Quixel vs. Substance

Started by sboerner, December 15, 2019, 12:37:26 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

sboerner

Thoughts? Pros and cons?

Adobe is discounting Substance for CC subscribers through Jan. 31.

Oshyan

Depends on what you want them for and how you like to work. Trying to make original textures for your objects or other aspects of your scene? Substance is the likely best choice. Want to add objects, ground cover, or other real-world-derived textures and visual detail to your scenes (probably not mapped to an object)? Then probably Quixel. There is some overlap, especially in e.g. Quixel Mixer vs. Substance, but that is generally a fair distinction. Quixel Mixer is also primarily layer and slider-based, whereas Substance also has a heavy node component (at least for advanced stuff), so depending on how you prefer to work, you may like one vs. the other. They both have nice interactive previews and are reasonably easy to use though.

- Oshyan

sboerner

Thanks, Oshyan. That all makes sense and confirms my first impression after looking at both of them. It seems that Substance would be the way to go. We'll see. I'm going to need a lot of assets (especially rocks) for the next scene, so it might work to generate them with a script in Maya and then tweak the surfaces in Mudbox. Testing that now . . .

WAS

From what I have seen and kept track of, there are lots of resources for substance too. Lots of shaders to take a look at and play with plus tutorials.