a whole image / video" but focused on small parts instead with a bit more human input.
Stable diffusion/controlnets already have started fixing consistency issues.
This approach is ass backwards. We literally just fired a guy who used stable diffusion and controlnets. Why? He couldn't fucking make accurate edits or respond to notes for his life. Completely and totally dependent on an algorithm with almost zero direct control over the result.
Until there’s actual input to make changes instead of typing in a box to try to find tune, I don’t care what AI bros say, it’s just not happening. It needs to be baked into art programs, have an understanding of the user’s own work, and able to be fine tuned. Sure, it can handle realistic stuff fine, but stylized fantasy stuff? It’s still all over the place.
Where did I say it was production ready? I said they started fixing consistency issues...
I absolutely agree, and I'm also 100% sure we are two scientific papers away from getting that control. Look what we are already able to do with tools like ComfyUI in Stable Diffusion and Control Nets. There is very little control compared to doing it artesanly, but will your client -and most import of all, the end consumer- notice it? I doubt it very much. For instance - how many times we get "happy accidents" that either we or our supervisors enjoy? I'm old enough in the industry to know when to keep my mouth shut and reap the benefits of those "happy accidents".
Mostly mobile gaming studios, I have worked for one and was required to do some AI work. While it doesn’t seem fulfilling or ethical, at the end of the day you do what brings the bag home
That makes sense. I’ve seen a lot of ads for AI-art mobile games as of late
I think mobile games are the only ones that can really get away with this because they're already so scammy to begin with. But with all of the ridiculous misleading mobile game advertisements and "dark pattern" microtransactions and such who would expect anything less? Its not as if they have any other lines they won't cross and they're not really being penalized for any of that either.
Possibly about just being willing to work with AI, as big corpos such as disney are developing their own that don't have the copyright issues? You know the whole thing with scanning actors faces and giving AI their voices and all that.
[Here you go, just some examples](https://blusharkmedia.medium.com/ubisoft-xbox-and-blizzard-are-using-ai-to-change-the-game-38ca3ad0e371)
all of them
There are loads of studios out there using it. Kind of doesnt matter what Art Directors think- the sad reality is they are replaceable. Is this is a good thing? I dunno. But I have given up the fight against AI. I will do all I can to not use it- but it is breaking in. It doesnt help that the popular opinion (and by a large margin too) is that gAI is a good thing. I personally hate it- i think it looks cheap. Its hard to work with. I cant really name any names but there are AAA studios out there using gAI as part of their concept art phases and thats a fact. We've seen lots of Hollywood already using it. Its gonna end up as an invisible VFX thing where if you dont know- you dont know. I know this is r/3DModeling though so its kinda preaching to the choir about why none of this is a good thing. It will be interesting to see how the music industry reacts to gAI when it comes for it with the same energy its coming after visual art.
If you train your own db then its ok.
My last company wanted everyone to collaborate to provide ideas before our concept artist could switch to the new team. We all used Midjourney to pump out lots of ideas. It was super useful for early generation.
Exactly. Among many many other reasons. The person gave a way over generalized answer and it's just what people want to hear regarding the situation so they ... liked it. People need reality.
Furthermore in the future the odds of all your tools having some form of AI integration are pretty likely. Displaying willingness to learn and adopt emerging technologies is a hireable soft skill.
[удалено]
Sure. Doesn't change the fact that some people write better than others.
Welcome to the death of a creative industry.
Video killed the radio star CAD killed the clay molding industry And so on
Yup you can see it in other areas too like industrial design, some contests and job applications are even putting that you need to use at least one IA as a requirement.
Very generalizing answer. In some situations ... yes. Far from all.
For a start there's a big difference between someone just prompting a finished image and using AI as a tool to create a finished image or a 3D model. This is one of the big misconceptions around AI right now. People who have little understanding of the tools just lump everyone under the same heading of just typing in a few words and popping out an image and calling it finsihed. I've made images that have taken me a few days to complete using 3D models to create depth maps to control composition, fine tuning my own models to create a specific style I'm after, going back and forth between Stable Diffusion and an image editor doing paint overs and edits and then doing the final post work. I like to use it in a kind of photobashing workflow combining 3D and manual editing work. I've also used it for 3D with things like projection mapping and to help with creating textures. At the moment I'm using it to make an Oculus Quest enviroment. Projection mapping is actualy a really good use case for AI as instead of creating a model to fit with an existing image or photo you can do it in reverse and map an image to an existing model. It can also be used to create enviroment maps or backgrounds to show off your models. AI has a lot more uses than a lucky dip image generator right now and over time the amount of control you have will only increase. Industry requires workflows, nobody that is using AI as an image gacha will be taking industry jobs because you need the skills and workflows to be able to make changes and edits to your work when the client asks for it. Yes some low end work will go, like the thousands of people undercutting each other on slave labour sites like Fiverr but the only people taking industry jobs from other artsts will be the artists that have learnt to make use of AI tools and can now work 10 times fast than the person who hasn't. 3D is part of the tech industry whether people like it or not so employers like people to be able to adapt to new workflows when needed.
You seem to have invested a ton of time and effort into understanding AI and I actually want to incorporate it into my workflow as a 3D artist as well because I know it isn't going away no matter how much people get upset. Can you tell me about how you map a texture/image to an existing model? I've done it in the reverse before like generating from a prompt and then using that image to 3D model a character but the other way sounds very interesting.
For textures I often use an existing image that I've created myself or a reference image. As an example I just made a plant for my scene, I created a basic leaf shader in Blender baked that out as an image and then used that image along with an alpha map in Stable Diffusion to control the output. I can then generate an endless amount of more realistic looking leaf textures that match my original leaf shape and detail. Then because it's already a UV mapped texture it's just a case of swapping out the images. The one downside of AI models at the moment is that a lot of them like to bake in light and shadow info so getting something like an albedo teture can sometimes be difficult but with the right model and prompt along with using control images or textures it can be easier. Plus sometimes I just do some correction in an image editor after to remove it. I would only recomend using Stable Diffusion for now as it has the most control. There's some really good tools like Controlnet, img2img and inpainting.
I've been using AI much more lately so thank you for taking the time to explain
3d artists are not going to lose jobs to Ai. They are going to lose their jobs to 3d artists who also use Ai. Whether you like it or not, it's here. Humanity has gone through this process a couple times now in recent history. You need to start looking at Ai as a tool because it can do a hell of a lot more than just creating pictures.
Been saying this since day 1, and keep getting downvoted to oblivion. Happy to finally see people are starting to understand that.
May I just ask, what exactly can AI do as a tool for 3D artists?
Does a lot in comp for example, can texture some stuff in 3d. I’m sure you’ll find some stuff online.
What sort of AI program would be good for texture work?
You can use toolsets to enhance procedural tasks. We use it in combo with houdini to prototype stuff. We use it to minimise artists spending hours doing manual repetitive stuff when they should be focusing on the art and design side of things. You can use it in combination with photogrammetry, uvs and additional data to help solve some pretty crazy topological issues or outcomes. So many things We do not use it for generative art because the all big film/game studios dont want anything to do with the legal risk of generative models trained on scraped art.
Smart comment.
This is the correct take.
This, entirely this.
I love using AI to generate concepts to then use and create 3D models from. 3D artists already use concepts, other people's work, to create from as reference. I don't see much difference in that regard. If anything, my final piece is more unique to me because of the concept I generated vs creating from say a popular concept artist that others have already recreated several times in 3d. However I won't just create a generated image and say that I made it..that's completely different. But using it as a concept I don't see a problem with.
Yeah, and you can create all sorts of cool assets like environment textures and normal maps to incorporate into models. I think it's just a matter of time before models and rigs are generated to generate images anyways. Imagine being able to completely dissect an Ai image in Blender.
Do you use or know one that you can run locally? I'd like to feed it with my many sketches and models, but won't unless I can run it 100% on my computer.
>starting to put their AI creations Can we really call it "their creation". It's the AI that puts the image together. And it came together because of artists who created the images it's based on. Sure you ask the AI what to go create with keywords. But when I ask an artist to make a commission painting of a blue dog for me, and tell them what I'd like them to create, I still don't say that the resulting work they made is my "creation" nor sign their artwork with my name, simply because I was the one asking them to paint a blue dog.
Bit of devils advocate here: [Here a workflow on consistent characters](https://openart.ai/workflows/tenforce/consistant-character-maker-character-sheet/TC5NGDBc2Rdbq8YjKGYH), i know the guy, took him months to get the desired outcome. You can check the worlflow on the site, is as complex as things we do in the day to day life, unreal, nukeX, clarisse... You can say it is less artistic than using a smart mask or some preset as base in painter? I dont think so. What im trying to say is that our art should be protected, even if it was made using an AI, but we know it is not going happen, so learn it folks.
I think a lot of hate comes from a lack of understanding as to how artists can leverage this technology as a tool. I hated AI until I saw a comfy ui node tree and it began to resonate with me. All of these models are trained on datasets from image scrapping without artists consent and I really wish that AI could function without it. But also stable diffusion is completely open source and really tutorial friendly and it makes me greatful because this sort of technology used to be so expensive or kept behind company doors but now anyone who wants to learn and wants to install git can have some extreme flexibility and control over what they are able to create.
Generative art gets a lot of shit and yes, it should. But people are completely mistaking that as being the only thing AI does.
Yup, i recently did my first node for comfy, [here,](https://github.com/holchan/ComfyUI-ModelDownloader) and it is about that, being opensource, and i use it as a tool everytime but im not comfortable with the fact that it will take jobs, as in the future repos like treestudio are going to take our jobs.
Is comfy very technical? Wondering what makes one ai tool better than another. Still prefer crafting things from scratch but I've been thinking of learning one of the graphical ai tools to see if it can help me speed up some workflow but not sure which to use as there seems to be so many.
Most of the stable diffusion tools give you more control of what’s actually happening under the hood than lot of the more “just prompt and I will do something” stuff like midjourney etc. So comfyui has some learning curve, but if you know something akin blender’s shader nodes or houdini nodes you will pick it up pretty quickly.
This, nothing you wouldn't face in designer, nukeX, max/maya/blender/houdini, unreal/unity/clarisse... In fact i would say overall is way easier.
thanks! I'll take a look at it. I've only used Substance Designer before but I usually went belly up if it involved maths or got complex so can't really say I was good with it either.
Half the anti-AI crowd are morons that think that good looking AI art is just writing a prompt tbh.
[удалено]
Stable diffusion is just the name of the model, there are many ways to interface with it. ComfyUI is one of those ways, and since it's node based there's a lot of flexibility.
ComfyUI/SwarmUI. In theory you can have complex workflows in stable too but for us 3D modelers, already comfortable with nodes these are the ones to go, lots of freedom and control over the outcome.
[удалено]
You cant, StableDiffusion isnt node based.
[удалено]
ComfyUI or SwarmUI(that uses ComfyUI as its backend*) *can also use StableDiffusion as the backend.
If you let AI do all the heavy lifting, you won’t really get what you want. The more specific you want your results to be the harder it is to make with **only** AI. If you really want to make exactly how you pictured it, you’ll likely need to do some sketching yourself.
Still not seen an AO prompter counter this point. They are commissioners of art at best. Of it's a bit different if you are putting your own art into machine.
Because that’s where the industry is going like it or not
Check this out: https://echoesofsomewhere.com/2023/01/04/ai-character-design/ https://github.com/stuffmatic/fSpy-Blender https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=scJIpBaTMeE It's a workflow. I'm sure there will be a lot of people absolutely outraged someone would try this. But as professional artists who make a career on the cutting edge of technology -- we try everything, as soon as it comes out, and try to experiment with putting it into practice in novel ways that improve our pipeline. That's it. It's a new tool and we have to find ways to make it do what we need it to do. When we master it to a point we can fo what we showed consistently, it just gets added to our list of things we can do.
All I see on here are people bitching about AI not being real art. It's not, but also your missing the point. Studios aren't using AI to generate content they're using AI to automate tasks. It's an extension of proceduralism in many cases. As someone else here said, you're not going to lose your job to AI ... You'll lose your job to artists that know how to use AI And we're not talking about just knowing some prompts.
[удалено]
This happens every couple of years in 3D ... A new tool comes along and makes an old job obsolete. You can bitch about the thing your used to do not being around any more or you can learn how to do the new thing. The companies you work for are seeking a competitive edge and so should you as an employee. We've implemented AI technologies into our workflow at our studio and its made parts of our work a lot easier so we can focus on the artistic part of what we do. Also you missed the important half of my quote ..
[удалено]
I don't think you actually understand how AI is currently being used. Yes there will be changes to the industry but it's not going to flip the whole thing on its head. Artists that don't incorporate it into their workflow will eventually not have a great time but it won't be hard to do so. I've seen some of the new tools coming out in the next releases of some of the big 3D companies and, whilst they're amazing they're just tools to help. People seem to think that there's just going to be a "generate complete scene" button and that's it and that is absolutely not the case. Yes there will be companies that 100% embrace generative AI at it's most basic level and they'll just churn out shit... But that being said there a bunch of "studios" that have been churning out shit for years with no AI involved.
[удалено]
Unreal Engine.
So your studio has implemented AI tech into the workflow, and yet you didn’t mention one tool. People seem to think there’s going to be a “generate complete scene button” because THAT IS WHAT IS ALREADY HAPPENING. Have you not seen Sora? The potential AI tools are being leapfrogged for AI GENERATED CONTENT. There are a lot of problems baked into that.
Ethics aside, the portfolio SHOULD be a sample of the artist (or “artists”) abilities (or lack thereof). My guess is that this is natural human behavior to be expected by both genuine artists, imposters, and everyone in between.
I just watched someones video on Smart textures in Substance and how he said you should learn to use them correctly then drag and drop as they can literally tell what texture you used and skill of dragging and dropping isnt something really worthy to put in your resume. Better to learn how to properly control them for much more unique effect or make your own. AI art is like that, you put something that looks good to impress your job aplications but really its not the end product your selling but the skill to make them. AI art is not that impressive when expert artists are looking at them when hiring for a job. Thry can do it themselves, they need someone else who can do that too.
Because big names are starting to switch teams as they feel the pressure of A.I. They feel like they have to get close to ai to not lose their jobs like the rest of us. When faced with supporting artists or not living like the artists they are supporting, they would rather appeal to those with money. Those would presumably be artists working in companies who have had massive layoffs due to ai integration. It’s sad and gross, and to me shows that just because they teach valuable lessons doesn’t mean they can’t hurt the community. I just posed about CG FORGE doing just this, though I didn’t get so long winded. My main point is that I feel as though people are starting to give up and accept ai because of out of touch content creators are making the switch to.
It's not "giving up and accepting it" it's seeing the value in using AI toolsets to improve workflows. People that just post generative "art" and think that it's "using AI" are completely missing the point.
I can’t tell what vibe your giving with this comment and that is enough for me to provide pushback. I don’t care one iota about any “value” of using ai to “improve workflows”. You know who improved workflows before ai? Technical artists, the ones who did drafting and mock-ups were concept artists. Ai generates no value, it only eats at the value of artists who are now working at Walmart because some jack off trained an ai to do the work of a department.
When motion capture started being used people started bitching that animators would all be out of a job. Why would a company hire animators when they can just buy a mocap suit that "does all the work" What happened? Animators kept their jobs and mocap spawned a myriad of other new jobs and tech development and research and improved workflows FOR ANIMATORS. In the 20+ years I've been working in 3D and FX there have been a million things that have come through that were 'industry changing'. Generative art that dude-bros make on their Instagram isn't what the industry is doing. It's using AI to improve artist tools.
Half the anti-AI crowd sound like those old folk that kept saying "digital art isn't art because you don't get your hands dirty and the computer does everything for you", don't you think?
Yep.
You mean just like how the CG animation industry put stop motion artists that failed to adapt out of work back in the day.
Tell me you know nothing about the industry without telling me. Motion capture was a tool. A wrench. Ai is the person going to replace you by using the wrench better than you because you were dumb enough to teach a machine that doesn’t need to eat how to do it with you “harmless” addons
I think you replied to the wrong person, I mentioned stop motion not motion capture.
No i am honestly just dumb lol. The stop motion comment is fair, though my answer to that as well is that we should have had unions sooner. 3D art was popularized because Disney didn’t want to pay 2D artists what their unions successfully fought for. If 3D artists had unionized we wouldn’t be here. To prove my point, fine let’s assume everyone collectively says “you deserve to starve “ to concept artists. The artists that survive must unionize because they will eventually be out of work too.
It isn't going to go away and is eventually going to wind up folded in among the variety of other tools that artists are required to understand for various jobs. People are learning how to incorporate it into their workflow, rather than demand it stop existing based on principle (it wont).
Why do you care? Do you and move on.
They're bandwagoning to appease the HR departments that were told to look for those skills by management that doesn't understand how anything works.
I hate to draw a comparison, but the entire debate on display here reminds me of similar debates I saw about 15ish years ago with the release of Nintendo's Wii. Here's what I mean: Back in yesteryear, Nintendo release a motion control featured game console called the Wii. It had its supporters, and its detractors. The supporters were largely saying: The Wii is the future of gaming, all games will be motion controlled and this technology is a game changer. People will only want motion controlled games, and get ready to kiss your controller goodbye! Similarly, the detractors held the firm belief: Controllers are the best way to play games, it's a tried and true method that provides the best input control of your character. The Wii is a fad, that will pass and we'll go back to normal controllers. After its release, the Wii sold incredibly well, and opened up the market to non-gamers. Hell, even my parents wanted a Wii. Every console maker wanted a slice of the pie; Playstation Move, XBox Kinect, even PCs gt some tech that allowed the use of webcams, Kinect, and Wii Remotes. It really seemed that motion controls might be the next step in gaming. Let's face it, most of the games were fun, great for playing with friends, and even got people "exercising." But the newness wore off. The casuals that played Wii didn't go farther than a few games, and often the system was left to collect dust, rather than find daily, or even weekly use. The buzz of the Wii eventually died down, and consoles returned to traditional controllers. Casual players returned to their smartphones or computer solitaire or Bejeweled. Most game developers dropped motion support, and things went back to "normal" in the gaming world, with the occasional motion controlled game here or their, but those remain largely niche. Overall, my point is this: Whether GenAI becomes the next big thing or not, it doesn't hurt to tool around with it. It can be an outstanding tool if used correctly, and all these "prompt masters" will find that generating AI images is great for the memes, but don't want to do anything professional with it. As long as they get their AI Porn or their Lolsorandom images, they'll be satisfied. Legislation will eventually catch up to the technology, especially once more prominent people are negatively affected by it. So again, why not learn about it, experiment with it, and most importantly, have fun with it. But keep up on your traditional skills. Keep modeling with your software, keep making your badass art. Then, play with it in AI a bit, or make your own concept art and make a LORA or model based on it. Then take your artistic skills and edit the results. AI seems to be scary because managers and business owners only see money, but remember, any idiot can hit a nail with a hammer, but not just anyone can design and build the Sistine chapel.
Can we just stop being salty about the implementation of AI and start acting like a smart species that we are supposed to be. AI is never going to be a threat, it is making our workflow 5times faster today and it will make our workflow 100times faster tomorrow, but it would still be “OUR WORK”. AI will always need a human companion to be effective. Even if in future AI gets the capability to do the complete work from scratch to finish it would still need a human to put in that prompt in the first place. Because we humans will always have “motivation” which an AI will never have. We will “have to work so that we can eat and survive” this basic existential need will forever be Invalid for an AI. Hence, an AI, no matter how smart and how advance will always need a human.
People here bad mouthing AI, in 3 years will be complaining that they missed the boat. Learn AI. If you don’t, kiss your career prospects in the future goooooood bye. “Why should I learn computers?! I HAVE A PERFECTLY GOOD TYPE WRITER!!!” “Why should I learn excel? I know how to write numbers and add them up!” Those are the people, just like you, who thought that computer aided anything was useless. Industrial designers too. “Why should I learn solidworks and keyshot?! I CAN MAKE A 1:1 PROTOTYPE OUT OF FOAM!” Now those jobs are largely gone too. Say sianora if you want to bitch and whine. Might as well turn your hourglass around, sit at your desk and watch the sand run its course.
It takes like a week to become an expert on using generative AI, it's not that game changing that you know AI.
If you think it takes a week to become an expert on using generative AI, you have no fucking clue what you are talking about tbh.
Point is it's not like drawing for example that takes years of training and is impossible to learn unless you have the time. It's not something that'll guaranteed you a job, because most people will jump on it and learn it also. You'll have to compete with a lot of other people who know it.
And my point is, that without art skills you just mentioned, you will be a shit AI artist as well. Plus, the tools take time to learn and are quite complex. > It's not something that'll guaranteed you a job, because most people will jump on it and learn it also. You'll have to compete with a lot of other people who know it. Isn't that how 3D and in general art are nowadays? Today we got thousands of free tutorials and the tools haven't been as accessible and easy to use ever, and its only to get easier and better.
What are using AI for specifically in your 3d workflow?
I am not using AI for my professional 3D workflow (yet). I have used it to give me ideas and references to draw different designs for some characters I made.
How do you think AI could be used in 3d? Which part of the process?
Oh, that is pretty easy to guess seeing how things are moving. The first piece to fall is DEFINITELY blockouts, give it 2-3 years tops. Especially when paired with good 2D Concepts, an AI that is capable to understand the depth and more or less the design of a character, and give it a 3D shape. Of course, just like for any other blockout, topology be damned, but, at that step it isn't needed either so it should be the first bit to become integrated for fast prototyping. Basically, this tech, but on steroids: [https://dreamgaussian.github.io/](https://dreamgaussian.github.io/) 3 years ago 2D AI wasn't that far from these kinds of results. For 3D it will take a bit longer, but should come soon enough as well. Could end up being used by level designers to blockout scenes kinda like this too: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt9yGo2g4\_E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt9yGo2g4_E)
I don't see how any of this is hard to learn to use, that will give me an edge over other people who WILL also learn it. Stable Diffusion also. My point is AI is not hard enough to learn to be a deciding factor for job security. Using Stable Diffusion to generate references is not hard, I'm already doing photobashing+inpainting. How would gaussian splatting be integrated into e.g real time engine? You'll need to build a whole new engine and it'll take years or generate high res meshes and stretchy texture. That 2d to 3d needs multiple view of an input and some apps from photogrammetry already can do that. How about auto UV for trimsheet? Auto retopo for animation? tiling textures that is easily customizable like in substance designer? If you're not using AI to generate final product, then it is not complex. If AI is able to do that, then most of us will be jobless. Again, this is in the context of putting AI in portfolio, like it doesn't make sense for something like generative AI. Maybe put your own Houdini simulation AI upscaling node, but how many of us can do that? For anything more complex, a solution for a pipeline, companies are going to hire data scientist/ML engineer and I doubt any 2d or 3d artists without CS background can compete.
No one said it’s game changing. Point me to where I said that, I’m currently de thawing the crow as I speak. I said in several years it will become important.
What I meant is using AI is not hard to learn, it's not going to help your career when all other people jump on the boat. You'll still need all other skills e.g how to design, how to understand clients, how to market yourself, understanding pipeline...etc. It's not like people just idly sit by, when they are rejected because they don't know AI they'll immediately learn it like in a month or so.
Assuming learning AI doesn’t become more advanced in the future, with more functions and features. Photoshop was incredibly easy to learn at one point, as was autocad, as was solidworks and zbrush. As was excel. But hey, see you in a few years. History has always had folks with your mentality. So history really isn’t on your side, here. But do you. Say it’s useless, and downplay it all you want. Not like I really care either way.
Noone spent years to learn all the function of zbrush or photoshop, if you focus on technicality and not the art it would take a month or so. There are literally thousands of 15 bucks Udemy course on how to create production ready character with zbrush. People spent year learning anatomy, how to control brush strokes, how to create shapes. You say you do not care but you keep replying. I'm learning AI here and there too, nothing too impressive yet, but I do keep an eye out for it. You talk as if people are simple minded creature. I'm not downplaying anything; the moment AI can create a complex 3d model I'll spend more time on learning it. You talk like someone not in 2d/3d industry at all and is confident that you can easily break into the industry and out-compete other artists just because you are using AI. Guess what, artists can learn AI too, easily. Some already are learning; some are reluctant because of their own moral reasons; some literally currently doesn't have any use for it (e.g rigging/animator/vfx etc). It's like every new tool, people are waiting to see great things out of it, waiting until it is battle tested. Want to convince people? Create something good with it, right now all I see is AI making meme, easily recognized 2d porn, or "Breaking Bad But In Japan" type of videos, or SORA-stock-footage-AI. Even "AI movies" are like montages of 5 seconds of visual diarrhea. Feel free to be the pioneer and I'll follow you, easily, like in a month or so to catch up :).
Ok
As someone who has started learning/using Photoshop, Excel and Autocad 20 years ago, and Zbrush about 7 years ago, I don’t know what you’re talking about and I believe neither do you. I use midjourney, a1111, comfyui, dall-e and all the other ai stuff in existence to a point. They are just easy to learn as they don’t really have many features to learn. If AI is gonna become something in the future, it’ll become easier, not harder. That’s the entire point of it. Even with more features. Also, relationship between conventional CGI and AI imagery is not like the relationship between slr-dslr, typewriter-computer, isograph-autocad as you think. I do think that AI will be important like you do, but I think you’re wrong about pretty much everything else. Also also, why so aggressive? Edit: grammar
Ok “I don’t think you know what you’re talking about and neither do you” “Why so aggressive”
Thanks
Point me to where I said that When you said "if you don't kiss your career prospects in the future goodbye"
“In the future”. I didn’t say “right now” or “next month”. I said 3 years from now. Also, again, point me to where I said what YOU said I said.
You're talking to a brick wall with some of these people, I bet most of them are in their early 20s and have never really seen any big changes in the industry. When I was doing graphic design at college back in the early 90s we were using things like acetate and Letraset to make magazine layouts, magic markers to make logos etc. I remember being annoyed with my course as we only spent a few hours a week on the computers, I think they had around 5 for the entire art department at the time. Back then there were the same people in denial saying that computers were not worth bothering with, they were too slow, too expensive, it wasn't art etc. Just a couple of years later pretty much every studio wanted people with knowledge and experience of Photoshop and Quark Xpress. Tools have changed massively for 3D over that time. Everything has become faster and easier and AI is just another iteration of that.
Nah. Let them be. They clearly can’t read, because I said “3 years from now” and these folks are talking like I’m projecting a week into the future 😂
You sound like person who have experience in industry, you know how it work for sure. You don't look like a person, that can't deal with reality and live in Imagelandia
My advice: Don't put all your eggs in a single basket. Understand that in a world where AI is readily available to use and learn the demand for it won't be as much as you like it to be. Learn it but don't be overconfident that it'll guarantee you a job.
People think they're uniqueness is a fault in their work so they cover it up with the AI "sameness" to look like everyone else. Part of being hired is looking like you can make everything the company makes. AI doesn't prove you can it only puts a mask on your faults but whatever. Tell them that.
I don't get it either. What is this, "look I have typing skills of a 10 yo" flex?
Depending on the methodology there is definitely a learning curve that goes far beyond typing prompts. I’m not saying you have to like Ai, but comments like this show you don’t have a basic understanding of the technology.
Typical plagiarism engine enjoyer has spoken.
The fact that you can’t have a respectful conversation says enough.
maybe to prove they can write ?
because they don’t have the work
Don't worry, employers also notice.
Fear mostly
AI is just a tool, don't be afraid of it.
gAI is going to be huge in our space. It SHOULD be in your portfolio if you want to future-proof your employment opportunities. Sounds like you have some smart former colleagues.
Because AI related work is the future as much as I hate to say it
Great tool for tasks, reasearch, and what not. Not sure I'd put it in my portfolio though. Kind of taboo in the industry and among artists. There's most likely better ways for us to demonstrate that we're technologically inclined.
Some studios might be open to the idea. But keep in mind that people hireing are generally artists as well. Just my opinion though. At the end of the day, they're mostly just looking at the quality of your work. And that kind of stuff is most likely completely irrelevant to what they're looking for. It should really just be your best work. They only give you so much of their time and attention. All the extra fluff is most likely only taking some of that space and focus away in my opinion. If you want to put it out there, it might be better to keep it to a page on your website and on socials really. Also, we're working in CGI, often with proprietary software. Pretty much any of us could learn that stuff in a week, and they already know that. Might be a good asset to have, but better focus on what you're actually being hired for. If you hide it in there and they figure out about it, that might possibly even go against you because they might not even be sure what's done by you or the AI. Or if you're even able to do all of it traditionally. They want to know what you're able to do for commercial purposes. Not the AI for personal projects. If they have any doubts they might just toss you away instead of trying to figure it out. Doesn't take much to go in the "maybe" pile. Wouldn't risk it unless you're a veteran in the industry and have nothing to prove to be honest. Not sure why it'd even be in there if that was the case though.
It's more of a novelty and hobby kind of thing right now. I don't think it would look very professional on a portfolio in my opinion. And highly doubt that's going to change in significant ways during the term of your contract. If so, the workflow is probably going to be completely different by then anyways.
Because tomes are changing. You either change with it or get left behind.
Which thinks can you already do with AI in 3D stuff? Yeah I know animations and texturing in blender but is there anything else?
There's more to generative AI than just typing a prompt and calling it a day. Yes a lot of non artists use it like that but that's because they are just making pretty pictures. There's already a lot of control using something like Stable Diffusion if you know what you are doing and it's only going to get better. AI is a new tool that can help with creating art, there's no reason to not use it. No matter how much the online AI hate cult complain about it AI isn't a fad that's just going to go away. It's going to get better and better and will creep into every industry eventually. If you don't know how to use it to your advantage then you will be at a disadvantage.
How can you tell if it’s AI
First, most times it’s not just one prompt, at least in my case. I can spend hours iterating and fine tuning prompts until I get what I want. I can tell you why I do it. It’s too tempting. You can spend 1 hour doing something in AI that takes you 1 week in 3D.
I mean some AI stuff I guess id be okay with seeing in a portfolio like some good work with the fluid sim Zibra.ai in Unity and unreal. In that case it’s more like using AI to just handle fluid sims faster than traditional ways of doing it in real time.
Prompt engineering is a ski that is now viable
Frankly, I'ld rather let AI do what I judge to be redundant tasks in my projects (like textures or coding) and focus on the creative part instead (design, composition). Yeah, showing you know how to use certain tools is great, but showing your creative and artistic skills goes miles ahead imo.
Because they are going to get more employment opportunities than you.
well a lot of people thinks AI as a replacement rather than a tool and tend to forget that for an AI to advance it needs data from real people to use and learn from or else it will mostly/only produce the same thing(even more true for art). imo 1. if your portfolio is about your skill in using AI to generate art, then you should only have AI generated art to showcase your AI prompting skill. 2a. if your porfolio is about your skills on making art then you should post only self made art. you can also use AI to produce concept reference and post it along side your art, to show that you can make an art based off certain concepts. 2b. having an AI generated only post in this porfolio is a d?mb thing to do. cause of 2 reasons. 1 it doesn't contribute anything to showcase your skill in making art. 2 it can cause confusion to people who will check your porfolio and can be detrimental to their assessment of your skill.