we do not accept untextured models in this gallery?

#1

I recently submitted a work to the gallery. Surprisingly, it was declined. And here’s the reason:

  • I am sorry, but we do not accept untextured models in this gallery.

I am confused, because this is the declined work:

It is lighted and shaded, yet of course, not textured. However I do see shaded sculpture works appear in more than regular gallery but also choice gallery. Here are some examples:




and even my own shaded yet untextured work was accepted by the gallery:

They are all shaded, but not textured. I’d like to know why my work didn’t go through this time.

#2

You should put these pictures into the Work in Progress and Critique section.

#3

I think it is a stupid rule myself. It is like saying a sculpture is not worth putting in a gallery because the artist didnt paint it with acrylics.

#4

I think it’s because yours is a model, not a sculpture, like the other ones you have posted.
Maybe it will be accepted when you stand her on a podium.

#5

i wouldn’t say Stallone is supposed to be a sculpture (rock).

#6

Thanx guys for participating this discussion.

I find it interesting (not funny, but interesting). What makes it a model? and a sculpture? So if I put this geometry on a stick or a podium, then it is a sculpture, otherwise it is not? Well my Abe was in the gallery and he doesn’t have a stick or podium.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not getting angry or anything. and I definitely don’t want ppl think that I’m raising my tone here. I’m just confused.

#7

Looks like David from Michelangelo is a WIP now… lol
That’s why (and other reasons) I didn’t post in the gallery for ages.
Nothing related with CG Talk and Ballistic, but because of some moderators\forum leaders around here (sorry).

best,
-Miguel

#8

QFA. I don’t think anyone has ever walked up to a marble statue and said “hmm, yeah, that’s good and all, but you know what would really make it great?..”

#9

The thread was moved to the lower corner of the forum! Ahah, nice touch moderators! lol
Next will be what? Lock users? :slight_smile:

Thats why I prefer to move around CGportfolio…

Have a nice day,
-Miguel

#10

JackZhang - There have been some changes recently as to what is being allowed in the Galleries. The submission page is due for an update to reflect these changes.

Malanjo - GD is not a catch-all for any thread. We have different forums to help users find answers to their questions. One relates specifically to “Support” where users can ask questions directly relating to the forum or the way we run it. Which is why this thread was moved here. If you have a problem with that, go somewhere else or create your own forum where you can enjoy your our own methods of forum management. Thanks.

#11

If I ask for fairness, then looks like I have a problem? :slight_smile:

With that said son, sounds like you are doing me a favor (and to the other users) to have this forum opened! :slight_smile: Who makes the forum? You and your friends or the thousands of users with daily posts\artworks uploading? Try to talk to a wall and you will see if you will get any answers and extra stuff. :wink: Look to the list of great artists who left this forum because of stupid situations from tacky moderators. Easy to check, just open the gallery nowadays and you will have your answers.
If I pay the every years quote here, is to have perhaps a word to say and not to be invited to open a new forum (something I did, yes, years ago, before I start working daily, when I was kid).

But nice to know some rules are coming from CG Talk’s moderators, better not to be the wrong ones (like this situation with JackZhang), or we will see one more story like we saw with Game-Artist.net some days ago.

Yup, will go somewhere else (with fairness): Ballistic and CGPortfolio and Workshops and Store and Features and Events and Jobs.

Best of joy to you… managing foruns,
-Miguel

#12

The “your model isn’t textured” explanation is admittedly a little lacking. The point is that it looks like you’ve just applied a lambert shader in there with what looks like a default lighting setup. The examples you’re comparing it to have had quite a bit more work put into the presentation. The gallery is meant to be for showcase pieces, the kind of pieces you’d put on your reel. Spending just 30 minutes to put a bit of effort into the shaders, lighting and presentation goes a long way towards taking your piece from a simple modelling piece, to a showcase piece.

We’re in the process of trying to increase the overall standard of the gallery, from a free-for-all to something that’s more of an accomplishment, but without trying to get too elitist about it. I don’t personally think that asking people to put some nice finishing touches into their presentation is all that unreasonable.

#13

Well, he is definitely recognisably as a sculpture.

#14

Hiya, the General Discussions forum is not the place to post support queries, the Support forum is. Threads are moved here so that the admins and mods that can deal with support questions will see them, since myself and a few others tend to check this forum first when logging onto the site. So please don’t take it personally that it was moved here - it’s standard practice and always has been. The moderators don’t have some secret conspiracy agenda, you know :wink:

Alternatively, users are also free to contact us directly through this page: http://www.cgsociety.org/contact/ You can also use this site to contact us if you have an issue with any of the moderator’s behaviour.

Cheers.

#15

hey leigh, thanx for replying.

no I didn’t just put a lambert shading on it with default light. you might noticed that I made sure that the key and back are in good position to show the definition of the muscles. The shader is a procedure shader that I created to help the geo pick up better light.

Yet it’s ok. I got the information and I understand the recently changes and why some of the samples that i linked were in the gallery and my current one is not. Thank you for your time and understanding.

as for meleseDESIGN ,sorry dude, no comment. Looks like we aren’t on the same level.

#16

No worry, I didn’t expect a comment, just thought you did… :slight_smile:
Glad you know now what was wrong.

Good luck next time.

#17

Jack, I appreciate that the lighting had a key/fill setup (that’s actually what I mean by default lighting) and that it was something a bit more than a Lambert shader, but the more pertinent point is the difference between your latest piece and the other pieces you linked to. Your own Abe sculpture there is a great example of a simple, yet really lovely presentation - there’s some nice specularity, a hint of colour in the lighting, some sculpted textural detail, some DOF. It’s clearly a finished, showpiece quality image. You’re a talented artist, I doubt it would take you too long to do something similar with your latest model there.

#18

I took different approach. Abe was screen captured in zbrush, with multiple passes of different zbrush shaders, composed in photoshop. Helen was hardware rendered within xsi with FG/GI. I really wanted to show the form and volume of the character, along with the muscle deformations on her back. Overall I actually had more study for Helen than Abe. I was using Rubens for anatomy reference.

But yah, I totally get your point. It’s ok, it’s not like it must get in the gallery or anything. I got the answer and I have no problem with it. Thanks.

#19

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.