Good enough for what? That’s the million dollar question.
You’re fairly new to the craft and are still learning the ins and outs. That’s perfectly fine. Everybody starts out somewhere. Since your question is not all that specific, I’ll ask (and answer) it from a few angles.
Is it good enough to sell? Maybe. Somebody might find value in it, especially if it saves them time. Price it right and you might find a few potential buyers. If it isn’t UVed and you’re using 3rd party textures then its sale value goes down dramatically. Potential buyers want as few hassles as possible. Asking them to UV the model themselves might be a big ask. Selling a model with textures you don’t legally own resale rights to might make it a non-starter for developers or artists looking to use your model in a commercial project. If your model is legally free of issues and is hassle free from a UV perspective then, yeah, it might be something worth buying to somebody.
Is it good enough to get you freelance work? Maybe. Nothing high paying, however. Your skills aren’t polished enough to earn you a decent enough contract. You might get a few offers from indie game developers who pay very little. If you’re willing to suffer the low pay, provided they’re not being abusive or unreasonable with what they’re asking, then such jobs are tolerable for the experience alone. Something to pad the CV and build your skills on somebody else’s dime. As you get better and your portfolio gets shinier, you’ll be able to command more money and ignore those smaller, crappier projects. Your work, at this point is good enough to get small work, but you’ll get eaten alive by the competition if you try to go for higher profile, higher paying contracts at this point. Always keep learning and growing, but never lose sight of your current limitations.
Is it good enough to get you a studio job? No. It depends, but probably not. Even for a very junior type role, I don’t think that you’re quite there… yet. I’ve looked at your ArtStation portfolio. Allow me to explain why.
- Your grasp of anatomy and proportion are still fairly weak. If you want to do character work, which is something that you place a fair degree of emphasis on in your portfolio, this is something that you need to practice a whole lot more. Pump the brakes on full blown characters for a bit. Spend more time on focused anatomical studies. Use lots of references; There are tons of great books and anatomical maquettes for sale out there. Get honest critiques as often as possible; Praise is nice, but brutal honesty is more constructive. Character work is, in many ways, the end of the anatomical sculpting journey. You sorta jumped ahead. Enthusiasm is great. You’ll need that passion. Just don’t fast forward past the fundamentals though. Mastering those key skills and disciplines will serve you a lifetime. They’ll outlive any one software or hardware platform. That’s for sure.
- I get a sense that you either might not like UVs & texturing or you’re not particularly great at those disciplines just yet. I can see this in the fact that it looks like you use procedurals and distorted textures a fair bit. There are a number of good (free) UV tutorials online that you and should study. Yes. UV work is boring and tedious, but it’s ultimately a necessary evil. Texturing is also something that you can learn and get better at too. Part of that process is just practicing and trying to get better at painting in general; Texturing and regular painting share some common skills. Another part of the process is understanding your material, what the channels do, which to use, when to use them, and how to make the most of that texture space. This requires you to learn more about the materials that you’re trying to create. Denim, for example, doesn’t look like copper, nor does it catch light in the same way. Study your sources. Practice makes perfect.
- Presentation is everything if you want to stand out from the competition. Right now, you seem to have some obvious gaps in your traditional art knowledge. Take your poses, for example. They don’t demonstrate a strong understanding of weight, silhouette, or acting. Knowing about and using something as simple as contrapposto can change your model presentation a great deal. Additionally, your lighting work doesn’t go too far beyond basic 3-point. You want to show off your models clearly, sure. However, you also want some drama too. You don’t want to have your scene be overlit like the temple. You also don’t want it to be underlit like the Haqui soldier either. 3-point can work in your favor if you know how to balance your keys and fills. Knowing where to place those shadows can keep things from feeling flat. Knowing how to color your lights can establish mood and temperature, both which can improve a piece’s overall composition. Also, work on those contact points. Your characters feel too “floaty” in their scenes and don’t touch the ground realistically, if at all. Take some reference photos of yourself or a friend in those poses. Try and match what you see.
- It’d be nice, at this stage, to also know if you have a good grasp of topology. I see that a number of your models are low poly or close to. Demonstrate that you know your edge flow and how to work within real world specs and limitations. If you want that sort of job, consider also showing off this skill.
If getting studio work is your goal then you’ve still got some way to go. You’ve got a lot of fun ideas, but the execution is lacking atm. Are you good enough for a studio job? No. Probably not. You’re getting closer with each new project, but I think that you’re still just a hair away from even getting work on mobile games. Just a hair.
Right now, you’re really getting killed on the basics. Practice your anatomy. Learn more about art & color theory. Lean basic art composition techniques like the Rule of Thirds, the Golden Spiral, & so on. Get more critiques. LOTS of them and at every stage of your process. (Critiques can sometimes hurt your ego, but improve your work if you listen to and learn from the constructive ones.) Do more focused studies instead of finished pieces, at least at this point. Use references more. Maybe even step away from the computer from time to time and pick up real world paintbrush, camera, or some clay; You’d be shocked how just messing with that stuff even a little bit can greatly strengthen your CG work.
I want to give you one last piece of advice: Your portfolio is only as strong as your weakest piece. As you start to improve and produce better work, consider retiring some of the older, more flawed stuff to an archive directory on your hard drive. The older stuff is great to pad your portfolio or reel early on, but they might stand out like a sore thumb in the worst way. You really want to show yourself off in the best possible light.
Every artist knows that a solid body of work is built on a foundation of corpses, work so terrible that you would much rather leave it for dead. It’s just not necessary to put every corpse on display for the world to see. Know what I’m saying? When the piece becomes too old or doesn’t stand toe to toe with your latest and greatest, it might be time to prune your portfolio.
Your competition won’t be showing their oldest, cringiest work. You won’t want to either. Don’t throw it away though. You’ll almost certainly want to come back to it later to see how much you’ve grown (or haven’t) or just for nostalgia’s sake. I’ve got some REALLY crappy work on my HDD from about 25+ years ago that I’d NEVER put in my modern reel. I still hang onto it… because. It’s nice to look back now and then even those the ancient pieces aren’t going to get me a new client or anything.
I really liked it
Good luck to use futher!
Such thorough feedback! Love this; I got so many takeaways!
Glad that it helped.
This is the sort of info that, in hindsight, is all pretty obvious. I think that the real takeaway here is that, to learn and grow, you need to step back once in a while to gain some perspective. When you spend hours, days, and even weeks working on project it’s all too easy to become blinded to that obvious stuff. Simple mistakes elude you. Alternate solutions aren’t explore. Putting it all into context doesn’t come to mind.
Honestly? This is why we should always seek impartial 3rd party critiques. Not every critique will be right or right for you, but having a fresh set of eyes on hand can never be wrong. Just be aware that, if you’re to grow, there’s no place for egos. Hearing that something is broken or just plain wrong always hurts on some level. However, it’s what you do with that information that matters the most.
I’ve seen some people who asked for honest critiques, got them, and then suddenly lashed out saying, “Piss off! You don’t know me. I’m a pro. This is my style.” …My response?… "Uhmm… No. Your stuff sucks for x, y, & z reasons. Here’s how to fix it. You have to master the basics before you develop a style. I also highly doubt that you’re a pro, especially with that attitude. "
That person went on and on like that for nearly 2 weeks worth of bad work. You would think that they were just a troll. However, in truth, they were just SO self-deluded and overly attached to their hard work and small accomplishments that they thought they knew better. Leonardo da Vinci himself could have beamed down from the sky with a list of critiques and they would’ve still said that he was wrong… Nature gave you two ears, but only one mouth for a reason.
Why does LukeMemonic keep posting here asking if people like his work, but never responds to people’s critiques? Is he actually looking for advice? Does he even look back at these? He has a lot of these posts and guys like you give him very detailed reviews and…crickets. The response saying how helpful it was, was actually posted by someone else!
Yeah. I don’t know.
This is not all that uncommon, tbh. Some people post the same exact comment across every known CG board in existence. Maybe they’re just looking for glowing praise or to get their name out there. Sometimes they’re just trolls looking to see if we’ll take the bait. Maybe they can’t handle honest critique or simply choose to ignore it. Whole lot of reasons why people do this thing really.
FWIW, I think that LukeMemonic is on the level in wanting to get better. It’s clear that he’s still plugging away; His last work was a month ago.
Honestly? I think that he maybe wanted praise and to be told that his work was great. Not a troll, but somebody with a sort of confirmation bias - looking for that little pat on the back to support his view of his own work. I hope that’s not the case, but his lack of response after 8 or 9 months is rather telling.
FWIW, I don’t think that this is the first time he’s done this sort of thing. I COULD be wrong, but I vaguely recall him doing this sort of hit-n-run thing numerous times on this board. Of course, I might be thinking of somebody else.
Nope, definitely him. Also the one ranting about his work being taken off of a site for being too perfect. Someone had to talk him down from that one too… His work does seem to be improving, so hopefully he is taking some criticism and working it.
No, this is not good enough. It is not a ready asset or a finished piece of art. I see you have some texturing ability and some modelling, but I’m afraid theres quite a way to go yet. For your reference, I would expect no less than this: https://laurogutiart.cgsociety.org/pieg/anubis-temple-entran
https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/military/character/russian-soldier-eb897de6-0970-4f2f-98a2-fb9699379e46 newest work I hope it’s better than before
There is not a single useful picture where you could judge this character really. You should learn how to present your material better.
Looking at your previous work i expect that this characater just works in this light, and in this screen resolution. You better don’t come closer. And why so many polys when the detail is so low?
Your motion seems speeded up and a bit choppy/unrealistic. Also, there are glitches where the character does some weird snap motions. Feels like there is some gimbal lock or something causing the motion to snap to odd positions or something. The motion is not smooth and flowing.
My initial reactions to the Russian soldier…
- Repetitive textures on the ground. I know that this is not a part of the model, but that’s a terrible way to showcase your work.
- Bad lighting. Again, not a way to present things. Making out certain details can be tricky in such flat, unflattering, & monochromatic lighting.
- Once more, not a part of the model itself, but that muzzle flash is WAY too far from the gun.
- Pose that character more believably. Yes. You need to show him off standing and such. However, you also want to sell the concept and drama. Nobody holds a 50 caliber that way. The recoil would knock him on his butt and he’d never hit his target. That’s the reason for the stand, to stabilize him. IMO, I’d show the soldier posed standing in a few ways without the weapon and then on the ground WITH the weapon.
- You tell us the poly count, but don’t show us the topology. If this is a real-time model and I were a customer, I’d need to know that it’s usable and not a mess that I’d have to retopologize and rework.
- With or without watermark, you don’t show us the textures either. No way of telling if this is UVed properly or the textures will work as-is. It could just be super simple baked procedurals. You don’t even tell us the texture size.
- The posing is such that it’s pretty clear that you don’t fully get the concept of weigh and balance just yet. Really stiff and not quite for the right reasons.
- Your choice of camera angles is terrible. As a prospective buyer, I learn very little about the model from what you show me. Go to YouTube and watch a few car commercials or highlight reels. You’re going to notice how each angle presents various key features clearly and in a positive manner. One shot may highlight the front end. Another may showcase the interior. Yet another may close in on the instrumentation. All of it is lit well, clearly and in a manner that says, “Buy me. I’m sexy.”
- It looks as if you’re working with a realistic 6-6.5 heads tall proportion. That works for some things, but can be a problem in others. It’s realistic, but hardly dramatic. That’s why game artists work with exaggerated proportions of 7.5-8 heads tall instead. It’s more “heroic” and what was standard in the days of da Vinci and so on. Also, 6-6.5 heads tall might look extra weird in VR/AR. You should test it out on that platform.
- Some weird bulkiness to some of that model. Extra bulge to that hip pouch, for example, that looks… off. Like he’s smuggling an apple in there or something. War gear or not, overall, he feels a bit puffy. It’s fine to aim for realism. However, you don’t always want to be too realistic if it hurts the drama. IRL, he might be like that - bulky. In a game, it might be more streamlined just so that his movement doesn’t look so awkward - as if he’s wearing a puffy snow suit.
Overall, apart from the model specifics, what’s killing your piece here is presentation. It’s uninformative and unflattering. You’re asking $60, but presenting it as one might a $15 model.