Why 3D Artists Choose Substance Over Blender

[@TheFitnessAcademy569]

The fact that blender is being compared to other studio level paid software is a testament to how good it is, plus it's free

[@soundsbeard]

cheese in a rat trap is free. blender is open source

[@mousesunset]

Blender is open source, so when something really specific needed to be added to the software, you either make an add-on popular enough to be added or just wait for it which may took years since the Blender devs got paid based on donations or other software developments.

[@prohdusah]

its not tho. substance you just drop the item in and bake in no time. blender you have to jump through hoops setting up nodes every single time.

[@mattm7426]

So I substance if you use any Adobe program

[@3dMistri]

Actually blender should not compete with substance painter but try to built a strong bridge with armor paint so that flawless transfer of data can be achieved in these two softwares. Even Armor paint support importing of .blend directly, no need of fbx export.same things should be done for photo-editing with Krita and blender.

[@jostasizzi818]

Agreed

[@mixchief]

I don’t disagree with tightening connectivity with Armor and Krita. But I think it should continue to compete with Substance in that, it already has the foundational building blocks for proper texture painting. It only needs to improve layer handling and make it more like Substance/PS.

[@3dMistri]

@@mixchief bro, it is not just about texture painting today but it needs to be developed constantly and a robust engine will be needed to optimize hundreds of different maps and it will require a complete mindset but yes blender should have some functionality to it.

[@snakebebop]

Substance Painter is too busy to care, they're competing with Mari

[@marcuscisneros8528]

Blender with Layer Painter and Extreme PBR addons are killer

[@LadyHolyKnight]

There's another addon now: Ucupaint

[@deastman2]

You can’t really make this comparison without also considering that Substance Painter comes bundled with Substance Designer for a much more powerful procedural node based texturing approach and that those procedural textures can be loaded into Painter. And Substance Sampler, formerly Alchemy, for easy processing of photographic sources into PBR materials which again can be painted onto your meshes with Painter.

[@joseph.cotter]

While I respect your videos and appreciate your putting them out, I have to respectfully disagree with this one. The first issue is the idea that Nodes have replaced direct painting. That simply isn't the case. While Nodes are the current darling by many content creators right now, it has by no means replaced direct painting. Furthermore the two are not exclusive of each other. One can direct paint and incorporate that texture into a node setup easily. The second issue is comparing Painter to Nodes. This is fundamentally incorrect. Nodes would properly be compared to Substance Designer. Finally, to properly compare Substance Painter with Blender's built in options is unfairly handicapping Blender as one of Blender's main strengths is it's plugin architecture. Ignoring this is a bit disingenuous. To properly compare the two, one would (again, in my opinion) have to include plugins such as Ravage, PBR Painter, Layer Painter, etc... Now to really put a nail in it. we have new plugins that highlight the very strength of the nature of Blender's plugin nature. Texturing addons like Fluid Painter, Everpaint and Deltaflow which bring in whole new concepts of texturing that are not possible in Substance programs. These addons are only the start of a new way of working that the Blender environment provides that traditional software development products like Substance will find it hard if not impossible to keep up with. Am I saying ditch Substance? No, different people will have different needs and Substance provides an environment that is suited for many people's needs, especially when combined with some of the new options coming out in Blender. My simple point is, a true comparison can't realistically be made without incorporating these factors.

[@chasingdaydreams2788]

I hate the whole "you cant compare these softwares because they are fundamentally different" argument because it totally misses the point of why they are being compared in the first place. A person getting into a texturing wants to know what software he should use to get the BEST possible result on his model. So OFCOURSE he is going to compare 2 texturing tools regardless of the fact they use two different methods of approach. All he cares about is which achieves his vision the closest.

[@eligijuspranskunas3509]

I started using "3D coat textura" it's a brilliant sofware and most important that you paid once and own it forever.

[@Meteotrance]

It have a very good bridge between blender and 3D coat this thing also have very good retopology tool, it's a mix between zbrush and substance, but as a pbr generative tool substance is more power full and work very fast, but people should have an eye on 3Dcoat it's a very good tool.

[@josephbrandenburg4373]

Thanks for the heads up. I feel better giving money to some Ukranians than to Adobe, especially becauselife is so hard over there right now.... but I'd give money directly to Vladimir Putin instead of Adobe. 😂 ... I actually have a permanent version of Substance, I donno if you can still get it permanent on Steam, but I did a few years ago. Still haven't used it much because I feel so dirty using anything Adobe. But I mean to try soon, since it works pretty well. Fortunately I don't have to do much texturing in my work.

[@tarosetantu868]

Comparing Substance post Adobe buyouts pricing with Blender makes it a no contest imo. Substance painter used to be great when it was a $30 lifetime license. Now it's hundreds a month completely pricing people like me out of it. And all that for only slightly better performance and a pre filled texture library. I'll take the free open source option that I can tune with plug-ins and make my own modules for any day over another Adobe buyout snatch away.

[@gurratell7326]

I'm a professional that work with both Blender and Sustance Painter, and I do really prefer Blender because of those nodes. Nodes will always be WAY more powerful than layers. I do use Substance Painter sometimes but I often feel that the layers are quite limiting and have to do quite quirky and clunky solutions for something that would have been a breeze with nodes. Another BIG benefit with nodes in Blender is that they are WAY faster to calculate. I mean if you ever had a big project with many layers in Substance Painter you'll know how very extremely and sluggish slow it can be when doing just about anything, while if you have Cycles running with shitloads of nodes it will update and calculate it quite fast (just don't use Eevee, that shader compilation is just hell) while also being 100% representative to how it will look in it's final form, while SP is using a rasterized engine that when using shadows (which you should since it do look a bit more like it should) it will be quite slow to update if you change your camera view, while also still not looking completely right with especially metals. Also if you're doing doing your rendering directly in Blender you don't even need to do any UVs at all for some types of objects which is a big plus. But sure, the painting it self in Substance Painter might be faster to set up and use, and the baking of AO, positions, curvature etc is quite fast and handy as well, and also SP have a simple but oh so powerful blur filter which Blender unfortunately is still missing. All in all I very much prefer Blenders node based texturing, but I still use Painter sometimes at work for the simple reason that most people there know it, so if anyone would have to take over my stuff for some reason it will be much easier for them to do so.

[@MaheerKibria]

Professional or not you seem to have some misunderstanding about layers vs nodes, and about substance in general. They are 2 very differnt solutions to 2 very different problems and are meant to be used together not exclusively. Kind of like how poly modeling, procedureal modeling and sculpting serve different purposes and you would usually use them together. Node-based is basically a nice way of saying programatically. The good thing about programmatically is it's a adaptive and can be reused and changed relatively easily. But the downside of programatic is you give up fine control. There are limitations to programing languages in terms of ease as well and the fact that not all things can be described with functions. Layers are a way to do stuff with non destructive fine control. Basically a way to tweak. Next Subsance is a suite though apparently the internet and pros forget this and a node based suite at that. Substance designer is a procedurel material authoring system that is node based like blender's nodes. While painter is their layer based software for finalizing. The intended workflow is to use substance designer to author node based materials with exposed parameters. You then use layers of materials with masks to quickly get 90% done and then do refinment layers to tweak it to your vision. Next Substance is neither Raster or Raytracing it is both. It is common to use the iray which is ray traced renderer when authoring a material. It is also common to use iray to preview your final texturing before exporting it.

[@VJK102]

​@MaheerKibria I'm no pro, but what you described seems just like blender's workflow to me; Design the materials on the nodes, paint them on the model, refine the final texture... All of it can be done practically the same on Blender's pipeline.

[@rowerowynomada2158]

and how to export material from blender to Unreal Engine 5? Substance has no problem with that.

[@gurratell7326]

@@MaheerKibria There's no misunderstanding. Nodes are WAY more powerful and flexible than layers. Sure Blender and it's approach to adding paintable textures and also exporting to PBR textures could definitely be better, but as a concept nodes really are superior to layers.

[@hound_of_justice]

I simply love Substance for what it is, how powerful and easy it is to use it. Also it is not on the pricey side of expense. I do pretty much always recommend Substance unless for filmmaking where Mari imo is the choice number 1.

[@pv8685]

great video! one thing you maybe have included is, that it is easy to bake the textures in blender. that would eliminate the need of more computing power but comes with the downside that you can not ajust much after it is baked to a texture. but thats really a minor thing.

[@agauerm]

I have watched another comparison showing that blender can achieve the exact same results as SP, it's just a different workflow. I prefer the free option.

[@visualstoryteller6158]

Make more of this format. other thing that blender is capable of n other industry standard software tht do it better or worse. Like why people use that. For rigging, animation, comp, why ppl use x over blender. Wht it lack. In tht way blender community/developers can get genuine micro aspect of workflow feedback of artist. Tht way in blender 5 i hope it becomes best alternative with minimal weakness for mass n highend adoption.

[@nosirve9458]

you should do a video about blender fund and why people should donate to blender

[@fotistsantilas39]

Only problem I found with painter is it needs a uved mesh to work with and adding a lot of layers makes it slow ,procedurals take time to render realtime. Blender lacks presets though and takes sometime to get used to but both are cool apps . Nice vids bw keep em coming .

[@AyushBakshi]

Hey, they introduced AutoUnwrap in painter. You can import anything and just start painting. The UV will not be top notch but once you are done painting on bad UVs you can always fix the UVs yourself (if needed) and import it again and paintwork will be projected onto the mesh with new UVs as long as it's scaled and placed same as the initial imported mesh (auto UVs)

[@fotistsantilas39]

@@AyushBakshi Glad it was added , can you use vertex information, procedural selections etc and mask selections and areas.

[@anonymouxx9261]

Then there's Blender + Substance Painter, using these two together makes the artist truly happy and get the desired results :D

[@Tay66455]

I like Substance 3D + Mixer

[@fumier21]

TLDR : you can achieve similar results in both softwares, it just takes more time and effort in Blender

[@buda3d2007]

Have to disagree, painting straight on 3D surfaces was done mainly through bodypaint inside of cinema 4d for almost a decade before substance, but the use of curve maps etc for procedurally generated effects was what made substance what it is now.

[@DileepNow]

The good about blender is multiple UVs. The bad is baking PBR textures in Blender is a too time consuming unless you are using some addons.

[@MaheerKibria]

3D artists don't choose substance over blender. Just Like they don't choose Substance over Maya or 3DMax or Cinema 4D. They choose Substance in addition to those software.

[@salomon_gutierrez]

How much does Substance compare to 3D Coat though? And also, why would you say Substance took over the texture painting scene when 3D Coat, AFAIK, had very similar features at the time?

[@AyushBakshi]

I hope internal UV tools in blender get some love. I transferred my modelling to blender but cursed a little during UVing. Maya's UV feature are a breeze.

[@vivoslibertos]

Errrrr why you compare 3d modeling/animation/vfx software to texturing software? AT least try compare apple to apple like mari to 3D coat to subcribe painter? Or blender texturing node to armor paint?

[@wiktoru3430]

It's obvious, Blender is a basic tool that sometimes needs to be supplemented with external ones. Other programs do this too. It's nice that you can paint something in Blender, but if you want more, SP is a good choice.

[@michaelperrigo]

You just convinced me to get Substance.

[@ivan-_-8577]

A couple of questions. How to merge layers in Substance? How to hide unnecessary geometry if you did not foresee in advance (in blender) that it would interfere with you? How to use pen sensitivity without using Windows Ink (because Windows Ink does not allow you to use the tablet properly). These are fairly basic questions, without which texturing turns into a BDSM session. I guess I'll continue working in the blender.

[@fingfufar9878]

You don't need to merge the layers in substance painter my friend, when you export, it'll export all the layers as on texture, it the tablet question about Substance Painter? Tbh, unless it's hand painted style of textures, you don't n the to manually paint that much for realistic textures, as it's all based on generators and such, and the little manual painting needed can be done with the mouse, I hope this was helpful!

[@ivan-_-8577]

@@fingfufar9878 unfortunately, it's not so helpful for me, because if i need something, i need it.

[@screwdriver1337]

@@ivan-_-8577 turn on windows ink when using painter, then turn it off after you're done. I have an XP-pen and don't use windows ink when using it normally, but have no choice in painter, and it doesn't break usability at all

[@ivan-_-8577]

@@screwdriver1337 I created a separate profile for this program in the Wacom driver. This helped partially solve the problem and works automatically. But we still cannot merge layers and hide polygons.

[@screwdriver1337]

@@ivan-_-8577 you don't need to merge layers in this program. It's not like photoshop, ehre every action is recorded and can be reversed, and merging properties of several layers as well as their masks is much more complicated than merging pixels in photoshop. If you have too many layers you can try to learn how to create less of them and make every layer do more stuff instead of having a new layer for every brushstroke:) Hiding objects is not as easy, but you can change the mesh during the process. You can upload a whole model, make some textures, then remove the part of the model in the 3d editor and reimport the model again, paint on the parts you couldn't see, then reimport the whole model again.

[@Meteotrance]

Blender Can do almost anything, with node but it's a slow process and when we need to tranform a photo to texture or generate complex procedural layers of textures, it became less efficient. Substance suite is fast and made for textures, that's is main purpose, same thing for zbrush, it's a very high detail sculpt tool with a voxel virtualiser, that can manage more polygon than a graphic card could handle, sure we have metaballs and geometry node , but it's performance is limited by the hardware and it's not a fast process, you cant compare zsphere with metaballs because it's not posable, you can't do radial array symetry sculpt with blender.

[@88RunnerBlade]

I think this is a fair comparison when doing texturing from scratch, but most people use done materials and textures which the Blender community is producing on a daily basis.

[@richeskokoti1235]

Model in blender, texture in substance . Nodes are so annoying. They have their advantages but are very tedious. If I get a better machine I will try substance. For now gonna be fighting blender in an arena.

[@chaosordeal294]

Guitar is better than piano because I wanted guitar sounds.

[@BYfilms_pubs_annonces_web]

Quixel suite with Blender !!!

[@Wenedi]

comparison videos be like: - shits on one software for the entire runtime - ends with "At the end of the day, they are both great" 💀

[@bUildYT]

amazing!

[@1Chitus]

I hope Blender improves the 3D painting tools in the near future. It would make the creative process even more enjoyable! 🎨✨

[@eduardosanchezbarrios5810]

I hope blender improve the 3d painting tools in the near future

[@lightdark4340]

Node setup in Blender is tedious, Bake in Blender is slower.

[@devriv8983]

9:52 🤣😆🤣

[@Azazeel._]

Subtance painter have more control, more advance, more tools thats specified for texturing, smart material is useful ofc, not just making texture but also optimize it But thats also its weakness compare with blender, more controls equal with complicated And there is a last reason why subtance still better than blender for texturing Its "Industry Standard"

[@charredorphan779]

they not just choosing substance. any person without masochistic tendencies will chose ANY other texturing software over what blender offers cus what blender offers is shit beyond what should be possible. (in texturing that is) Substance painter/designer quixel mari 3dcoat textura armor paint. ALL OF them are supirior in any aspect that blender can offer with its texturing. Not only that all of them but mari are either cheap af or free completely. So not using the alternative is either lazyness or well i said what in the begining. If you start comparing the softwares themself however there is no one better then the other. Substance is best at material texturing 3dcoat is best at handpainting texturing mari is best when you are madshit insane and want to use 32 udims 8K resolution each and not expirience any lag whatsoever. armor paint is just a free upgrade to what blender offers. ( at least last time i checked. ) quixel is a huge library of presets to QUICKLy make something DECENT. In short Choose your tools. blender is a swiss knife but no swiss knife is better then the purpusfully made tool with for a s[ecific task.

[@khalatelomara]

Blender has one unique power that no other software has , which is integrity , all its tools interconnected and every value has a meaning that corresponds to other tool , for example in math node if you have a value of 1 , that means for displacment 1 meter , and it means for lighting 1 W , and when you translate keyframes it means 1 keyframe , or 1 UV tile , or 1 meter for brick texture width or length and the list goes on everywhere , this kind of integrity let me throw any other software out of the window , substance of course does better in few areas , but when it comes to reality that you have to bake the texture in order to use it , that's a complete failure compared to blender procedural system , that all under control and all up to date , no sad baking specially for architects who doesn't even bother about clean UV 😅 if it show that material good then it is , but for painting blender still sleeping in the department for no reason , enough to say no layers 😓 but with procedrualism in blender you can achieve anything you want easily , aside that we have addons that can do magic 😀

[@khalatelomara]

@Red_Paper6495 yes unlike blender it is doing very very impressive procedural materials that are natively working no export no useless pipline shenanigans

[@arthurprather6720]

@Red_Paper6495 Yes! Way better than throwing money away.

[@arthurprather6720]

@Red_Paper6495 There is no need for intrusive responses about my mother. I'm sorry if the context of "throwing money away..." has offended you. Clearly, you have no idea what my intended context was. I have been using Painter Since 2015 and have owned 4 perpetual licenses, Yes its a good software but that was back then. I can assure you, i would rather invest in Blender over Substance Painter and you should too.

[@mikerusby]

not really a fair comparison. susbstance painter is just good for one thing, ie painting textures/materials Its like trying to compare max with substance

[@adekobpromaxultra6941]

I used blender layer texture paint. and it is the copy of subsPainter.

[@AmritSingh-ot2qt]

Substance painter vs quixel mixer..

[@DXPL1C4T3]

I say this with kindness and respect, but this analysis honestly misses the mark. The idea of "which of these is better" not at all the right way to approach using them. Moreover, it's about knowing which is the right tool to use for the job and how can you use these tools together. The really amazing thing about substance painter is that it allows you to make materials/textures/maps with a bunch of different materials that you can bake down into one map for a model. This is especially convenient for models that have a bunch of different kind of materials put together (i.e. characters) and models that need those painterly/hand crafter edits. But for objects that require a more procedural workflow or have more conventionally simple surfacing (i.e. product designs, statues, ECT.) Substance Painter isn't necessary. More importantly, Substance Painter isn't just going to completely circumvent texturing and material development in your general purpose 3D software. In the simplest regard, now matter how good you may make something while texturing, you won't know how it looks in the scene until you start doing more final layout. And when you get to that point, there are likely things you're gonna want to change. Maybe you have a closeup on a popcorn ceiling and you need to get more sharpness and grit from the texture. It would be extremely cumbersome to have to bounce back and forth between Substance Painter and Blender (or whatever general purpose 3D package you're using) and reporting that model and their texture again and again. It's far easier to just natively go in and edit the texture in blender afterwards and making smaller granular adjustments for the shot. Maybe you want to increase the coarseness of the surface. Just edit the influence of the displacement, bump/height. Maybe you want to quickly at a little bit of color variation. Add in a noise texture mixed with the base diffuse and some other colors mixed in. My point is that as great as tools like Substance Painter is (and you absolute should use them especially if it will significantly help your workflow), you will never in no way completely circumvent the node based workflow especially in high end texture editing. That doesn't mean that you have to be a God amongst men making insane procedural materials entirely based on nodes. Far from it. But you have to have the basic skills of still being able to make small adjustments to your texture maps after import

[@ajhanaimu2343]

answering the title : They don't.

[@NevilTan]

what I understand from this videos explanation is Substance Painter is suitable for lower brain capacity that cant understand nodes and math and The blender for smart people. Did I get it I right?

[@Fasimedes]

Hate nodes...

[@coddy212thcommanderorang8]

hey Inspiration while yes it for now impossible to use blender on ps and xbox consoles is there any possibility for that in the future ?

[@エレダー]

blender is already enough to do it work already, hence in subtance painter, you don't pay subcription only but also pay by your RAM, Jesus Christ, blender 900M, Substance from 2G5 to 8G, good luck, if you don't have those 20% chance to crash and when crash it does not save your progress, good luck firends

[@Lavonne1]

This channel has some strong clickbait. Here is an idea. Is Maya Better than Blender. Then point out obvious things about both programs. Then get a ton views from people that will argue or disagree. Asking questions. Most of the time these videos don't really offer anything of value. The problem is other than the obvious is you are wasting people's time. Which is just evil. Whenever you see ?! In the title block the channel

[@WalidART]

I personally have benefited a lot from this channel, and I continue to benefit from it. There are many artists who have benefited from the information provided by InspirationTuts, and it is also a leading channel in this field. Your thinking is incorrect.🤏

[@MrChupalok]

All features you'ved shared are booth software that is an already in 3dmax 😂.

[@Tertion]

I have a love/hate relationship with Substance...and I have a hate/love relationship with Blender's texturing tools 😅. I recently switched to Blender because I realised that I was not really using hand painting that much...to a point where it was not worth the subscription cost...

[@williamcousert]

Substance Painter costs $600 per year, per seat. Blender is free. I think I'll stick with Blender.

[@AbhiMoz]

one time lifetime payment on steam

[@NicCrimson]

@@AbhiMoz But does it get updates?

[@RanDom-y8r5i]

🏴‍☠️ 😉

[@williamcousert]

@@NicCrimson Free updates only until the end of 2023, which is only a little over three months away at this point. It also doesn't have access to the Assets library. I'll stick with Blender.

[@edenassos]

Reeking of poor. I'm pretty sure you don't make anything worth showing in the first place.

[@Gameboy-2000]

Substance lost the charm after Adobe brought.

[@Niko_3D]

Substance in right hands is much better than Blender, blender is free though and one of main reasons why it falls behind substance, it lacks layers and proper material workflow. Using blender for PBR in lets say game industry is like taking a gun and shooting yourself in right hand and then trying to work fast... it's not going to happen. I am not saying it's a bad software I actually love it and my entire channel is pretty much based around blender. But when it comes to deadlines and AA or AAA production and fast/none-destructive workflow blender can't compare.

[@jax1877]

These bullshit comparisons never end ffs

[@definitelynotnick2454]

The speech patterns are very distraction.

[@mikethespike7579]

Comparing a free open source software packet to a pricey industrial standard packet? Really? I'm sorry, but I can't help saying, this is a stupid and utterly useless comparison. It's like comparing a VW Beetle to a Lambo. If you're working for a company you will use whatever software that company wants you to, and it won't be anything open source and free that's for sure. If you're working on a budget, you'll choose something far less expensive.

[@KohdyMcintyre]

What about substance modeler

[@blackjew6827]

Blender is not made for artists.