Hello, everyone. Welcome
back to my channel. We're Cray for the realistic assets
together. So for today's video, we're going to talk about substance versus actually, I didn't think I will have
a full video about this subject again, after the videos I made previously, but it's still a subject that come up
in comments and people asking about very frequently. Then I saw this comment that made me
want to make the entire video about this again, the common sense. Hi, Jinshan I have been studying
your tutorials for weeks, and I know Mary's is a great software, but I still believe that it is possible
to achieve the same results and amount of details. Only using substance.
What makes you go back tomorrow? It is a great common Daniel and
the short answer for that is what quality each software can achieve was
not really the reason why I choose to use certain software. As a matter of fact, achieving high quality on an asset has
everything to do with the skill of the artist, not the software.
For example, remember this? I think that was my expression.
When I seen this for the first time, [inaudible] it's a time where we didn't
debate about substance versus Mari. So how do a professional visual
effects textual artists decide what software to use? The first thing you need to understand
is a professional texture artist understands that every asset is
its own unique problem solving process. I mentioned this in
a couple of videos before, but I really want to emphasize this. I get comments and requests
that made me feel like it. There is a sentiment that there
is one out summit, cloth tutorial, or leather tutorial, or metal tutorial out there that will
solve all these materials for you. For sure. That is probably
not going to happen. Those tutorials can help for sure, but you can always encounter a new leather
piece where the old way you used to do a one work and you will have to
come up with new strategies. Jeez software, no one software would do
everything for you on every asset. For example, I made two different clothing
pieces for two different characters. One is Denon, which I have down
completely instead of substance painter. I know that as long as I have
a good denim fabric tolerable, I can achieve the Cardi. I
want inside a painter only. It was easy to break up the Dannon color
using substance painter texture brush. On the other hand, when I was making
the lace material on my female bus, I know that besides
projecting the displacement, I will have to project the opacity at
the same time where Marie extremely flexible projection functions
were a great advantage. So now I want to talk about Mari and
substance painter's advantages and disadvantages. I don't want to spend too much time
on this topic because I feel like in general, my audience has a pretty
good understanding of both
software or at least one of them. If you are really going to debate about
which software is quote unquote better, then you need to at least have a
decent understanding of both of them. What is Mari famous for? For me, it is the extremely flexible and
artistic projection functions. It's ability to handle heavy
geometry, high resolution, and many UDM tiles that visual
effects production often requires. What is substance painter
famous for? For me, it is the procedure workflows and
the PBR real time. Shading recently, both softwares have improved what they
were lacking in the past substance painter, just officially added UDM
Marie added mask, baking functions, and the PBR shaders. They have become
a bit similar software than before. And for me, they are running into
the same limitations as well. Mario can handle hundreds
of UTMs at a same time. It's grateful visual effects would
action. Now we have PBR shaders too. It's great, right? But when you're
handling large assets like that, it's very unlikely. You
will use shaders at all. Turnout shaders makes everything
slower. It's very hard on your machine, especially when you are deep
into the tax return process, where you have tons of textures,
adjustments, and channels, same with substance painter. We have
UTMs. Now that is a great update, but on my personal machine, 10, four, K you dim is about reaching the point
of stopping me right in the tracks. For example, I have to fill layers
in the scene with seven 4k tiles. Every adjustment I do on a smile masks
takes about five minutes to update. I have to lower view per
resolution so I can keep working, but that means less accuracy because
I'm not looking at my final resolution while at work. I know you might say,
Hey, maybe your computer sucks. Well, this has been my experience on all my
work machines from different studios as well to summarize real time, shading texturing on high resolution, large assets takes a
lot out of your machine. None of the softwares can
just take you there like that. So what are the main aspects to consider
when you're choosing which software you're going to use to solve your problem? The first thing you have to think about
is what are the unique problems you need to solve on this specific asset, knowing what you know about
the different sectors, worse, which one should you use?
Which problem? For example, if I know the asset requires
a lot of procedural breakup, substance painter has clear advantages,
but if the asset requires super fine, accurate projection, for example,
a texture, XYZ projection, I will rather use Marie.
You see in production, make these decisions
based on production needs. You need to consider what kind of
quality you need for this asset is a background to make ground or hero.
If it's all the way in the back, you probably do not
need a high resolution. Then substance painter will be faster. You also need to consider what
is the time budget limitation? What software are you
more comfortable with? If you're just so much faster inside
Omari than substance painter that are weights, any kind of advantage desk,
substance painter can give you, then you probably should use Mari. You also have to consider
your hardware limitations. If my spaceship is 100 UDM, I probably won't bring it into painter
or at least I will have to separate the geometry into smaller groups and create
a separate painter scene for each group. If you ever worked in a
professional CG studio, you will see including
the leads and the soups. We almost never tell each
other how to do something. Maybe we do come up with
general strategy sometimes, but there can be a thousand
ways to dress a kid in. And everybody understands that
weight critique, the final look, but we don't micromanage how you
achieve the look. As long as it looks, how you supposed to it's finished
with that line and it fits into the pipeline. You can do whatever you want. I hope this video resolves
some of your questions. I'm sure this is not the last time.
We'll talk about this softwares together. I will say, give both the try
and see what works for you. That is everything I have for you
today. If you enjoy the video, give it a thumbs up and subscribe to my
channel. I will see you in the next one.
