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
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
With photorealism, you can just hack away and throw numbers at it until you get the skin or the eye reflections just right. You don't have to worry about conveying emotion or telling a story. We're programmed to respond to human faces, so there's at least an automatic response. Like there's that one model that's getting a lot of attention of that bald guy with his eyes closed. He'd look lifelike if he didn't look like he's freshly dead. Nevertheless, a lot of people like to ooh and ahh over that kind of thing.
Whatever floats your boat I guess. Like I'm a fan of 1960's American Popart. Warhol, Rosenquist and them. A lot of people still think Warhol's a hack, but to me standing in front of the Gold Marilyn Monroe at the MOMA was kind of a spiritual experience. He didn't get to that following a "How to Art" checklist.
That's a fair point! When cg is done right, no one ever notices it's cg!
My closer was in reference to my original response to this thread. Don't worry about it.
He'd look lifelike if he didn't look like he's freshly dead.
How do you guys keep coming up with statements like these?
Can I have permission to use this?
Don't worry about it.
I see, some of you/us are talking about making characters FOR COMMERCIAL use.
Yeah, originally I was just trying to explain certain factors that contribute to the reason why some of these models tend to look fake. But the topic ended up becoming about why there's such an obsessive pursuit of realism within the 3d community. The industry is that very reason! Since I've received training to be in the animation and film portion of the industry, and since I'm currently employed within the games industry, my stance will always be from the perspective of the artist looking to work commercially. :)
I just think the industry took a couple of wrong turns.
The Lion King remake just baffles me.
It's like the original one but with all the life and joy sucked out of it.
The reason why I loved Tangled and Zootopia is, that they were so well designed und superbly animated. In a cartoony fashion.
Would have liked to see more of that for DAZ studio and Poser as well. (I'm not into Manga/Anime)
You know that quote from Elon, "Space is hard."? Well, realism is hard. With all the money in the world, Star Wars could not bring back Princes Leia, or Governor of the Death Star (they did a great job, but everyone knew they were fakes). And also to your point, not all of the poser/daz characters are meant to be real, some are outright fantasical fanatasy. Also, cultural differences play a role. What looks good to you, may look awful to me. I've traveled to Transalvania and Sudan, and some of the people look like straight up fictional characters, just because I'm not used to seeing those skin tones or facial features.
Ah well..wall of text. The TLDR is most models look fake because realism is very hard.
Oh yeah! I completely agree with all of that! We're all starting to experience photoreal fatigue.
I'm not even all that into photorealism, myself. The style of Final Fantasy is as realistic as I'll go. Lately, I've been getting into more cartoony character creation and cg anime in my down time.
I don't think it's an either or - it can be fun chasing both dragons! lol
While I'm not "there" yet, it can be a lot of fun to see how far we can push it in either direction.:)
wel said, thisis th big problem a i told "each person have they vison about realism" and i's make then don't see which "realism" is pretty subjective and based on the "culture", races and many others facts which play a big role on what you perceive as "realism", for exemple as told even if you go let's say "asian" you will find a lot of peoples an special womans which you gonna sayu "hey they are barbies dolls?? or any sort of doll, becaus for you they "characteriscts don't gonna match you 'perceives as "realism".
I tend to be a thorough thinker so a lot of words come with that. If reading a lot of words upsets you please don't read this post so you won't feel the need to criticize me for posting 'too many words'. Thanks!
Talk about the uncanny valley often focuses on the eyes. An example image on the second page of this topic, for instance, has a woman whose eyes look like marbles. Getting the eyes right is critical.
I don't think too much symmetry is necessarily a problem at all when it comes to realism. As some mentioned, some models and actors are very symmetrical. It doesn't necessarily make them gorgeous (I've never found Brad Pitt particularly beautiful but he's supposed to have facial math on his side) but people do prefer symmetry. It's a sign of good genetics. Look at a local police department's mugshots database and you'll see how poor symmetry is usually a defining characteristic of criminal behavior. That doesn't mean it's always genetics. I grew so large in the womb that the right side of my face was smashed into my shoulder. The doctor had to try to scupt it to match the other side but the result is that I am a 'two face'. It's sad because the other side of my face is very attractive. If labor had been induced sooner I probably would have a very symmetrical face, like my parents had. I also wonder if being a side sleeper when a small child increases the 'flat side' issue.
Beyond eyes, one thing that is obvious to me is the lack of fat. The woman with the jean shorts above, for instance, looks like her body fat was removed and replaced with muscle. Male characters are more obvious with this lack of body fat. A fat simulation layer is really needed. Everything I've seen had characters who look like gristle and sinew. Too little body fat in men (for my asthetic taste but also most females', according to some research) is a current fad even with real models. Body fat simulation would also help with the facial coloration issue already mentioned. In art, females are frequently (even the ancient Romans did this) depicted as being much paler. Some of that is due to a typically higher body fat percentage. Males are often exaggerated in art, with their faces being excessively dramatic with red tones in places. This is due to the reduced body fat. It's also due to idealization, where exaggerating the idea of the working/outdoor tanned male with little body fat is contrasted with the softer paler female. More than one culture has idealized the indoor/low-agency female, such as in China where foot binding was used and in the United States where tight corsets were used. Such things are designed to limit mobility and therefore action/agency. Tanned skin is also sometimes associated with health, at least in males. It tends to mask skin imperfections. Clear skin, according to research, is extremely important for a person's attractiveness rating. I don't care for the bronze spray tan look that's so prevalent, though.
There are multiple topics at work in this thread:
1. How do we make 3D models look more indistinguishable from real people?
2. How do we make 3D models look more artistically 'high quality'?
As discussed, those two things don't necessarily go hand in hand. Michelangelo's David, for instance, was given at least one larger-than-realistic hand and smaller-than-average genitals. Some of these choices are due to perspective trickery but cultural agendas also play a role — like the common but hardly definitive idea that large male genitalia is embarassing/uncouth. David's body fat is extremely low, in order to emphasize certain aspects of the characterization. His face is not particularly youthful. The sculpture is both quite stylized and hyper-realistic. It's not the only way David could be done. Someone could sculp an older teenage male with complete adherance to realism. That wouldn't necessarily be inferior; it just would be different.
One of the things that bothers me about male models I've seen in Daz is how tiny and flat the nipples look, like pepperoni stuck on. There is a topic about someone who was having a bug that caused very large nipples. That made them look even more like pepperoni. Details like nipple quality are important to me. They should look 3-dimensional and there should be control over their coloration, softness, and puffiness. There is a lot of variety in real life.
The poses, as mentioned, are often too dramatic. That is especially the case with facial expressions, at least for males. I don't focus much on female models. I know I'm in the minority. The dominant aesthetic seems to be the 'vigorous action man'. I'd rather have subtlety, especially with the facial expressions. People can pose their bodies in very dramatic poses in real life.
As far as computing power, it's not very hard to afford computers with 32 GB of RAM, 8–16 core CPUs, and fast NVME SSDs. The post that pointed out how demanding realism is is spot-on in terms of it involving a lot of computing power. However, I think there is too much of a gulf between what's available in consumer equipment for reachable prices and the quality level I've seen in 3D Daz-type models.
I'm a newbie at 3D rendering/posing. I worked a little with Michael 2 years ago some but was frustrated because of how coarsely-grained the model was. I could expand both the size of the buttocks and hips, for instance, but not just one or the other. Males begin to look like females when the hips are made wide. This is the same problem I encountered trying to make a character for Star Trek Online. One either has a flat butt or a huge old lady waist. Hopefully things are more fine-grained than that now with these models. But, I've looked at model catalogues just today and see the no body fat, the vacant faces (even when in an expression), the micro nipples, pecs that are too flat around the top area, and so on. I'm going to give the current stuff a try, though.
Someone asked why people want realism. The same debate has been had in painting and drawing, even prior to photography. Some very appealing paintings are unbelievably realistic. However, I also really enjoy Van Gogh (such as his White House painting). Someone pointed out that one benefit of realism with 3D rendering/modeling/posing is being able to fake out the viewer. That is definitely an important goal. It gives people the ability to make scenes that would be difficult or impossible to do with real models. It's a bit of a holy grail for filmmaking and game design. Once the uncanny valley is gone and there is a vast amount of diversity in terms of the models, poses/expressions, props, scenery, et cetera — artists are no longer constrained by the valley and by the extremely high cost of using real models (provided one can even get models who match the vision). A society of clones mixed with near clones, for example, can be done with real models but it would be a lot easier to have 3D synthetic models instead.