4 ms·

I do a lot of 3d stuff (not a pro) and I've found a passing knowledge of programming is quite useful when you're doing something a little bit more unusual or co

I do a lot of 3d stuff (not a pro) and I've found a passing knowledge of programming is quite useful when you're doing something a little bit more unusual or complex. I did some pretty big cityscapes made out of modular components, and it was nice to have python for stuff like twisting 300 TV aerials so they're all a little bit differently wonky, or making lines of washing. I'm also a big believer in mastering your tools. An artist is limited by their imagination - and imagination is largely structured by your knowledge of materials and the capabilities of tools. If you're working with 3d models, and you plan on mastering it, having an idea of what you can do with An artist is limited by their imagination - and imagination is largely structured by your knowledge of materials and the capabilities of tools. It spurs you on to try new and ambitious stuff, new styles, new forms.

pfranz 8y ago
As passing knowledge is great, but focus and mastery just requires too much time (and time to maintain). Something as large as Maya or computer graphics you have to pick your battles. If you're completely independent or at a very small studio you have to be scrappy, but I think that means more of having a wide toolset, a lot of copy/paste and experimenting. You just don't have the time to master and maintain that mastery. My career has let me focus on the backend and internals. I know people way more proficient than I am with Maya, but they know little to nothing about Python or the DG (or maybe MEL). I know a few vfx sups who can cobble together a basic shell command, but aren't masters and don't know a bit of Python. It's much easier to interact with them (especially over chat/email--I can send them a command and trust them to modify paths and run it), but it's not worth their time to invest in honing those things. It's probably cheaper to fly someone from a different state to do these things for them than it is for them to spend half a day writing something to parse and edl to rename some Quicktime files or troubleshoot a bad power supply in their workstation. I've also noticed that the more technical they are, the deeper the hole they're in before they ask for help. Hopefully that means they're more productive (and are more ambitious), but it usually means I have to ask them what their original problem was, then what was the first thing they did, then the second, and unwind the situation. For the situation you described of turning buildings there are probably 5-10 completely different approaches you could take (apart from manually placing them), only a few use Python. At a moderately sized studio (on a moderately sized project), I'd reach for something like Houdini to do what you're asking and you would be hard-pressed to find someone who would use Python for this kind of thing in Houdini. On the flip side I was handed a project at a small place that was well suited for Houdini. We didn't have a license so I cobbled something together in Maya. The producers were telling me in their experience they'd hire someone who would do a project in Houdini, but later when they needed changes and that person wasn't available they'd have to hire someone to redo it in Maya. Reality is hard. My thoughts about this really clicked with photography. A lot of photographers are just technical enough. Most of the process is a black box, but they've had their camera for years, tested enough inputs and outputs that they can trust their tools to do what they want. Other photographers dig into the tech. They can't, by definition, have as much time in the field. They can tell you a lot more "why" and might be equally good or better in many respects, but it can be really easy to get lost in the tech and miss out on the practice.
- pasabagi 8y ago
  I guess I'm interested in 3D stuff because I feel like I'm living in the birth of a new medium, like when people discovered painting, or dance. Most people doing 3d are doing stuff you could do in another medium, like film but cheaper, or interactive. On the one hand, you're absolutely right when you say that it's largely unproductive to work outside of your speciality. On the other, I think it's a bit like painters learning to make their own frames and mix their own paints. It's not strictly necessary, but it deepens the understanding, and it opens the door to loads of stylistic discoveries. I think the thing I like about python, or programming in general as a creative technique, is the combination of amazing fine-grain control, with absurd expressiveness. The kind of techniques you learn as an artist are usually strong on one or the other. Crosshatch gives you a lot of control over light and shade, but it's a time-consuming, boilerplate kinda technique. Most traditional techniques are like that, or, like throwing paint at a wall - very expressive, but no control. Programming the creation of sculptures and images is the kind of amazing opportunity that it feels sort of crazy to pass up. I've spent an inordinate amount of time refining my ability to draw nice gradients with a set of pencils - and now I have a machine that can give me a perfect gradient with a couple of lines of code!

pfranz 8y ago

As passing knowledge is great, but focus and mastery just requires too much time (and time to maintain). Something as large as Maya or computer graphics you have to pick your battles. If you're completely independent or at a very small studio you have to be scrappy, but I think that means more of having a wide toolset, a lot of copy/paste and experimenting. You just don't have the time to master and maintain that mastery. My career has let me focus on the backend and internals. I know people way more proficient than I am with Maya, but they know little to nothing about Python or the DG (or maybe MEL). I know a few vfx sups who can cobble together a basic shell command, but aren't masters and don't know a bit of Python. It's much easier to interact with them (especially over chat/email--I can send them a command and trust them to modify paths and run it), but it's not worth their time to invest in honing those things. It's probably cheaper to fly someone from a different state to do these things for them than it is for them to spend half a day writing something to parse and edl to rename some Quicktime files or troubleshoot a bad power supply in their workstation. I've also noticed that the more technical they are, the deeper the hole they're in before they ask for help. Hopefully that means they're more productive (and are more ambitious), but it usually means I have to ask them what their original problem was, then what was the first thing they did, then the second, and unwind the situation. For the situation you described of turning buildings there are probably 5-10 completely different approaches you could take (apart from manually placing them), only a few use Python. At a moderately sized studio (on a moderately sized project), I'd reach for something like Houdini to do what you're asking and you would be hard-pressed to find someone who would use Python for this kind of thing in Houdini. On the flip side I was handed a project at a small place that was well suited for Houdini. We didn't have a license so I cobbled something together in Maya. The producers were telling me in their experience they'd hire someone who would do a project in Houdini, but later when they needed changes and that person wasn't available they'd have to hire someone to redo it in Maya. Reality is hard. My thoughts about this really clicked with photography. A lot of photographers are just technical enough. Most of the process is a black box, but they've had their camera for years, tested enough inputs and outputs that they can trust their tools to do what they want. Other photographers dig into the tech. They can't, by definition, have as much time in the field. They can tell you a lot more "why" and might be equally good or better in many respects, but it can be really easy to get lost in the tech and miss out on the practice.

pasabagi 8y ago
I guess I'm interested in 3D stuff because I feel like I'm living in the birth of a new medium, like when people discovered painting, or dance. Most people doing 3d are doing stuff you could do in another medium, like film but cheaper, or interactive. On the one hand, you're absolutely right when you say that it's largely unproductive to work outside of your speciality. On the other, I think it's a bit like painters learning to make their own frames and mix their own paints. It's not strictly necessary, but it deepens the understanding, and it opens the door to loads of stylistic discoveries. I think the thing I like about python, or programming in general as a creative technique, is the combination of amazing fine-grain control, with absurd expressiveness. The kind of techniques you learn as an artist are usually strong on one or the other. Crosshatch gives you a lot of control over light and shade, but it's a time-consuming, boilerplate kinda technique. Most traditional techniques are like that, or, like throwing paint at a wall - very expressive, but no control. Programming the creation of sculptures and images is the kind of amazing opportunity that it feels sort of crazy to pass up. I've spent an inordinate amount of time refining my ability to draw nice gradients with a set of pencils - and now I have a machine that can give me a perfect gradient with a couple of lines of code!