It's amazing how little understanding some people with "a gift" for certain skills have.

I play guitar, it's easy and I enjoy it a lot. I've taught plsome friends to play it, and some of them just... don't have it in them.

Similarly,.I've always liked drawing/painting and 3d modeling. But for some reason, that part of my brain is Just not there. I just can't do visualization. I've even tried award winning books (drawing with the right side of the brain) without success.

Way back in the day I tried 3D modeling with AW maya, 3d studio max and then Blender. I WANT to convert a sphere into a nice warrior, I died to make 3d games: I had the C/C++ part covered, as well as the opengl one. But I couldn't model a trash can,.after following all tutorials and.books.

This technology solves that for us who don't have that gift. I understand that for people that can "draw the rest of the fking owl" it won't look as much, but darn, it opens a world for me.

▲

maplethorpe 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'm similar, honestly. I've spent countless hours trying to become a good drawer and a good 3D modeler, but I lack the ability to see something clearly in my mind's eye, and it feels like it's always held me back.

The thing is, I've actually worked as a 3D artist for a number of years. Some people even tell me I'm good. I suppose if that's true at all, it's because I've learned to use the computer to do the visualizing for me.

For some other artists, their process seems to be that they first picture a 'target' image in their mind, and then take steps towards that target until the target is reached. That seems impossible to me -- supernatural stuff. I almost don't believe they can really do it.

My process is closer to first finding some reference images, then taking a step in a random direction and asking whether I'm closer or further away from those references. I'm not necessarily trying to copy the references exactly, I'm just trying to match their level of quality. Then I take another random step, and check again. If you repeat this process enough times, you'll edge closer and closer to something that looks good. You'll also develop a vague sense of 'taste', around which random movements tend to produce more favourable results, and which random movements tend to produce more ugly results. It's a painful process, but it's doable.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the ability to visualize isn't a prerequisite for 3D modeling.

▲

Etherlord87 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I can agree with this. If someone has some kind of disability, like aphantasia (I don't know if it really applies here, as you can look at a reference image) then perhaps the tool is useful. The thing is, none of the examples presented in this particular AI tool are stuff that require hard 3D-related skills e.g. knowing human anatomy.

I wish I could see you struggling to model a trash can and see if maybe you didn't have too high requirements for the quality of said trash can. After all it's just taking a cylinder, insetting the top face and extruding it down, and the top you can model in the exact same way. The rest is detail that the AI tool in question is terrible at. https://i.imgur.com/xeFrgpP.gif

▲

xtracto 5 days ago | parent [-]

Hah! you should have seen me "drawing" a coffee cup that was in front of me at a drawing class: The cup was sitting there, I was seeing it and supposedly I was drawing what I saw. The teacher came and told me: Squint your eyes, draw "lights and shadows". Theoretically, I did that, but my cup just didn't look like the others haha.

The teacher then asked me for my pencil, and started doing some adjustments in my drawing. The shitty cup just became alive with some touches here and there. All I could ask was HOW ??? how did she SEE that?

The book "drawing with the right side of the brain" goes over it: A lot of who are strongly (brain) left-sided see a Cup and "abstract" away the forms, we are constatly drawing "lines" (like, drawing a sticky-figure person,a head is a circle, then body is a line, girl skirt is a triangle, etc) and just cannot actually get past that reasoning in our brain.

	▲	Etherlord87 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		I remember getting the same piece of advice from the teacher. Problem is, even before getting it, I was already applying it, being a rare kid experienced in computer graphics. The teacher was just repeating a phrase she heard somewhere, without actual competence to direct me. The way I see, and I think the way most people see, is that I have subpixels, not distributed in a square grid and small enough, too many to be able to count them - but I can see them when I close my eyes, it's somewhat similar to looking at a colored noise - something like this: https://i.imgur.com/1P3n80k.gif except you would have to display it on a ridiculously high resolution display (I don't know, 64k or maybe more) and it would represent just a small fragment of view. Of course this unordered constellation of cones can be mapped into a grid of pixel or a space on a paper, so the only problem is I can't make a measurement in my head and I need to calibrate "eye-balling" measurement to figure out where on paper should I put what I see and I deal with it typically by imagining vertical and horizontal lines to subdivide my view, and then I likewise subdivide the paper. So I don't really have a problem drawing what I see, the problem I have is the missing technique of how to use a pencil to draw what I actually want to draw. I think most people work the same way but apparently you don't?