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
Or do the code for a 3D program from zero...or design the operative system for the 3d program, and build the components of a new computer with your own cpu and gpu design...or create the silicon transistor...or extract coltan and gold with your own hands...
Are there any PAs out there looking at this and thinking about putting together an "art bundle" of objects to populate your museum and art gallery renders?
https://www.daz3d.com/orestes-iray-stylized-glamour-props
https://www.daz3d.com/jepes-cinematic4-poses-and-props-for-michael-8
https://www.daz3d.com/jepes-art-deco-statuettes-iii-for-victoria-8
https://www.daz3d.com/jepes-art-deco-statuettes-ii-for-victoria-8
https://www.daz3d.com/jepes-cinematic-poses--props-for-michael-8
Or do the code for a 3D program from zero...or design the operative system for the 3d program
Not to go in any more, but if you watch almost any video about behind the scenes special effect work, they PRIDE themselves on rewriting all these 3D programs or adding code to get it to do what they want it to.
So even the high-end professionals think all these fancy 3D programs are inadequate for the work THEY want to create.
Which is the same as the Daz user- using scripts. Scripts probably fall under power user territory. It's the same idea that Daz Studio, by itself is unable to do what you need it to so you add...oh, you get the idea.
and build the components of a new computer with your own cpu and gpu design...
Actually some do. Computer building is a thing. All the way down to the lighting in the case, fans and the cooling.
Those that are REALLY into computers, frown on people just 'buying a whole computer' at the store. For them, BUILDING a COMPUTER is (part of) THE ART (form). And yep, they do take pictures and share them.
As to the broader discussion of what's art and what's not, I don't think you can create a definition. Just think..
Usually you put a word to describe the thing before it or after it to be more specific. Just because we don't know what those words are, doesn't mean they don't exist and are being used by those that need to use them.
Last example is Kick Boxing.
Kick Boxing exists in every format and form.
There is a FULL COMBAT/Contact Kick Boxing sport.
There is a kick boxing Tournament Sport, which is NOT full contact.
There's someone taking self defense and being taught kick boxing techniques.
There are Kick Boxing gyms who do not compete, but they light spar and teach Kick Boxing.
There are aerobic classes called Kick Boxing that have some Kick Boxing techniques/elements put to music.
Most people who understand those differences would never think they were ALL the SAME.
And most people couldn't watch someone throw a kick and for sure know which aspect they partake in.
But that difference does make a difference.
I'll say it again. When humans are into something. they tend to dig deep into it and get more involved with it- they DO MORE.
Why or how is art so special that this doesn't happen in that arena.
What is a Daz Power User or Power Customer?
Someone who's been around forever- before or since day one.
Someone with a massive library -some with truly ancient items.
Someone with a 'Daz budget' - some have a DAILY budget.
What are those -that ....
Use and Write scripts.... edit textures....create their own morphs.....use Plug-ins.....
User other programs aside from Daz....
Heck, even use OTHER RENDERING ENGINES......
Do post work....master the system/tools/resources- enough to not need post work...
learn Deforce.....weight maps....geometry editing...modifiers.....
Those are all people digging deep into this 3D thing.
So you have to RESPECT those that do more and understand their frustration when someone does little to nothing and wants to land right beside them as ARTISTS with ART.
That why I said it takes all three, because at the end of the day, we are going to judge the work for effectiveness. Doesn't matter how the artist feels about it.
I'm not the art police. I love everybody.
Hit the render button, make art.
This is actually an interesting example because the value of the piece depends on knowing what it is, and thinking that what it is, is cool. That back piece stays put because it's been balanced with the weight of the other pieces and the wires. I wouldn't put it in my house, but also I couldn't do that myself.
I'm a fan of the artist Oso3D linked, who arranges leaves and rocks into interesting patterns. It takes knowledge of color and form to do that, and I always thought about what it'd be like to come across something like that left in the woods. I grew up in the mountains and we'd sometimes find markers and even structures left behind by hikers or people who choose to live out there, and it always made me feel like I was on the edge of touching something I didn't understand.
You can take full credit for your render because it is your render that includes "premade assets" licensed to you from Daz3d to use in your 2-D renders without attribution. Simple as that. I've given coffee mugs that have my renders on them to others, and I never once felt the need to say "Just so you know, I didn't use traditional means to make this art." Why complicate things just because you enjoy a particular type of art? You'll end up worrying about nothing more than rendering, and that will be a waste of time and money you spent on the products you bought.
If you submit your render to a group/contest on DeviantArt, for example, where "Any type of art is acceptable" then you can categorize your render ("Digital Art/3-d Art" etc.) and tag it with "Daz3D" or "IrayRender" etc. (I may have switched category/tag in this example because I'm not looking at DeviantArt right now, but you get what I'm saying.)
One of the art festivals near me used to not allow digital artists, but now they are showcasing their works through social media.
I'm inclined to say that needing to know something about what it is, or how it was produced reduces it's ability to claim any value as art. But it just goes to show that art is really (just like beauty) in the eye of the beholder.
That is an interesting way to think of it. I have a relative who has worked for two major museums and the artists i have met would argue the opposite. i once had a pecular experience of visiting my sibling who was working for MOCA (Museum of Contemporary Art) in Los Angeles. She took me over to the warehouse complex that housed the museum before the permanent buildings were built. The building, called the Temporary Contempory, was repurposed as a satellite museum and had a show about art of the lat 50's and early 60's. This is a period that never appealed to me. Inside this vast space, they built a version of a one bedroom hose cut in half diagonally. Inside, there was a collection of iconic abstract art such as a Jackson Pollock and a two color Rothko painting; these were all the sort of thing that people who only seen reproductions would say that anyone got do this. They were spectacular; the Pollock is almost fractal in its 3d detail while the Rothko was so resonant in its color that it was a bit like op art. Could I tell you what they were supposed to depict? No, but they were moving and the were art.
I have met the occasional filmaker who, if you asked what was their movie about, would describe the thematic elements and mood so you would have to clarifiy that you were curious about the plot. They would argue that what the movie is about is not the same as the plot. Art is often about things that one can only explain by experiencing the art.
Given every other art form has adherents arguing whether technical expertise counts as art or what is and isn't proper art of the form, I think it's a good sign that cgi is an art form; people are arguing about whether it's art. :)
(see: MC Escher, various poets, Vladimir Horowitz, and many others )
Well put. Art, artists are just words and can mean whatever you want them to mean. Eye of the beholder and all that stuff. One of my favorite quotes that could apply to this thread (and pretty much all human enterprise and endeavor) is from Carl Sagan's Cosmos book and TV series. "If I want to bake an apple pie from scratch I would first have to invent the universe." Well, no artist has ever done that and never will. That includes the great classic masters like Michaelangelo, Davinci, Titian and countless other names you can think of up to the present. .
I'm a photographer while I'm making a photograph, and not a photographer when I'm not. For me, it's really as simple as that.
The other thing is to simply give a credit line to all the artists (or non-artists) whose products contributed to the making of your image. (kind of like movie credits). In a movie usually the Director and principal actors get all the top credit, and their names are associated with the movie. But without the hundreds and sometimes thousands of behind the scenes gaffers and lighting technicians and wardrobe designers and set builders and matte artists etc, (not to mention the financing) the movie would not exist at all. Every thing we make, whether a painting, song, sculpture or kitchen cabinet has more than one person in the chain that makes it possible.
Of course you are an ARTIST! You bought raw materials (model, props, environment, poses, etc) that you used for your own composition.
Daz is selling these products/materials for artists like us to create a masterpiece of art! Our own composition that we show to other people who might say "That is a beautiful painting", or ask us how we created a beautiful work of ART whether it's surrealism, fantasy, portrait, sci fi or toonish.
Why/What is Daz here for? For 3D ART.
Art has become increasingly collaborative and I'd say that's a good thing. It gives you as an artist the choice on how to most efficiently spend your time to achieve and manifest a particular idea. There is always the opportunity to draw, paint or sculpt along the way, or not, depending on the result you want to attain.
In the old days a painting studio would involve teams of specialists and apprentices in a joint effort. Today in the gaming industry there are diverse teams working together. One artist may be specializing in designing hair, another designs clothing, yet another sculpts characters, another is rigging characters, et cetera.
Working in a collaborative environment doesn't reduce your artistic vision or work, it opens up more opportunities. Would your artwork exist if you didn't exist? Probably not if you put some effort, passion and spirit into it.
If we think about it when we look around, most buildings and items we can see were designed and constructed by different individuals, groups or teams operating in a free market. Imagine if one person took upon them to create all of it; not only would that be a tremendous burden that would reduce the resources for overarching composition or storytelling, but it would also remove the unique variations that comes from different mindsets blending their work together. If we alone designed the whole world it would become far less dynamic.
Have fun, challenge yourself, iterate on ideas, share your work and inspire others.
Well also, most the "great" artists also usually used (a team of) assistants who painted half of the painting for them doing various parts like background characters (though they typically did the "important" parts). So they didn't even do the painting entirely on their own..
Also, when you say "using other people's assets" you don't mean, for example, using another customer's files? I remember someone asking that a while ago is why I bring it up, and while it would be great (for us, not the PA's) if we could, it isn't allowed.
A "real artist" rarely does anything from scratch. A photographer doesn't need to know how to light he might have lightning assistant on set doing that for him. A great photographer probably has a first assistant, a light assistant and a digitech helping him light a scene to produce an image that executes his vision. For the photograph to be really good there is a hairstylist, a makeup artist and fashion stylist on set to ensure all the parts are the best they can be. For the image to turn out amazing there is probably a top model on set posing, even with direction the model will need to know how to move. Afterwards the image goes into retouching where a team of retuchers and an art director ensures postproduction makes the best out of the image.
Andy warhole didn't actually paint or print all his work himself. he had a team of junior artist working in his studio executing his vision. weather it cam from screenprinting the painting or actually drawing the brushstrokes for him in some cases. Same goes for most artists. If you jump back in time and look at artists 100 years ago a successful painter, or sculpture and what not would have a studio filled with people working for him helping him execute his vision.
Same goes for a fashion designer who usually if successful gives his/her team the direction of the season and then execpct the team working for them to sketch out the clothing and later on work with the pattern maker and the factory to sample the garment.
in the end the person putting together the image composition and rendering out the final image and controlling that vision ensuring the end result is what they wanted to achieve is the artist. not the person who put together a generic mesh and slapped on some textures. because if we go down that route Gigi7 mentioned where one person does it all and that is just not ever gonna happen. sure people build their own computer but its complete [nonsense]that that someone creates anything from scratch without help from other people. even if you are texturing the model you made your self where did you get the textures from? did you go out and photograph a person to make those from scratch?
People make different parts but the true artist is the one with the vision to create the final result you are looking at. Regardless if the build anything themselves or even had other people putting together the end result that was rendered out. Being an artist is about having a vision and executing that vision alone or using other people to get their message across.
or like google puts it
"Art is a diverse range of human activity, and resulting product, that involves creative or imaginative talent expressive of technical proficiency, beauty, emotional power, or conceptual ideas."
To make good art one must be organized
Great art comes from strong fundamentals which strengthen the underdrawing
Modern Da Vincis are making Marvel concept art
Photographers use pre-made assets all the time.
Rendering, especially using raytracing engines, is much more akin to photography than it's to painting.
Ask yourself - should you not call photographers artists because they hire models/actors and use sets and costumes made by someone else?
On a related-ish note, I think we can find ourselves in the Premade Assemble Rut: Buy Model, Buy Hair, Buy Outfit, Buy Scene, Buy Pose, Insert Together (as defaults, including presets), Render Now. I'm guilty of this, TBH.
Sometimes you can end up with some nice combinations and it can be easier for source credits, but it can lead to feeling a bit mentally cheap on other occasions.
I don't think this is really a premade content problem. Artists could find themselves in the same type of rut making all of their own assets. We're really talking about deficiencies of creativity and originality. Three suggestions that some might find useful:
1. Consume something different: Watch older movies. Look at art from different historical periods (Yes, I know my art history reference may get the thread shut down.). Try to draw inspiration from the real world rather than comics, video games, and TV shows. When the artist's own viewing habits are very narrow, we shouldn't expect anything but hackneyed, uninspired images.
2. Make a conscious effort to work a significant minority of the time using different techniques and in different artistic genres. If you find that you're rendering some variation of the same portrait over and over again, it might be time to work on a still life for a few hours. About 5% of my renders are non-figurative ("abstract"). Or try working achromatically or monochromatically. Maybe 15% of my renders are B&W. You may find that this gives you a broader technical knowledge that helps when working in your main style or genre.
3. Challenge yourself to use assets in ways that are very different from what you saw in the promotional renders. Don't think you have to, or even should, reproduce the PA's use of the asset. Daz Studio comes with all sorts of sliders and a surfaces tab. You can move models to a variety of positions within the frame, place the camera anywhere, use all sorts of lighting set-ups and render settings (in 3DL or Iray, even some other render engine). Even with premade assets, there are still an enormous number of artistic decisions to be made.
Again, the availabilty of premade models and other content isn't at fault for lapsing into cliches or finding oneself in a creative rut. If an artist lacks imagination or is intent on working in ways that are wholly derivative or imatitive, fooling around with primitives in Daz Studio isn't likely to help.
Same applies at CGSociety and other "serious" CG art galleries. I'll bet you'll see Megascans everywhere, and I'm pretty sure very few 3D artists actually go out and take their own photos of cloudscapes...
Modern "art" is funny like that.
It ye olde times being called an artist meant something.
Nowadays is more dignified to be called an artisan.
In writing people emphasize the same rules all the time and ignore actually good movies that contradict their rules. People complain about bad love triangles but are told they need conflict yet their heart isn't in the conflict but in the canon couple's relationship
They all want to follow the same structure and even want to impose it on video games which don't even have the limitations books or movies have and should take advantage of it
Man, this whole thread has dirverted really far from the original subject... which if I'm not mistaken, was the purity and beauty of potato based art.
if someone puts together the premade assets they buy to create an image that, often be more unique and creative than the parts they bought that person is an illustration or an artist or whatever they want to call them self. then there are those that can also call themself artists if they want but have work that has not much that is unique to it or required nothing more than them to google an image and recreating the object or a person from that image. I love love love the models from some vendors on here that makes gorgeous women for example, but those specific models are in fact not unique creations from someones imagination, they are straight of digital versions of famous acrtresses and supermodels each and every one of them. if i go an filter on human models i can quickly find milla jovovich from the blue lagoon, the actresses anna-taylor joy, Sigourney Weaver from alien, kiera knightly, a young jennifer connelly, Anne Hathaway, julianne more, and an endless number of famous models like Caroline Trentini, Kendra Spears, Bianca Balti, Frederikke Sofie and so on. They are well-made and amazing models, and have amazing craftmanship but not unique. I prefer personally not to focus on creating models but to concept and create images and campaigns that convey the message I want. no one should say one thing is worth more than the other. we wouldn't really have much unique content or interesting images to look at if everyone focused on modeling but we wouldn't have amazing images or campaigns if we didn't have the amazing works of all the different people that was used to make those either. I could make a model, i could create a texture, i can edit a film, i can colorgrade a movie but if i did all those things every time i wanted to make a campaign or editorial story i wouldn't get much done.
I SMFH every time this comes up, not because of the person who asks the question, but that someone thought they had to give them a hassle over it in the first place. Once upon a time I went to college and took art classes, this was after I had started using Poser, but before I started using DAZ Studio full time. I only mentioned that I used Poser to a couple... well 3 Professors but the one was just in passing and she was all for using anything you could get your hands on to make art with. One of the others was one of the ones that felt (and loudly proclaimed) that using premade models was plagerism or something. I just told her she was crazy and never brought it up again. But another really laid back Professor I had, one day he told us to do a piece using ANY medium, so I askeed him after class if Poser was okay to use and since he knew what it was he said yes. So I spent time making my piece and while I did a nice piece and was trying to set it up to render out before class... (it was not a huge scene and it was not overly complicated just a nice scene, I don't remember what it was off the top of my head since it crashed) But it crashed and the scene file was corrupted and I had about 4 hours before that class including time to get to class, so I threw together a scene of an elf chick kicking some of the old Drone bots and called it F Technology and took that to class.
That day in class everyone had their own pieces to show and I had mine on a flashdrive. Everyone showed their pieces to everyone else and we would talk about them. When it was my turn I projected the image with a projecter and someone asked me how I had made it when I said Poser several of them started talking crap about how the image was not mine and it was plagerism and all that. My Professor pointed at one of them and asked "Why?" they said it was because I didn't make everything and that someone else had made everything. He pointed out that his own piece was a "found objects" piece where you basically just find a bunch of trash and leaves and stuff and glue it to something (Yeah that is how I view that particular sort of work, but I never said it was not their piece or that it was plagerism) The professor said how is your piece any different from the piece he made? You bought the canvas you glued everything to, and you did not make anything you glued to it, but you chose where to glue them, just like each asset was placed in the scene how he wanted it in the render." And I pointed out that I had also made the character shape and all the poses and set up all the lighting so that it could even be seen. All of them changed their minds about whether it was mine after that.
Yeah that is long and rambling, but yeah your renders are yours and they are not plagerism or anything else stupid like that if you feel like you are an artist then you are, it is your imagination that is taking all the assets you use and positioning them into a scene to render out. I think the biggest part of what annoys the ones who spout that sort of crap about poser/DAZ Studio renders is that it is relatively quick, you can get a render of something in your mind done in a little bit of no time if you can find all the assets you need to create the scene while those purists or elitists or whatever you want to call them are spending weeks and months making one thing (depending on how fast they are able to model/texture something.)
...would probably have bashed Joseph Beuys for not having churned the butter used for the Fettecke himself.
you all realise this is a 2 year old thread raised from the dead by necromancer mikael.kangas