Make a living?
murph101
Posts: 68
How do 3D artists make a living?
I have been dabbling in Carrara for several years but always towards my own ends of one project or another. I usually use a 3D piece as an intro or outro for a video project, but it's been strictly a "nice-to-have" feature. Largely, it's been a hobby, rather than a money maker.
I'm curious as to how other 3D artists make a living, and how prominently Carrara is a featured tool.
Where does one get gigs in which they can utilize their 3D skills?
If I were to expend the time and energy ramp up my Carrara skills, what kind of paying opportunities exist out there?
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
It really depends on your skill level, but most don't. For most CG artists it's pocket change, or a supplement to another income. I doubt even stonemason is making a living at this. The ones that are making a living at it are working for some big CG house like pixar.
But it depends on just what you want to do. Carrara can be used to make commercials. Carrara can be used to render pictures for print, comics, book covers, ect. Or you could use it to model and texture content. Then it;'s just a matter or rigging it in Studio.
As I said, it has a lot to do with your skill level. I've been at this for years and am still a novice at best. I can model and have made cloths for figures. But it was too frustrating for me to do regular, and I'm not that good at modeling.
I found a very informative thread on cgsociety.org in which several people working in graphics relate their experiences and opinions.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=1093330&page=1&pp=15
Actually, based on my own income vs. what a monster of an artist he is, I think he probably is. ;)
But this also depends on what your standard is for "making a living." If you can't settle for less than a hundred thousand US per year, then yes, 3d is only for the top one percent, or those with bachelors' degrees from Vancouver Film School. I am nowhere near this category but I certainly make enough to support my modest lifestyle, more than I ever made at minimum-wage or lower-echelon medical support jobs (so glad I don't do that any more!). So don't quit your day job if it's in tax accounting or dentistry and you've already got kids, but for those of us already used to a middle-class existence, this is just fine.
In my case I started out doing this as a hobby while working part-time. I couldn't get a job after college that was in my area of training, so I bounced around and ended up in a coffee shop. Then I made a couple or three very bad products and sold them for very little. Then I did some more research into the art aspects and improved my texturing somewhat, which is how I made my first product that sold well at Rendo. At that point it didn't take long for my digital income to outstrip what I was making as a grumpy barista, so I quit and did this full time.
It took two years to get to what I would consider a 'real' income. Last year was pretty good (being a PA sure helps), and I have every hope this year will be even better. Carrara... well, that's something I can't help you with. I would expect it to be harder to make a living at just that, since your possible customer base is smaller than with Poser or DAZ Studio, but I can't tell you no one does.
Well, I've been making a living at it (an excellent living at it...) for over 30 years, and here's what I can tell you:
Gone are the days when it was a fun job. When CG and visual effects were new and were blazing new ground, it was a blast to work in the field. There were a few big studios, good 3D artists were in high demand, you were doing new and innovative work, and getting paid excellent $$ for it.
But now, every single kid on this planet with a computer fancies himself a 3D artist. There are TONS of studios and freelance 3D "artists" out there who will do crappy work for peanuts. It's not fun, which is why I retired (well, semi-retired) last year. It sucks.
For someone who hopes to get into the business, good luck. You'll be competing with 136 trillion kids all over the planet with computers and free software, who have no clue what to do with it, but they call themselves artists and get people to believe them and pay them for their work.
And if you want to work for one of the big studios, forget about it. The competition is insane, and the pay isn't all that hot, and the work has become more like a sweatshop than a fun place to work. Some exceptions, of course.
Years ago I'd be encouraging people to consider working in the field, but those days are, unfortunately, gone.
But if you really want to do it, the very first thing you need to figure out is this: do you have any talent for it, or is it just something you WANT to do cuz it's fun? There are a jillion guys out there who WANT to do it cuz it's fun, but have no talent whatsoever. And talent is what's important to an employer.
For starters, Here's what Daz3d has to say about it.
And the opportunities are really quite endless due to the nature of it. My brother is lead engineer for an antonymous vehicle worth millions, and the studio that they contract to do their 3d animations are a Father and Son team using Carrara Pro!
Carrara is such a versatile suite that it lends well towards doing nearly anything you want. The hardest part being the "Coming up with ideas" part. A Daz3d artist once told me that you need to find your niche and run with it. It's amazing how many people shoot weddings for a living. With Carrara's rotoscoping abilities, this is a possible lead as a freelance. If you can add really cool 3d stuff to family videos that could easily set you apart from the competition. Website studios, even in small population areas seem to be growing nicely as well. Carrara can render directly to GIF :)
Many opportunities exist, even those that don't currently exist! lol
Good advice. Glad we have experienced experts here who can give their insights.
Good advice. Glad we have experienced experts here who can give their insights. Whew!
I just re-read the OP. He didn't say anything about wanting expert advice only.
(Joe just likes to pull on my strings and he knows I'm no expert ;) )
But I know people too! :coolhmm:
Things change, people change, markets saturate...
just to say, (as I'm Illustrator), that 3d skills are difficult to sale (not impossible, doing content and that sort of things, ) if you don't know how to draw really well... best hint to teen ageers wishing to go in the pro field is "just draw, you will open a software later..."
Absolutely true. But if you're like the vast majority of aspiring 3D "artists" out there you'll never understand that and will always think it's about playing with software. It's not. It's about art, and it's about talent. Anyone with half a brain can read a software manual and figure out how to use the software, but only a very few can make wonderful art with it.
There are some common perceptions presented in the modern world about art and talent that don't actually exist historically. That art is some 'talent' that people are 'born with' and other aren't. Yes, there is historically a recognition of outstanding talent some people are born with, but that "isn't" the historical basis art comes from. Before people get up in arms, let me explain. Art traditionally comes from craft. One would join a craft, work in that craft, and after much training and learning of the fundamentals of the tools and forms of that craft, some would excel to the point of artistic. There are a number of historic quotes which actual great artists have said 'one cannot hope to produce art until they have mastered their tools and medium.' Unfortunately I don't have links atm so this will fall into the category of hearsay but I still put it forth as a fundamental truth I personally live by.
The point is, if one has vision, the only way to express it well is to learn the tools, the medium and what one has at their disposal to present their vision. It is only after working with the tools and the medium becomes second nature that one can truly express oneself. There is a reason behind it 'needing' to be second nature for the most part. If we are struggling with trying to get something to do what we want, we can't focus on the vision itself. I guess the point is, one needs to be a great craftsman to be an artist, but not all craftsmen will become artists as it takes a level of devotion many craftsmen don't care to put forth, preferring to live a more normal life.
hmm, don't misunderstand me... I just answer to the question: "how to go into the pro area, and is it possible to make a living from 3d"... it seems to me that the most asked characteristic is the ability to draw... I wasn't answering at all about the "artistic level" by itself.
( for example, talking about two surrealist painters, dali and Magritte... dali is an extremely 'good" painter, and has an extremely accurate drawing, much more than Magritte, but I prefer definitively Magritte, for a lot of poetic and chromatics reasons...)
Nothing to misunderstand there. Beautiful explanation of taste.
I was a sketch artist through most of my youth, then venturing into painting - Watercolors and pastels, then acrylic and charcoal, then oils. My teacher turned me onto an airbrush - and I was just getting the hang of it when she unveiled a beautiful piece of alabaster. It was about 11" high, 8" wide, and 6" deep. She bought me this beautiful stone and a set of chisels with a nice chisel hammer. I've always loved sculpting with clay, etching copper and enameling, etc., but this piece of stone was different. Hard yet soft. Solid but translucent. Numerous imperfections, yet perfect! At first I was very cautious not to cause an unduly split or chip in the precious material. As my hands got used to the feel of it, my caution was replaced with splendor. That year I was 17, and the local library displayed my entire collection of works that I had done that year. Even though the naked and winged angel, flying out of her cloud was not yet finished, Ms. Menieur still wanted it in the show. I agreed. It was my dragon year. I filled the halls with drawings of dragons and women. Two things that I really like putting together. Baby ceramic Dragons, with their exaggeratedly large heads compared to their immature little dragon bodies. Their Mother glorified in a painting larger than any table - heh, my brother always gave me crap that the frame would warp, being so big - it's still hanging true in my mothers stairway! (edit - I became very proficient at stretching my own canvas. I can still perfect them - it's all about 'feel' to me - not science) There was also a large ceramic dragon head incense burner - the stick incense actually designed into the work, so that the sculpture was incomplete without them. The whispers of sweet smoke drizzling from the nostrils came from a copper etched dish underneath. Prior to the alabaster, this was my prize. The dish was etched into what I felt looked like archaic writings of prophecy about the coming of the Great Dragon - or so I told...
After the exhibit, I gave everything away with two exceptions. My mother wanted the painting and I could never part with that stone. Two years later, in college, my precious alabaster sculpture was stolen. My biggest disappointment at the time was that I hadn't finished her yet.
Funny how this discussion turned in this direction - as I was thinking about this very topic as I laid sleeplessly in bed last night. I was thinking about the demand that software users place on those who've already done a spectacular job of creating something so special - such a great set of tools from which an artist may spill fourth imagination - feeling - expression. Art is not right, nor is it wrong. It only has an opinion if the creating artist gives it one.
been drawing for 65 years - that's the short of it
now I could go on but who gives a dam
bigh, I'm not sure to understand, (my English is, mmm , very very poor...)
if you mean that beeing able to draw isn't a totally always secure position, and artistic level isn't also an always rags ro rich story, I agree, of course... all art history is claimed that...
Yes, from various things I've seen in art houses, Drawing is a fundamental skill many expect, even if there is limited expectation of drawing in the position to be filled. There are multiple long and involved reasons for this but I'll keep it short. One, drawing teaches certain skills in the way of thinking, proportion, dimension, etc... that the people involved have a measuring stick to work from, a known quantity. Two, there is a language that artists use to communicate, and drawing is part of this language so it facilitates communication. Three, the pencil/paper interface is an extremely efficient one if one has mastered it, hard to match for quick jotting of ideas in the computer space currently. All of these are temporal and therefore will probably drop in significance over time, however drawing will always in the foreseeable future perform some function in basic learning of art imo, even if it eventually moves to a computerized version for many. Some of the functions drawing provides will probably be Incorporated into other tools as they evolve but this will take time, not just for the interfaces but for the people involved who are grounded in a particular paradigm. Change like that usually doesn't happen in a given generation, it usually takes succeeding generations to move to new paradigms as they don't have quite as much invested in the old one.
None of this matters as much if one is an independent artist as the final product, and the cost to get there are really all that matter for commercial viability if one isn't trying to work within a team, particularly if one isn't trying to join a commercial house of artists.
From what I've seen, it appears that a rise in independents (in any field) is often precipitated by such a fundamental shift in paradigms that make it extremely efficient to do things different then traditional methods to the point that the independents can unseat to some extent the natural stronghold the 'old guard' have on a given field.
On a related but side note, there is always some loss when moving to new paradigms. Some historians have suggested that human memory (and some related skills) actually declined after the invention of writing since memory dropped in significance as people were able to transfer knowledge through the written medium. There are skills one learns doing mathematics manually instead of using a calculator. Over time calculators went from being banned to being required however.
I could be wrong, but what I took that to mean is that he has had that as a strong base of skills from which to draw from when creating his art.
No pun intended :p
Wow. A whole lot of fancy, high sounding stuff that I think basically misses the point.
What we're talking about is doing art and making a living at it. When you make a living at 3D, or any other art, you are doing something FOR OTHERS. You are producing stuff that others want to look at. Very simple.
And for others to want to look at what you produce, you have to speak their language and know how to tell them a story or make them feel a certain way or react a certain way. And beyond just knowing a bunch of rules, if you're going to be really good, you need to also have an inherent ability to generate awesome stuff that REALLY serves the purpose of evoking certain things in an audience. It's called TALENT. An natural ability to put things together in just the right way to make a huge impact. Nobody can teach you that.
That's why Pixar does so well, they have TALENT. That's why Disney does so well. They know how to strike a chord in audiences and speak their language and make them feel really good and tell them stories they want to hear. That's why great advertising firms do well, they know how to make their audiences want a product. And on and on.
Few people can do that. Very few. You can have every skill, know how to operate every piece of software on the planet, but fail miserably at telling a story or evoking emotions in your audience.
But a concept like that is very difficult for most hobbyists to comprehend. Many hobbyists, including many here, don't think in terms of others with what they produce, they do it for their own satisfaction. They have absolutely no concept of what it takes to evoke certain emotions in an audience, or tell a story that will have impact. Nor do they even care about any of that.
That's one reason why it is so difficult for the average hobbyist who downloads some free software and calls himself an artist to actually cross that bridge to becoming a great, or even good, commercial artist.
But nobody wants to hear that, so I'm sure I'll get trounced once again.
Some valid points. I agree making what one is producing relevant to the audience is key to producing something that is marketable. Van Gogh's work was not relevant to his audience, thus his lack of marketability. His vision was one that wasn't appreciated till a later audience who could appreciate it came along, by then.. he was dead. So yes, there is a difference between creating something and making a living at it there for starters. As for nobody being able to teach one that, I have to disagree on that. The real issue often is that the thing that draws someone to art is often not in line with what makes something relevant market wise. Without specifically dealing with those issues, one probably won't succeed in the marketplace.
Select whatever you want to watch later... but for now, pick "The Daily Dose" playlist from the right side of the page and watch some of these! This is Project Dogwaffle! We sell it at Daz3d Right HERE! and some of those videos are taken using the $5 software on the Daz page! I know this has very little to do with the OP, except that it totally expands the horizon to what can be done. One of the developers is an avid Carrara user. I find it amazing how well a person can oil paint right on the computer with this. The more Dialy Doses you watch, the more you discover about what can be done with it. The other developer does really nice hand-drawn comics - even animated cartoons, as you'll see if you watch a few of them.
I just pulled out my nearly unused Wacom Graphics tablet today to make sure I could still find it - so I have it when my new software arrives! (waiting on some cash!)
Several local television stations around here are looking for people talented in the field of 3d digital graphics and animation. Also web page studios. Miles from here (but thousands of miles closer than a few years ago) there are satellite studios of major game companies hiring as well. Look slightly in another direction and you can find work for advertising agencies. Of course I'm not an expert in the field, so please, take my words for the nothing that they're worth. ;)
Or you can use the free MyPaint, if you're a sketcher with a tablet but not yet ready to invest in something like DogWaffle. (I mostly use the GIMP, but something like one of these really is better if you like to oil paint or pencil sketch on the computer.) There are ways in which a tablet stylus is infinitely more versatile than a pencil even if it doesn't have the traditional feel. True, pencils are much cheaper, but a decent tablet is easier to get and cheaper than ever before, and a beautiful picture doesn't have to be ruined by eraser smudges because you were feeling your way toward a concept (we've all done that at some point, surely).
I like Gimp too.
if you want to see what I do ( don't have 25 years before ) - first page has link to two videos -
http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/212/
He does awesome stuff huh! I like his thread in the animations forum, too! Frickin' great artist!
A perfect example...
For anyone who has followed this forum for any amount of time, answer this question:
How often have there been threads where the folks here have discussed how best to design their images/animations to have a maximum impact on viewers? Or how to convey a particular feeling or emotion? Or how best to tell a story?
Answer: NEVER
On the other hand, how many times have there been discussions of software? Usually a "my software is better than your software", like one that's going on right now. Or a "how do I make this happen with software"?
Answer: Every freakin' day.
Most hobbyists like to play with software, plain and simple. So if any hobbyist is truly considering getting paid for their work, they need to have a complete change in mindset if they are to succeed.
And that doesn't mean spending hours and days finding that perfect GI setting so you can produce what looks like a photograph of a kitchen table. Because in the real world, show that to an average person and they'll say "Great. A photo of a kitchen table. So what?", and toss it on the floor.
Instead, as Celmar suggests, learn how to communicate beautiful concepts to viewers with the simplest and most elegant brushstrokes.
I've been involved in some such discussions which are mostly lost to deleted PM discussions. I get a lot of personal messages here, and my friends and I discuss everything under the sun - even stuff that may seem to others to have no point whatsoever other than to have a conversation. Thank goodness most people are patient - as I have plenty going on away from the digital universe. I'm really active here right now, but I'll often times just drop off the face of the internet for months.
Art is heavily embedded into the family I grew up with. I've made it very open to my children - who I've adopted - but they certainly are not bitten with the same bug as I have been. My baby Sister conducts group classes teaching folks how to use the left side of their brain for art. She is amazingly effective at teaching people who have apparently no talent at all, to being able to paint a decent portrait of their spouse or pet, a still life, etc., We all sing and play some sort of instrument - and we are all artists. It's like... built in.
Such a childhood certainly gives a person an advantage towards looking for a career in art, I'd imagine, compared to those who would need to learn concept of art as an adult. But humans all have a fascinating ability to switch modes - if the ambition is there - with extreme success. But such situations are rare as people often follow patterns of what others around them are doing. I grew up in the middle of a forested wildlife preserve - away from society - so I have a more difficult time in the pace of a big city.
Ooops. Off on a tangent again. Do I hit submit or back? Oh well, here goes...
You won't see those discussions. Guaranteed. Well, unless someone decides they want to prove me wrong and starts one...
People here don't care about that stuff. They just don't. Not a bad thing, just the way it is. And there's no need for anyone to try to prove they're NOT that way if indeed they are. Accept it and move on.
I've tried 345,463 times in this forum to steer discussions away from "how do I do this with software" and towards using artistic skills and learning instead of dragging and dropping, but all I've ever gotten was anger. It's just not what people are interested in.
Typically those discussions end up with something like "Well I/he/she thinks it's awesome, and that's all that matters". Not real conducive to discussing how your work affects viewers.
Seems like many here just care about how soon DAZ will do whatever they want them to do with Carrara.
For the original poster, getting into the VFX/CG/Animation biz is getting as bad as getting into radio which has been my main livelihood since 1972. Radio is imploding right now with the big companies letting more and more people go and slashing salaries. They grew too big and incurred billions in debt for all the consolidation that went on since 1996 (not all companies but a couple of the big ones) and the advertising revenue isn't big enough to save them. The biggest overhead at radio stations is people. Sounds like it's almost the same at the VFX companies. Rhythm & Hues filed for bankruptcy and cut loose a ton of folks who won't be getting a last check as well. And they are up for Oscars!!
This podcast explains things about the biz many don't know. Joe, throw in your two cents here, but you already setup the groundwork for this earlier in the thread. This is an interview with Scott Ross who "had a hand" in ILM and Digital Domain.
http://www.fxguide.com/fxpodcasts/checking_in_with_scott_ross/
Sounds like if you want to make any money in the CG biz, you better create some IP - Intellectual Property - something you can copyright and trademark and own. So best to learn how not to treat this as a hobby and do what Joe suggests.
Can I jump in and ask what if I love making 3D models, I make renders non stop almost everyday take time off every now and then I find this fun, how hard would it be to make 7200 a year selling renders and models? What would be the best way to go about doing it, and yes I skimmed through reading some things, but I have been wanting to ask this for a while, I figure I should just ask here instead of somewhere else. Also do you think it would possible to make more then that a year. Sorry for bugging anyone 8-/
Easier with models than renders. Rendering you're competing with every artist out there who does the same, and only the top 5 or 10% will make a living at it. Selling models you instead have those people as customers, since some of them don't model. This is not advice you need if you're already in joelgecko and mattymanx's league, of course. ;)
If you want to sell your models, you need to choose a platform (plain objs, fbx files for Maya, DS props, poser props, carrara, etc.) and find out what you need to do as workup for that platform. It's a little different for each one, and there are people who do more than one (such as VanishingPoint over at Rendo). Once you've chosen a platform and gotten proficient at workup for it, start offering to markets and see if your work sells and what feedback you get.
Your renders are still very important because they are what sells your mesh product, and the better those renders are in the chosen platform, the more product you will sell.