Hot take: 3D shouldn't be treated as a backup plan. Most people only bring it in when a live shoo...

Hot take: 3D shouldn't be treated as a backup plan. Most people only bring it in when a live shoo...Hot take: 3D shouldn't be treated as a backup plan. Most people only bring it in when a live shoo...

The network for creativity

Join 1.25M professional creatives like you

Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free

Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started

Back to feedPost

Bhavesh Bhat

• Sep 15

Hot take: 3D shouldn't be treated as a backup plan. Most people only bring it in when a live shoot isn't possible, wrong season, product not ready, no budget left for the shoot day.

But it's not a substitute for photography, it's a different tool. Faster iteration, no location or single-day lock-in, works before the product even exists.

Used only as a backup, you're leaving most of what it's good for on the table.

Ferroz Productions

• 1d

Guess which 3D visual performs better.

3D Modeling 3D Rendering

Nicolette .

• 17h

the second?

Isabella Guran

pro

• 1d

Unpopular opinion: most brands are still paying five figures for photoshoots they don't need anymore. I built FROTH's entire visual identity with AI in a fraction of the time and the budget

Brand Design Creative Direction Packaging Design

Jerry Quartz

• 2d

I spent the last week challenging myself to design, brand and 3D model a minimal supplement. I experimented with compositing nodes to add a blur in some renders, which one do y'all like more?