I'm wondering how popular 3D art is, particularly 3D art.  Pin-up too.  Are we geek basement dwellers??  :ohmy:

Depends on who you ask. 

I had a pretty good success on LiveJournal with renders. On Deviant Art and Tumblr I hardly get any response. So the audience matters. 

I don't have a basement. I am, however, mighty geeky. LOL

Laurie

Popular as far as users or viewers? I wouldn't think it would make much difference to the viewer as long as the art spoke to them on some emotional level.

As far as viewers.  It seems like there is a large enough audience on the web, but I have no idea on statistics.

renderosity, rdna, yurdigital, etc all cater to 3d viewersrotica used to get lots of non- artists , there are at least 50 'erotic art, dungeon, beasts and monster ' web sites, 3d movies are mainstream so the viewers are there.

I dont have a basement :woot:

perhaps rendo admins could post gallery hits on 3d galleries with no forum visits ?

Following Deviantart and getting the feel for it;s trends is probably a decent measure of this.

Depends on how you define art and popularity. Commercial art and illustration, there’s a huge number of print and TV ads, kiosk applications etc. using 3D that people aren’t aware or don’t really think about. Medicine, forensics, military training, education are all in there with the huge entertainment market. If you look at the 3D Warehouse, SketchUp has probably increased the production of 3D architecture tremendously. Affordable 3D scanning/printing is probably going to be another big area.

If you mean ‘fine’ art,’ ala Poser, it’s certainly growing and maybe attracting some people who might have done ‘traditional’ painting, sculpting etc. in the past, plus others who would have never gotten into art at all if it weren’t for 3D. How popular it is, either in absolute terms or relative to something else I don’t know. Bing/google may give some indication, of the number of sites and their traffic, but you can find a ton of anything on the internet. As false1 said, it also depends on whether you’re talking about users or viewers, i.e never have so few rendered so many naked Vickies for so many ÷)

That was my thought too.  There's a lot of 3D everywhere that people don't think about being 3D, from the Geico gecko to effects in movies to vehicles and ships in anime series.  We probably use it more in stills than others do but to me, that doesn't matter because 2D comics are using digital coloring (Photoshop) so that makes it at least to where its utilizing computerized tech, which is going along the same directions in a way.

Quote - That was my thought too.  There's a lot of 3D everywhere that people don't think about being 3D, from the Geico gecko to effects in movies to vehicles and ships in anime series.  We probably use it more in stills than others do but to me, that doesn't matter because 2D comics are using digital coloring (Photoshop) so that makes it at least to where its utilizing computerized tech, which is going along the same directions in a way.

And many 2D comic creators are using Poser to model figures for tradional drawing or rendering scenes to be painted over digitally.

Many comics are also using Max and Maya for buildings, backgrounds, detailed scenes and so forth.

But as to how "popular" 3d art is, as in, how many of the great unwashed use it, or even know of it, I'd guess it's as popular as rabies.

As for me, I'm not a geek, have never been a geek, and couldn't possibly ever be thought of as a geek.  Even though I know an awful lot about Daleks.  :)

I don't have a basement, either.  I used to have an attic, though.  All the kids in the family said it was the best room ever.  Full of musical instruments, toys, games, computers and so on.  What's not to like?  

It Probably depends on location as well. From the amount of content they've produced it may be that Japan has a higher per capita use of Poser than perhaps any other country. I'm imagine that's probably rooted in their love of anime, manga etc.

In terms of user interest, I think there's a cieling on how many people want to create still, art type images. The future od mass use is IMO not in galleries but in a host of other online areas, FB (bah, can't even bring myself to spell it out :-), blogs every type of website, especially virtual worlds etc. The barrier is ease of use and Poser isn't, IMO, easy enough for that type of mass uptake. I haven't looked at iClone but it may be a move in that direction. Give a dead simple way to do avatars characters etc. and I think there could be a huge growth. I think people also want movement, interaction etc., so still imagery again has its limits. The fact that so few tackle animation, even in Poser I think says that the barrier to entry both in terms of skills needed and hardware has to come down a lot. The cloud will probably begin to answer the hardware part. You don't need state of the art cinema quality, at least to start with, but a simple way to do basic animation, set up interactive characters etc. Kinect type consumer mocap may be a big help.  

Quote - Many comics are also using Max and Maya for buildings, backgrounds, detailed scenes and so forth.

But as to how "popular" 3d art is, as in, how many of the great unwashed use it, or even know of it, I'd guess it's as popular as rabies.

As for me, I'm not a geek, have never been a geek, and couldn't possibly ever be thought of as a geek.  Even though I know an awful lot about Daleks.  :)

I don't have a basement, either.  I used to have an attic, though.  All the kids in the family said it was the best room ever.  Full of musical instruments, toys, games, computers and so on.  What's not to like?  

 

 

Sorry for delay, computer was down and I was busy restoring it.

I suppose my question is a little more aimed at who views it, not necessarily actual 3D artists (or amateur hacks like myself).  :biggrin:

Well it's good to know at least 1 non-geek is into the 3D art!

For viewers, I suppose looking at the various sites and how many visitors they attract might give some indication. Sites like DeviantArt and even here may also feature photography and non-3D digital work as well, so it’s not that easy though. I’m not entirely sure how you tease out viewer interest in 3D from artist interest. Are people viewing a 3D comic because it’s 3D or because they like the story, characters etc. – if that makes any sense? How much is a specific preference for 3D and how much is the timeless preference for “good” art? The medium has been around long enough that most of the novelty factor has probably worn off and works have to stand on their own. Mr. Sparky just posted about having one of his works exhibited in a brick and mortar gallery. It would be interesting to know how much acceptance 3D is getting in that type of venue. Not to say that it would be a more valid indicator of popularity by any means.

Probably veering wildly away from the question but what is it about 3D art that would make it interesting to viewers as a distinct medium? It enables a type of ‘realistic’ imagery and the ability to create otherwise impossible or improbable images. Photography can certainly do realism and with digital techniques of photo manipulation, it can create the impossible as well. Airbrush artists were creating uncanny realism decades ago. In terms of what viewers might want to see, I’m not sure what 3D has that couldn’t be achieved in another medium. From the artist’s side OTOH, it may be entirely different. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that creating a top notch pinup with Poser is easier than doing it in airbrush – I’ll leave that judgment to artists. It’s certainly a different process though with its own advantages and drawbacks. That’s getting back to the artists choice of medium and what they’re presenting for viewers to choose from. If they create more good 3D, then the popularity of the medium will increase – not necessarily because it’s 3D. Throw in how the availability of Accessible 3D tools has coincided with the rise of the internet and the ease of online exhibition of those works, yada yada.

I go to sites like Rendo and DA just to be inspired and look at the possibities of the tools I'm working with. Not really interested in works using Maya or other highend programs, just Poser and maybe Daz, though the best work, IMO, uses a variety of other programs and utilities. I'm sure a large portion of their members are similar to me. You can see a lot 3d for 3D artists type work on those sites as well.

3D art has been around awhile but as it advances so does the work. There is probably still a novelty factor as things become more and more realistic or easier to achieve. 3D can also create hyperreality that photogs and Photoshop artists will have a harder time creating. I've seen highly stylized human figures rendered very realistically for instance. Some use nearly impossible camera angles or lens effects. There's something in those images that is fresh and new. 3D animation allows studios to achieve effects that would be cost prohibitive to attempt with traditional methods.

In the future I hope to see (and do) images that really take advantage of the unique strengths that 3D brings to the table. Viewers will respond if artists bring thier imaginations as well.

What do viewers say when they see 3d art? Do they look at it as real art or do they lump it with paint by numbers or a dot to dot? Would museums hang it on display or laugh the artist out of the building? What do viewers say? "That's beautiful or big deal, a computer did all the work".  We talk about 3d as a medium, but in my limited experience with the art world at large, I don't think I've ever heard "Ooh that is great. It's a fresco." or "Oils are the only paintings that are good" from viewers (artists may prefer using one type to another). It's more about style. "I prefer a surreal painting to a fauvist" or "I prefer modern to traditional painting" Do people say "that's not art, it's computers" (not referring to the poser vs high end apps debate here but all 3d art) or do they say "it moves me?" I think it would be great to have more 3d art printed (2d or 3d printings) and on display where the public can view it. I think there is one person who understands even remotely what 3d art is. There's a couple others who might say oh that poser stuff you do and the rest would stare blankly. It's around but perhaps people don't realize what it is so much.

Disclaimer: all sentences in quotes are for example and are not indented to be taken as fact nor do they necessarily reflect my opinions.

The medium is going to develop and mature of course. Like its “modern” counterparts, film and photography, there is room for technical development – even more so with 3D probably. I don’t know if there’s been much change in the technology of painting in some time. I’ve seen where galleries are incorporating things like holography and digital projections, the same with the theater. I imagine 3D will be incorporated in other mediums as well. I think there will always be a certain attraction to ‘hand crafted’ art as opposed to digital art, just as in some sci-fi scenarios printed books are valued not so much for their content as for something else more undefinable and I suspect something more than mere nostalgia. If an image can embody something of its creator than a painting that the artist touched, breathed on, even incorporates molecules of him may have a certain something, perhaps on a spiritual level that I'm not sure a computer generated work can match.

about a million fans of CGI that's 3D and 2D.

Games ,characters ,comics ,movies , etc etc tends to have fans.

Art mediums ,not so much.

“Art mediums, not so much.”

That suggests a question. If our definition of art is narrowed to, for lack of a better term, ‘gallery’ art, art that people seek out for itself rather than experience in all those other ways (games, movies, commercials etc.) then … How popular is traditional art? How many people visit art galleries either in the real or the virtual world? How many have art in their homes that really means something to them as opposed to being just a decoration? Answering tat still doesn’t give a measure for 3D’s popularity but in those terms, it probably doesn’t come off too badly in comparison. The interest level in art as a whole may not be that great, though I would hope I am wrong about that. It is AFAIK one of the first things to get when school budgets get tight.

I guess it's all 2D once it's rendered. :)

Quote - I guess it's all 2D once it's rendered. :)

Yeah, it's just the tools that differ.

I think Deviant Art has veered towards groups.... folks who have a similar interest... cosplay, roleplaying games, anime characters.

I think Poser/DAZ Studio type renders can be welcome to a lot of those groups.

In the Renderosity galleries I think it is a lot of artists viewing each other... rather than non-artist viewers.

I think the audience is out there for anything one posts... just, the artist is the one who has to go out and find their audience... they most likely won't come looking for you.

"I guess it's all 2D once it's rendered. :)"

LOL Good Point. Decorum bars me from another "It's all …" saying. * *

Back in the day ,Before PC's ,to find fantasy Art was not easy.
About all we had was
Heavy Metal Magazine when & if they published .
& Spencers in the Mall had posters.

Herd about Luis Royo ,Boris Vallejo from Heavy Metal Magazine.
There Art would be on the cover but they did not make comics.

Think I herd about Olivia De Berardinis in a Air Brush book.

Those are the only 3 I can think of that where famous just for being Artist.
They are the best thou.

Forgot to say you could buy there books and calendars ,of just there Art.

There where some baseball cards of diffrent Artist you could collect also.