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
My cat seems to think there is such a thing as a 4 am walk...
Must be one hell of a banner...
Different standards for beauty, modesty, and all that... I might start with the Canaanite dress from the "Minoan Era" set by Deacon215 at 'rosity.
I haven't played with the outfits in this bundle, however.
Usually, when PAs want to be clever, there's something you can hide or a shawl to remove, so hopefully some of these Egyptian outfits are like that.
Others point out that it might simply be aggressive use of a razor.
I was kind of trying to avoid critique of the grooming standards.
Okay, I have been messing around with RawArt's Lekkulian. Here, the shape is 100% Twosret 8. The skin uses 100% Diffuse textures from Twosret, a constructed Diffuse texture for the head tentacles based on Twosret's Face texture, and underlying skin textures from Lekkulian. So you can see the Lekkulian trans maps (which helps the seam on the head), but the top layer Diffuse maps are 100% Twosret. (Mainly seeing how far I can push Lekkulian's skin.)
It's a 20% off the cart banner. It didn't drop to $13.94, but by $13.94.
@duckbomb
Here ya go!
Hey thank you! This is great, I really wish they would provide some more "detail-oriented" renders in some of the promos, but I also understand the art of marketing, so I can't cast too much blame there.
I appreciate your effort, you've helped me out, for sure! Thanks again!!
Another gorgeous character from DAZ
The Genesis 8's have been epic pretty much all of them
Twosret's bundle reminds me of two products that might be helpful for Egyptian renders, some Egyptian Artifacts and Bast for The Daz Housecat.
https://www.daz3d.com/egyptian-artifacts
https://www.daz3d.com/bast
Well, I thought about it overnight and decided to pass on the bundles. The Creature bundle is of no use for me - I wouldn't use anything in it. And as for the main bundle, I really liked the base figure, the egyptian makeup (the headdress is included!), the Hemet-nisut dress and the Papyrus outfit. I wouldn't ever have a use for the senet game or the poses with it, the animations or the expressions, and I wasn't particularly keen on the hemet hair (it looks too wig-like for me, plus I have the Bast hair for G3 that I can convert) nor the Desert Queen hair.
So I did something really weird - I only got the stuff I liked and would use. ha ha.
LOVE those Egyptian shader fabrics tho!!!!
oh and I ended up using the coupon for the 70% 'select pharaoh' items instead of the purple banner cos I really really REALLY wanted this Fashion Sophisticate outfit after seeing it in the promos LOL!!!!! (and I've not seen that pop up in any deep sales)
I've been to Egypt and can second that. The real issue with a lot of characters and products is the PA's copy Hollywood, comic books, and each other. That goes for just about any genre in the Daz store. Fantasy is great but there are only a handful of PA's who really do their homework and strive for realism.
Correct.
Just wanted to say... first of all, no one that i know of is claiming accuracy- just artistic interpretation, which has room for so much more. Realism is what you want it to be. PA's plan their product to their vision - (and hope that it's unique and different from others being submitted as well!) and it's not really fair to say they don't 'do their homework' because it's not historically accurate in some way or form. some times its the best option to pick a middle ground between historical and fantasy to reach an optimum user base, or it just suits the PA's style. No less research or work went into it for not being historical, though. This topic comes up often- between renaissance, pirates, wild west, Egypt, etc.... sometimes we plan what is historical and sometimes we plan what inspires us. Realism and historical accuracy aren't the same in digital genre. :)
I never said it had to always be real all the time. But I can create lists of products that are virtually all the same because everyone copies each other. I've been publishing art going on 50 years now and I it's frustrating that the 3D world thinks it's all fantasy and only fantasy.
Yesterday, with the 35% gift card sale, purple banner code, $20 rebate, and prescribed cart contents, it was possible to actually make money buying these bundles---assuming Daz credit is equivalent to money. That was a great deal.
https://www.daz3d.com/dforce-hemet-nisut-outfit-for-genesis-8-females
I don't know about the other products, but this product is actually pretty accurate, in fact we still have original clothings from that time :
The egyptians loved their linen (if you were rich) and wool.
Ok here she looks quite a bit darker than the promos. See seemed too light skin in the promos to be egyptian, maybe not in cleopatras time perhaps. Were you using default settings for the skin in your two renders?
Her skin in your renders is what comes to my mind when I think egyptian. I'm much happier with this than what I noticed in the promos.
In response to some comments about one of the hairstyles looking like a wig - from a historical perspective, ancient Egyptian nobility used to wear wigs.
So a female noble would sometimes also shave her head and wear wigs or head coverings to protect her head from the sun. Incidentally, Canaanite priestesses and female temple staff shaved their heads once a year, so it would appear wigs were more common in ancient times than we would perhaps first imagine.
The dresses may have been long, but most of the time they were pretty see-through... and that's for the men as well as the women - there seemed to have been proud in their bodies and were more than happy to show them off. Garments were mostly different grades of white linen and the common ancient design was a relatively simple Kalasiris that could be fashioned by folding a single piece of linen (see attached image). Naturally, those that could afford more elaborate clothing would have indulged their tastes a bit more.
Here's a useful link - https://www.historymuseum.ca/cmc/exhibitions/civil/egypt/egcl06e.html
Speaking of exposed boobs also reminded me of the Minoan culture where they would wear elaborate dresses, but they appeared to be corsetted under the breast so they were on full show - it is assumed these were depictions of priestesses and perhaps linked to fertility rites, but we only have statuettes and paintings so it's only guesswork by archaeologists.
Oops, I'm speaking too much.
boobs were largely seen as baby milkbars in many cultures even now in some tribal societies
its the ankle and what it leads up to that is the sexy forbidden thing
WRT realism, it's worth remembering that what's left of ancient civilizations has changed with time. Art objects that were originally painted in bright colours have had their surfaces eroded by time and the elements. What we see now is less representative of what things looked like back in the day than many reproductions.
Realism is the dull bits, IMHO.
I like Twosret. This is a quick render (see in my gallery for a list of assets I used):
After test rendering Twosret 8, I'm pleased with her. She's a good example of what I seek in Daz Core Figures: A detailed, radiant skin and a refined head morph. Hopefully, Akhenaten 8 is coming up next.
I learned to search the store for "Egyptian" rather than "Egypt" to find more.
Presumably that wasn't true in pre-historic times or human women wouldn't have them - no other mammal has built-in falsies, as far as I am aware (which makes all the alien women with breasts even odder).
First...keep talking, lol.
Second: the thickness of the fabric was not related to vanity, but to temperature.
Egypt can easily reach 45C or above, linen was not only the most available plant, but also is the fresher fabric, of natural origin, and can be made thinner than cotton or silk ( neither of them was abundant enough in that region 5000 years ago).
Sorry for the OT, but i just loved your comment.
Human women have external breasts because otherwise, babies would suffocate during feeding, due to our stupid noses sticking out in front of our mouths.
using Daz Central Twosret 8 does not appear everything else in the bundle did
The fact that we consider this surprising is because our expectations are shaped by our particular culture (assuming Western/European here, with apologies to readers whose own culture is something other), and specifically the last few hundred years of it. But even within that tradition, customs with respect to the female breast have varied considerably over time. In Elizabethan times in England, it's believed that unmarried women often exposed their breasts (but not their forearms -- that would have been shocking!). Although official portraits of Queen Elizabeth I invariably show her covered up to the neck, it's been claimed that the royal rack was fairly frequently on display -- the French ambassador was apparently surprised to be greeted by a bare-breasted monarch, but the French had different standards at the time. This custom seems to have persisted into at least the 1600s: in portraits, women are shown exposing one or both breasts, while dresses that revealed most or all of the breasts were apparently common (again, queens and upper-class women may have led the way: the architect Inigo Jones designed a dress for the wife of Charles I that fully revealed her breasts). During the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, breasts may have been briefly eclipsed but by the end of the century the 'modest and virtuous' Queen Mary has the goods regularly on show again. In the eighteenth century (the Georgian period), very low-cut dresses and occasional full exposure were back in fashion, although I don't know if this was widespread or was something that only 'daring' wealthy women could get away with.
And once you get away from European/Anglo-Saxon culture exposed female breasts were often 'standard'. In some cases, married women/mothers would expose their breasts while young women would be expected to cover them. In others, it was the other way around.
I suspect that in many cases whether breasts were covered or uncovered may have had more to do with comfort than with sexualization of the female breast. Poorer women might have wanted to keep their breasts under control while doing physical labor (the sports bra having not yet been invented). Nursing mothers (and before birth control, sexually-mature women might have spent a good part of their lives either pregnant or nursing) probably also wanted the support and protection that came from clothing. But poor women in the past might often have been smaller-breasted by modern standards (due to a combination of physical labor and a low-calorie diet resulting in reduced body fat percentages) and might have felt less need for the support provided by clothing such as breast bindings. Climate must also have influenced whether it was more comfortable to cover up or go bare-chested.
Then there's the display aspect. If you want to show how young and healthy you are, then presenting a pair of breasts that conform to the aesthetics of the moment (to judge by art, small and round seems to have been popular through much of history) is one way. But if you want to show off your wealth, then one measure is how much fabric you can pile on yourself and how ornate you can make it. Why waste space showing off what any woman has -- breasts -- when you could be flaunting your costly materials, embroidery, lace, jewellery etc?
Attitudes surely varied. The female breast, as a visible sexual characteristic, must always have been at least a little bit sexualized. But many societies probably also took the attitude of "Breasts: women have them. So?" and thus covering or not covering your breasts might have been largely a practical decision.
I heard she poisoned her older sister, Onesret. :)
Does anyone know what headdress is being used in the main image and first two promo images of Twosret?