3 ms·
> AI is a tool and is not going to replace artists any time soon. It has for my personal projects. I used to hire freelance designers often. I see no need anym
by kypro 3y ago
> AI is a tool and is not going to replace artists any time soon.
It has for my personal projects. I used to hire freelance designers often. I see no need anymore.
> Proper 3D art generators don't even exist yet. The ones that do are useless toys. We aren't even close to generators that can output anything even close to what a beginner 3D artist can produce.
Disagree, unless you believe we weren't that close to good 2D art generators a few years ago. Maybe 3D is different, but things can move surprisingly fast.
> And yes - it will make sense to physically draw stuff, because it's a much better way to tell the AI what to do.
Is that drawing? I write music as a hobby. If you told me I could strum some chords and give a model a rough beat and it would produce music 10x better and a 10,000x faster than myself I'd just stop doing it. What's the point? It's the complexity that makes it interesting, not the output. I'm guessing the fun part of being an artist isn't creating the rough initial sketches, but the complexity of getting the exact shadings and fine details perfect. Perhaps some people view it differently though.
- zirgs 3y ago3D models are a lot more complicated. You need to generate models, materials and textures separately. Need to split the model in separate parts that make sense. Need to know where to use spline meshes, where to use instancing, how to group meshes and so on. Also which format to pick? Gltf is a good choice, I guess. But it's pretty limited compared to formats like .blend or .max. One of my favourite examples is a clockwork mechanism. Current 2D AIs always generate complete nonsense, because they have no idea how a clockwork mechanism works. A much more advanced model is required for something like that and it currently doesn't exist. A model like that is the bare minimum for 3D.