Try this with your 3D printer......

[Gra30]

Yes, that was not me saying 3d sculptors are not sculptors, what is says is that I believe it needs a human behind it to be a complete success and machine sculpts lack this. They are nice in some cases but a human sculpt takes it to a complete new level. I believe that was also the initial point in the thread and has been mentioned before on other threads in debate.
The Orc is great but as you say, it has no real life comparison. Faces are asymmetrical, clothes hang different all the time, subtle things like this humans can pick up, maybe subconsciously and maybe subconsciously that is why I prefer hands sculpts, at least at present.
As I have mentioned before, an original painting or a digital image, the fondness to me is the hand touch.
But I stand by what I said, to me sculpting needs a crafted human direct touch, but that is my opinion.
Hope that clarifies what I did and did not say.

 

[Waterman]

I think Richie has put it into simple language that I understand now. Was a bit lost keep talking about printing, thought that was for books etc. If at the end of the day the end product is as good as that which our present day sculptors supply us with, and the price is agreeable to me, then yes I don't give a fishes tit how it was produced, I will buy it. My wife puts a lot of skill into cooking my dinner, as opposed to a ready meal from Tescos, but in the end it just boils down to taste for me, never bother thinking too much about the process.

 

[JasonB]

The Orc is great but as you say, it has no real life comparison. Faces are asymmetrical, clothes hang different all the time, subtle things like this humans can pick up, maybe subconsciously and maybe subconsciously that is why I prefer hands sculpts, at least at present.

Don't mean to pick on you here at all, but I chopped this piece out of your post, since the rest of it is personal preference and is something I can go either way with because its a "je ne sais quoi" kinda thing
But the part above baffles me, because it seems to imply that the 3-d sculptor doesn't have the same feel for those subtle differences, or that you are saying the computer will alter things to be symmetrical and hang a certain way all the time regardless of what the sculptor tells it to do. And this goes back to my statement that it seems people are giving the computer more credit than its due when it comes to its input on the final sculpt. The computer is going to render, and the printer is going to print, what the human sculptor tells it to print. So if the human has the talent and skills to pick up on those subtleties, they should show up in the sculpt. If the face is asymmetrical, and the digital sculptor creates it that way, that is what will show up in the print. Just as in a "traditional" sculpt, the artist determines the result, not the tool. Put it this way. If someone taught Mike to use a 3-d rendering program and he applied his sculpting talents to it, would you expect the output to be symmetrical where it shouldn't be, and for clothing and fabric to drape unrealistically, only because it was printed and not sculpted? I think that gets at the core of peoples belief or non-belief in what is possible with 3-d rendering and printing.

 

[Meehan34]

"try this with your 3D printer..." That sure is a loud horn.

Does this look dull and lifeless? http://arttalk.ru/articles/content/son-the-dream-making-of

 

[JasonB]

"try this with your 3D printer..." That sure is a loud horn.

Does this look dull and lifeless? http://arttalk.ru/articles/content/son-the-dream-making-of

Dude, a little heads up. That is definitely ****! Nice though...

 

[JasonB]

Heres one I have been following

http://industriamechanika.com/blog/

Waiting for them to release this
http://industriamechanika.com/blog/tag/the-chrononaut/

 

[Gra30]

Hi Jason
No problem, I used the Orc as an example.
Up until now I haven't seen any really good human forms in 3d but not saying they aren't out there.
I realise the computer does what it is told and understand everything else you have mentioned.
Many of the sculpts I see, on here mainly, all have perfect symmetry but you can prove me wrong and as said I may have not looked properly.
The rendering is a completely different topic as I see some benefits and some hurdles there as I cast myself, but that is another topic as said.

Ignoring the fact I like traditional sculpts as a personal choice, the question that keeps coming up is if digital sculpting is replacing the more common and when looking at some digital sculpts I do see them precise but generally, and there are exceptions, less alive than those made by human hands ie symmetry and false creases etc but as said, that may be down to me not looking at the correct sculpts. That answers the question that for every good digital sculptor there will still be equally as good traditional sculptors and I think they will run alongside each other, eventually.


I did say that my preference was sculpting by hand ( manually with putty and hands) but that is just me snd my opinion.
I also have said numerous times that both fields require knowledge and skill and then applied, but differently.

At present, the result direct from hand to finish piece, to me brings a quality that I prefer and feel is better than from hand to finished piece via machine, lets face it most of us find it easier to tell our hands what to do than a computer, a reason why we give so much expression by hand using our hands in conversation.

3d pieces are great, as mentioned before, but at present I prefer to invest in traditional hand sculpted pieces and masters and I certainly will continue to commission these in the future as I appreciate them for what they are.

That is not to say I wouldn't try the dark side but it would still not replace my respect and preference for original hand sculpts ( MEANING DIRECTLY SCUPLTED BY HAND RATHER THAN BEING DESIGNED BY COMPUTER USING HANDS OR LIMBS)
As said that is all just my choice, think I have said enough now so will leave this thread for others to comment.
Best wishes

 

[RKapuaala]

Gra30
But there you go again with the phrase Hand Sculpts.... I use my hands to sculpt clay, whether it is digital or not. Perhaps I am getting petty about syntax.... but then it seems to me that you are purposely trying to disparage one medium over the other by using the phrase 'hand sculpts' to infer that a digital sculpt is not done by hand. Sculptis gives me a ball of clay and the tools to change it into something. I have to use my hands to change it into something. Sculptris won't change it for me.

 

[Gaudin]

In Soviet Russia, Orks digitally sculpt you.....

 

[JasonB]

Just an FYI to everyone. NOT how it works...

BTW, total suck up here, but thats one of the best 1/32 figures I have ever seen. I wish I was capable of painting it to a higher standard, and building a good triplane to go with it.
EDIT
After looking at this pic, I would REALLY like to see this fig in a larger scale, preferably 1/9. "Computer, rescale..."

 

[Waterman]

Rkapuaala, to my mind you seem to be a bit of a dog with a bone over this. Nobody it seems to me is disagreeing with you. People are just looking at it from different perspectives and trying to put a cross all aspects. It could be the best thing since sliced bread, we don't know, and no one it seems to me is taking anything derogatory away from this technical and skill full new way of sculpting. But I do not think you do this new innovation any justice by continuously splitting hairs over something that we hope tuns out to be an enlightening and successful venture. At the end of the day, it's not an Ego trip for either side of the equation. Get out there, make it a success, and then bring it to us the customers.

 

[bonehead]

"try this with your 3D printer..." That sure is a loud horn.

Does this look dull and lifeless? http://arttalk.ru/articles/content/son-the-dream-making-of

I never said digital sculpting was dull and lifeless! (Go back and read what i actually said.)

I said that SCANS from real people almost always need tweaking to give them life. There is a world of difference between those two statements. Perhaps it is not my communicating skills that are the problem here.....

Also notice that those awesome digital sculpts (follow the above link) were created by a person with mondo artistic skills! They could probably do just as well in clay - with a little practice. Thus, far from proving me wrong, this makes my point quite well..... !

Plus, I think Pete (diamond cutter) makes the ultimate point to this whole argument: our biz is too small to make such costly processes economically viable.

Finally, there are other analogs to these contemporary happenings. The best one that comes to mind is the advent of photography in the mid 19th century. Prior to that time, portrait artists were quite common. Before photography became popular, if you wanted to hang a picture of your uncle Dudley on your living room wall, you had to pay a portrait artist to paint one up for you. After that, you could simply take your uncle down to a photographer's studio for a photo portrait.

Because of this, many people believed that photography would make painting obsolete. (You know, kind of like that wag who thought digital 3D printing would put sculptors out of business.) It certainly did reduce the opportunities for portrait painters. But it never did put them completely out of business. For one thing, a photo was a little TOO honest for some folks. The painter could always do a little "adjustment" to make a portrait more flattering. Not so much for the photographer. And photography never really replaced other types of painting either. In fact, photography simply became another artist's tool that allowed talented folks to express themselves.

Notice the word "talented". It takes talent to do good stuff no matter what tools you use. Sometimes a less talented person can get lucky. But it takes a talented artist to do that consistently. Tools will come and go. But talent will always be an important commodity in creating good art.

With that, I will rest my case.......

 

[kidsbday7]

Dang it! That whole talent thing takes me out of the running every time.


Phil

 

[JasonB]

Dang it! That whole talent thing takes me out of the running every time.


Phil

Yeah, me too. I don't qualify above "Skilled" and usually fall into the "tries hard" category!

 

[Alaneye]

I've seen busts created from printed out scans, I've seen busts created from life casts, and I've seen busts sculpted from a ball of real clay that all had a 'lifelessness' to them. I would be no more impressed with a scanned and printed bust than I would with a tracing of something... but it might still have a 'wow' factor to it simply cause I enjoy technology.

I've seen digital portraits that have been unbelievably good and have garnered praise for the accurancy of the likeness. It occured to me that the artist could apply a photo overlay of the person, rotate the digital sculpture to the same angle and tweak to the sculpture to fit the image, and indeed I saw a Youtube video using exacty this method. I'm less impressed with this approach no matter how good the result. So whenever I look at a digital sculpture I will always have this doubt at the back of my mind, unless the artist says specifically that he/she did not use the overlay method.

That said, I would probably relish a technique that allowed me to do that with a real clay sculpture it might just be jealously. About the closest I can think is to find a photo, then photograph the sculpture at the same angle, then put both into in an art program and make one transparent so you can superimpose and compare the two images. But it's much too time consuming a technique to use unless you are really stuggling to understand what is wrong with the likeness. Plus, it's still looking at the images and altering the sculpture using the eye and the hand.

For me personally, art is about observing something and recreating it in paint or clay, or what ever medium the artist choses.

I would love to get involved in digital sculpting though, but the programs have a pretty steep learning curve. I mean, you could pretty much sculpt something in real clay with a toothpick and your fingers, but with virtual sculpting, if you don't have the correct understanding of the tools/menus/settings, you aren't getting anywhere So yeah, I think I would enjoy digital sculpting but at the moment the interface is the barrier... plus, at least for the time being, the printing is beyond my reach and if there is one thing I love to do when one of my sculptures is finally baked, it's to hold it in my hands and feel the shapes and the textures.

Al

 

[Mark S]

".....Because of this, many people believed that photography would make painting obsolete...."

Here I was thinking I might give IT or Applied Graphic Arts a try as a new career. But no!,hold on there!, apparently 'portrait painting' is still alive and well and giving that new fangled photography a run for it's money.
I was in the bank the other day just trying to extend the credit on my card, when a portrait painter came in with several people helping him to carry his money. That's when I realised I'd been wasting my time all these years. I needed to break into the go get 'um world of Portrait Painting.........long live the 19th century!!!!

 

[carl reid]

I have to agree with Mike here!

To me there seems to a case of the emporors new clothes going on! Technology is the answer to everything...? I'm not sure myself. Like I have said in a previous thread, I have been having the same conversations for almost 20 years! I agree technology has moved on. But the limitations of the operator remains. There are few that will gain the required ability to reproduce the desired standards, in exactly the same way only some will gain the manual skills to push the clay!
Its a little like giving me a camera and another to David Bailey, I would take a few snaps and David Bailey would produce something close to photographic art!
I guess in a nutshell I'm saying it requires vision and talent in whatever field you operate, and what ever the your desired medium and never more than when you are dealing with what is effectively an artform!

With regards to the scanning issue, I think it has serious limitations. Yes it can scan a perfect portrait or a perfectly still human. But how do you scan a runner for example or a horse or a dog etc...?
And again I agree with Mike here, when you are presented with a scan of a human head, it looks a little staged, a bit like a passport photo, but for me that moment in time element is missing! That what I mean when I say lifeless! Its the same difference between a great actor and a mediocre one. One is convincing the other is wooden and staged!

Now for the printing! I was talking the company I buy my resin from the other day, who also sell a range of 3d printers of various price points. The general opinion was that they are great for car parts and engineered items for example, but art forms and details related to it, they are no where near yet. Thats not to say they won't achieve the desired quality in the future. But as I see it at the moment there is an inbalance in the quality of the CG sculpt If you have the right talent, and thats a big if...!
And the quality of the print is still questionable.

There is one more issue that has been mentioned in a previous thread, The Cost! There seems to be an opinion that it will be cheaper to produce a 3d print. I'm affraid that won't be the case. If anyone out there has had the oportunity to require a rapid prototype will know they are a fortune! The same will aply in this market too!

I'm affraid talent dosen't live in a software package, scanner or a 3d printer!

Just my peniths worth!

Carl

 

[Gaudin]

With regards to the scanning issue, I think it has its limitations. Yes it can scan a portrait and perfectly still human. But how do you scan a runner for example or a horse or a dog etc...?
And a gain I gree with Mike here, when you are presented with a scan of a human head, it looks a little staged, a bit like a passport photo, that moment in time element is missing for me! That what I mean when I say lifeless! Its the same difference between a great actor and a mediocre one. One is convincing the is wooden and staged!

Carl - you dont need to scan a runner - once you scanned a person you then assign a " bone structure" to a model and then you can move it whichever way you like, with posing software, rag doll apps, motion capture on life human etc ( think Gollum) that will make it realistic etc.
Same can be done with animals. There are already plently of algorithms that will do a running dog for you. If not - motion capture.

Same with head- one its scanned - every surface and muscle can be assigned and used, hense you can expressions and mimics and make video of talking head if you wanted. to be realistic, some one else will need to scan a texture of face and work with it so it applies to 3d model and then add effects and so on and so on.
Realistically all can not be done by 1 person - I am guessing, like in medicine, there are narrow field specialists that form teams - on uber professional level.

What you are right about - is how much skill, experience and talent has the individual artist got to have to be able to do that.

 

[carl reid]

Carl - you dont need to scan a runner - once you scanned a person you then assign a " bone structure" to a model and then you can move it whichever way you like, with posing software, rag doll apps, motion capture on life human etc ( think Gollum) that will make it realistic etc.
Same can be done with animals. There are already plently of algorithms that will do a running dog for you. If not - motion capture.

Same with head- one its scanned - every surface and muscle can be assigned and used, hense you can expressions and mimics and make video of talking head if you wanted. to be realistic, some one else will need to scan a texture of face and work with it so it applies to 3d model and then add effects and so on and so on.
Realistically all can not be done by 1 person - I am guessing, like in medicine, there are narrow field specialists that form teams - on uber professional level.

What you are right about - is how much skill, experience and talent has the individual artist got to have to be able to do that.

Thats exactly the point I was making!

Very few will gain the required skills to be able to apply all the ingredients to bake the metaphorical cake!

Take Gollum as an example, can you imagine the size of the team let alone the budget required to bring it to the screen.
Its like comparing a Bentley to a kit car.

Carl

 

[JasonB]

This discussion has become like a dog chasing it tail. Round and round and round. Once the dog catches its tail, it quickly realizes it has achieved nothing for all its efforts...and starts again.