Get 25% discount now with the coupon EARLYBIRD. The new course: blender-secrets-school.teachable.com/p/hard-surface-subdivision-modeling The hard surface bundle ($60 discount!): blender-secrets-school.teachable.com/p/complete-hard-surface-bundle
Thank you for this. I am buying right now. I am a CAD guy (CREO 9, SolidWorks 24) and I really want to learn how to model like this. The product you are showcasing is exactlky what I have been looking for. I just wanted to make a little Mech dude to hopefully put into UE5 and then learn how to make it a playing character on a Martian surface.
I've already purchased your course, but have not gotten into it yet. Jan, not to be controversial, but two Blender teachers out there promote a Boolean and Modifier-centric (e.g., HardOps) approach to creating hard-surface models, as long as they are not intended to be animated, deformed, or destructed. This in no way diminishes the importance of learning a subD, quad-based workflow, but I wonder if you'd offer your opinion on the other workflow. Thanks!
I'm not Jan obviously, but to chime in where i'm not wanted: it's helpful to learn topology geared towards subdivision, but afterwards it is really down to you as the artist to determine how you wish to create an object. You can create using booleans and then retopologise your model afterwards if it requires it. if your object is completely static in a scene with good lighting, then it reallllllly doesnt matter. Unless you are being hired to create quad topo models then do what you must to create. You can have models with quad topo and the topo itself looks like a fucking mess. A generalist artist to my understanding doesnt concern themselves with topology, ALWAYS only the shape. give this video a watch /watch?v=yPVr4Zb62wk
@@LutherTaylor Thanks, Luther. At my age and for my purposes, it doesn't really matter, but it was something that I had been curious about. I am enormously impressed with Jan's knowledge, teaching style, and problem-solving approach. But I like the 'bros, too. ;)
I also have your sculpting course but haven't made much progress yet (the frontloaded work on brushes, alphas, maps etc have made it a little daunting so I keep putting it off!). Would this new course be a good intro to go back to the sculpting course after, or should I stick with the course I've already bought first?
Get 25% discount now with the coupon EARLYBIRD. The new course: blender-secrets-school.teachable.com/p/hard-surface-subdivision-modeling
The hard surface bundle ($60 discount!): blender-secrets-school.teachable.com/p/complete-hard-surface-bundle
Thank you! As a former engi tech well versed with CAD, this sounds exactly what i need to get comfortable using Blender.
this looks cool. on my list...for sure. been watching your vids for a while now. great content and very volumous too. thanks for creating this/
Im proud of you man 🎋🎖️🎖️🏆🏆🏆
Great work! If i only have time for this.. maybe in the future :)
looks awesome
Thank you for this. I am buying right now. I am a CAD guy (CREO 9, SolidWorks 24) and I really want to learn how to model like this. The product you are showcasing is exactlky what I have been looking for. I just wanted to make a little Mech dude to hopefully put into UE5 and then learn how to make it a playing character on a Martian surface.
I've already purchased your course, but have not gotten into it yet. Jan, not to be controversial, but two Blender teachers out there promote a Boolean and Modifier-centric (e.g., HardOps) approach to creating hard-surface models, as long as they are not intended to be animated, deformed, or destructed. This in no way diminishes the importance of learning a subD, quad-based workflow, but I wonder if you'd offer your opinion on the other workflow. Thanks!
I'm not Jan obviously, but to chime in where i'm not wanted: it's helpful to learn topology geared towards subdivision, but afterwards it is really down to you as the artist to determine how you wish to create an object. You can create using booleans and then retopologise your model afterwards if it requires it. if your object is completely static in a scene with good lighting, then it reallllllly doesnt matter. Unless you are being hired to create quad topo models then do what you must to create. You can have models with quad topo and the topo itself looks like a fucking mess. A generalist artist to my understanding doesnt concern themselves with topology, ALWAYS only the shape.
give this video a watch /watch?v=yPVr4Zb62wk
@@LutherTaylor Thanks, Luther. At my age and for my purposes, it doesn't really matter, but it was something that I had been curious about. I am enormously impressed with Jan's knowledge, teaching style, and problem-solving approach. But I like the 'bros, too. ;)
Love it!
I'm happy you didn't make a killing bot or a gun too :-)
Christmas Week is an odd time:
even sci-fi bot's legs are made out of caramel candies.
We want a discount on the book. ✌
I also have your sculpting course but haven't made much progress yet (the frontloaded work on brushes, alphas, maps etc have made it a little daunting so I keep putting it off!).
Would this new course be a good intro to go back to the sculpting course after, or should I stick with the course I've already bought first?
What course would be good for making thunderbirds ships.
Are any paid add-ons needed for the course?
And how suitable is it for making models to 3D print?
No, only "vanilla" Blender. It's mentioned in the video 🙂
I would like to 3D print the model at the end, in fact.
Cool concept art! Can I download it somewhere?
In the course :-)
Gadam amazing 🎉🎉🎉✨✨