Getting into 3D skinning

3d Has been frowned upon around here for quite sometime...There are allot of skinners here that are quite familiar with allot of the 3d programs, I see them post their work on DA and other sites..WC doesnt seem to care for 3d works..

I dont know why really, Jafo probably does...

Because no one is interface skinning with it.
--------------------------------------------------------
Ive been working in 3dsMAX with conceptual 3D WB skinning on and off for a few months now.

Conceptually its totally different than current day Wb'ing but with Per pixel frames and menus it wont be long before I can implement some pretty different and innovative ideas.  

3D Interface design is FAR more time consuming to learn and apply than 2D so I personally wouldn't think there are that many 2D artists that are competent in 3D also or we would have seen it in the skins.

However hopefully as 3D becomes more prominent more artists will delve into it..It can be daunting.  

of course its coming, or you wouldnt have started a thread about it...

this is a very interesting topic, I have a question.
Please forgive my stupidity, I'm still just a noob when it comes to skinning, especially skinning wb themes.

What does "per pixel" mean, I've seen it in skinstudio but I don't touch those areas because, well... I don't know what it means. "Per pixel" elements are obviously not required to skin wb themes, what is the advantage of per pixel gui elements and how do you implement them? I'd also love an example of a wb skin out there right now that uses per pixel gui elements.

Go ahead, say it, I'm dumb. I keep hearing about "per pixel" this & that, if I don't ask the question I think I'll go crazy!

Skinhit, bryce is still a mystery to me, you must be running a liquid cooled ultra high performance machine to run bryce and render the kind of images shown in your gallery. Crazy, awesome stuff bro!

Don't confuse 3D rendered objects with machine-rendered '3D' scenes [walls] created by the likes of Bryce, etc.  Genuine 3D modelling [such as what Dangeruss was/is into] is an altogether different animal...

Per pixel allows for smooth, unjagged corners and shadows/transparency (I think). Optix is a per pixel skin, most skins state whether they are per pixel or not in the description.

No Disrespect meant Jafo, I have seen you give an explanation more than once...I just havent paid much attention to it since I am not one of those that are familiar with 3d.... I have tried a couple programs, one that was offered free, forgot the name of it,I think I opened it ...once?..LoL, lost interest rather quickly... it is a much different world....

thanks brother...actually i'm using a Dell Dimension 4400(about 5 yrs. old now) render times are hard due to the speed of my computer, renders seem to drag...right now i'm rendering something thats been going for about 24 hours or so....either way, back to topic

yep two different animals.

Yeah 3d modeling is much harder than working with "2d" graphics. But to build a complete windowblind in 3d is nearly impossible (at least for me), that's why it's mainly used for icons. This is my try at a 3d start menu hehe

But in my case, I find max 10000 times better to use for animations in cursors.

many new skinners are working with 3d stuff nowadays. I believe DreamScene and DeskScapes are going to bring many 3d artists to WC and they'll start skinning with their 3d skills.

the reason why there aren't that many "3d" skins is because there's no real reason for it. why create anything 3d when you can only use it in 2d? basically you're adding something more complicated with no real benefit. you can't rotate a window, you can't turn buttons, etc. the ONLY benefit of using a 3d program is that you can have a uniform lighting system for reflections and the like, but just because you can model in 3d, doesn't mean you can texture in 3d, nor light it. any true 3d artist will tell you that most 3d artists work in a pipeline, where only one person does one thing. one models, one animates, one textures, one lights, etc. remember this when thinking of 3d : jack of all trades, master of none.

you can freely model a skin in 3d, but since you'll only be able to see one side of it, there is no benefit of doing it the hard way. since most people should be able to create the same effect in photoshop (3d effect, shadows, lighting, etc.), making in 3d is silly. I've personally used 3d program to create certain parts of my skins, but overall, it's unnecessary and (in my opinion) stupid to even try to make it all in 3d since you will not be able to have true 3d form. I was hoping that Vista would change that, but it seems, at least for the time being, at 2d skinning is here to stay. true 3d objects and windows just aren't possible yet.

noticed the talk about 3D and couldn't help but to comment. I've been doing 3D for awhile now and have noticed more and more 3D influence applied to skinning. Honestly it wouldn't be that hard to design a skin in 3D the issues would deal with lighting. a 2D bevel would look completely different in 3D. It's very possible but the one consideration would be the image size. Since the images in skinning are much smaller it would be very difficult to maintain the same effect as 3D. 3D is based on very high resolution and is also dependent upon it. Though polygon count would not be an issue as far as effect, the lighting would almost certainly be lost or almost lost do to lack of information in the image. Here's an example of two tanks I modeled based on ghost in the Shell. This is where i get to have most of my real fun, and loss of hair....LOL just figured I'd share, and I hope ya fig the image. Note: the female is a prepackaged model. I modeled the tanks, text and grid.

So thats what it looks like when you get rid of all the grids?..LoL

Glad you decided to stop by NW and share, knew you couldnt stay away, as I said before..3D is *Your Thing!

Looks great!

awesome, thank you DZ, yea that's a fully rendered image. spent 4 days modeling time each tank. The Tachikoma (blue) is much more complex the the Fuchikoma (Red) so i had to spend abit more effort on getting the surfaces right. All in all though i'm quite pleased with the overall outcome. pipelining poser models into a legit modeling app is a pain, but it comes out nicely if the model is setup pre scene...lol. Oh btw a perfect example of what I had mentioned about skinnin in 3D would be the text in this image. Despite being 3D it still looks flat due to lighting.

My two cents:
I do all my icons using PSP X (2D Software), I was thinking about using a 3D modeler to explore new skinning territories, but looking at 3D rendered icons found around here, I can't help but notice it doesn't look organic, if you see what I mean... it's mainly patterns applied to surfaces, or objects available in the 3D engine library that just lack this "je ne sais quoi" you can find within 2D icons (you can make them look 3D by the way, that's what I do with my IPs, as most of the skinners here).
In my point of view, with a view to achieving an organic look with 3D icons, so much work has to be put into it that I for one wouldn't create them and then given them away for free.
For information, creating an IP with 2D icons, roughly more than a hundred icons, takes me around 80 hours to complete (I like coffee, so that's okay).

So in a nutshell, I think most skinners won't do 3D icons because of the "tacky" look these icons have at the end.
That's my point of view, no offense!

Hey Aroche my man, you are using a nice IP set   but I can't help but notice the "My recent documents" is not skinned... Why? It should be here! Ahhhhh... IconPackager sometimes... well...

This is about as '3D'as I can get with PS...I do have plans to make a wb with real 3D software...whenI learn how.  

Cycoced, you mentioned they don't look organic, but i'm not quite sure what you mean. Organic is the abscence of straight rigid lines. I have made some icons for folders and such and they came out ok. I know what people mean about skinning in 3D though. It doesn't look quite right because XP is based on 2 planes. Since it's on a true zero axis the only way to get past the flat look the image would have to have multi plane surfaces or even notches so that the light would catch the varriences. Even then it would be hard to pass off. In order for 3D to look right it has to be represented in an angular fashion. Like a 3/4 view or similar. It's not impossible but I do agree in that the amount of work to achieve the effect would almost not be worth it. The patterns you're referring to might have to do with the lack of UV mapping. Alot of ppl (including myself) tend to allow procedural texturing take care of the model. Modeling is actually the easiest part of 3D design, or at least one of the easiest. I've spent many hrs and days just mapping the UV coordinates for the mesh to have a decent texture map. I'd say UV mapping is the hell of modeling. Even those tanks in my image are void of mapping. Mainly due to the fact that for them it's just not needed. something as small as icons wouldn't need mapping unless they required complex texturing such as bump mapping or even transparencies to a degree. Oh and yea IP has it's probs you're not alone...lol.

dude Braniac, that is MASSIVELY COOL! for 2D i'd say that's a really really good fake job! you'd never know!

I only have minor experience with 3D. My old job gave me a 3D course, as one of our clients is one of the only 3D animation schools over here. That course lasted a few months and wasn't very intense, but we did some funny stuff, like a burning asteroid hitting the atmosphere, an underwater scene, a bottle of coke on a table, a scorpion (or what was supposed to look like one) and a face (this being the hardest - we all created freaks that day). All types of modeling like box and spline - all of it VERY hard compared to regular 2D work in Photoshop. I'd love to dive into it further, I'd love to try Maya as I've heard it's far better than 3DS Max that I used at the course. Another issue for me is to sit down and find the time to learn it, time and practice makes you good, and I know this will take a lot of time for me to learn properly.

Thanks NW Dragon...I wouldnt know where to begin to do that with a 3D modelling app.  

NightwingDragon, what I meant by "organic" is simple: By watching an icon created in 3D, one shouldn't be able to tell it has been created with a 3D app, just like special effects in movies, hence a loads**t of bump mapping, with a LOT of triangles for the model structure and natural looking patterns. Not impossible, but too much work for icons I think, especially if you do it for free.
Nonetheless, 3D icons that achieve this are incredibly beautiful.

Let's take an exemple here, Corinthia by D. Arnaez (excellent skinner):
https://www.wincustomize.com/zoom.aspx?skinid=1556&libid=2

To me, the REG or the Control Panel icons are very nice, and are a good use of a 3D tool, but the DVD or the Folder icons look too polished, too mechanical. It may be the expected effect, but I don't care too much for this kind of cold visual. Personal view of course!   

Thats not entirely true..yes your screen is flat but u can see a 3D model in a wallpaper right? If Start menus, windows, etc are slightly angled a 3D looked can be acheived in an interface. If you dont think so.. stay tuned.

PixelPirate said it right, its the time thats needed to learn 3D apps that is the biggest obstacle, also I would think a person would benefit to be a skinner first and then learn 3D rather than established 3D artists becoming skinners.

One good use of 3D that i know of with respect to 3DMAX being used on WC are J. Aroche's Cursors. Very well done indeed.

Last thing.. Brainiac..that start menu is brilliant, you are a pure skinner in every sense of the word.

I noticed NightwingDragon talking about 2D Bevel, and it triggered something in me I wanted to discuss about: Do you guys outthere like bevel? I for one don't like this effect at all, it just doesn't look right when trying to give a 3D aspect to a 2D object. I for one use cut outs to get the desired effect, and I think it looks more real. What 2D skinning guys think about that? Should we prohibit the use of Bevel in the skinning world?   

Bevel will always have a place if used correctly.