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
You'd be surprised, leather can cover a lot of ... mistakes. ;-)
Besides, after the "basic" training, There won't be many mistakes to hide.
Anyway, who wants to take all those oaths.
You'd be surprised, leather can cover a lot of ... mistakes. ;-)
Besides, after the "basic" training, There won't be many mistakes to hide.
Besides, who wants to take all those oaths.
lol...there are a lot of mistakes so to speak...basic training ugh...another reason not to join!
Warning, Will Robinson. Thread hijack imminent!
An updated Ninja Nun. First was a V4. Here's a G2.
Actually, the fighting nuns are a part of a story line I'm developing.
How's that for "realism" :lol:
Totally unrealistic. Ninjas would never wear something so shiny.
This is now the ninja nun thread.
And we never even saw them take it over.
And we never even saw them take it over.
Not bad for shiny ninja ladies, huh? :coolsmile:
Well, I said that I wanted to start a discussion...
Szark: I really like the work you put into that piece. VERY solid work. And all the things you described doing are exactly what sold the piece. I recall reading an interview in 3D World Magazine back when the Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, 2001, and they were discussing this very issue. They said it was much easier to create more realistic men, especially the older man, than it was to create the pretty female hero. The old man, they said, could have wrinkles and bumps and spots, but they couldn't easily add those details to a younger, pretty woman because they would quickly age her or make her look unattractive (I think the artist even acknowledged -- fleetingly -- the double beauty standard between men and women, but there was nothing much they could do about it. BTW: If you recall waaaay back then, you'll remember that movie was an eye-opener for its amazing hair rendering. Before that movie, most of us had not seen a feature CGI film that had such realistic long hair (Toy Story 2, 1999, had great short fur, but not the long hair). My, how the technology has zoomed by and put that sort of thing in the hands of artists like me.
I remember when I was younger I was very upset about the stereotype for women, especially in comic books, an art style I love. So I tried to draw a realistic female image. It was quite difficult for me to make her look like a woman, especially with full armour on. Whether or not it was just something deeply ingrained into me that women in art look like a certain way, and not in another way.. I don't know, though I try to fight the system, heh. But from that I self-realised after that little drawing excercise, the reason that women are drawn as 'more' female in bodyshape is to differentiate them from the male characters if you want it to be obvious at a glance, at least in comics. Otherwise in some imagery it can become ambiguous. Although that said, I have a friend who writes self-published comics and his female characters look like men with round bits on the chest front, yet I like his imagery of women XD
And on Hair in CG movies, I believe they played about with it in The Incredibles too as Violet's hair was amazing. I loved the Spirits Within just for the movement as well. Oh, who am I kidding, I love ALL CG movies.
I love raccoon eyes and Pink lipstick. If I could figure out how to put it on properly, I would wear it all the time. But putting on lipstick lighter than my lips is hard. My reaction to most of the DAZ makeups is generally a desire to have my own makeup technician. I do own a lot of bright purple lipstick though, and it is fantastic. Seriously, If I could go around with some surreality style makep I totally would. Its threads like these that remind me I'm a young city person.
Now what is horrible and unrealistic? Characters that have makeup on but still have really visible pores. ARGH! Makeup tastes vary, but, if you're wearing makeup, unless you have the worlds most perfect skin, you're wearing foundation. Pores however have become 3d shorthand for "realism"
I admit I'm not a fan of facial pores... Especially the ones done on noses. There are several male characters with them ... they look more like blackheads to me.
My Ideal texture (more for ladies) would be a un-madeup option pores, color variation, stronger spec in the t-zone, etc. and then a range of makeup ranging from natural (i.e. what men mean when they say they prefer girls with no makeup) to heavy (the "stripper makeup" so many forumites decry) all the makeup options would look look like there was makeup, so the tone would be more even, pores less noticable and the spec more even (and matte serioulsly folks thats what powder is for)
Men obviously tend to wear less makeup so a lot of this doesn't apply, but as with everything I'd like more variation. A lot of times it feels like there are 2 options: pre-airbrushed or giant cheek pores. plenty of real people don't have giant holes in their cheeks.
Honestly the official daz textures are pretty close to my ideal, but, because they're the daz characters the base is just a hair too idealized for me
j cade: I agree with you about the pores. A few can look good in small doses in the right scene, but in general it doesn't look right, especially when the artist seems to be going for a "beauty shot."
But I'm excited that you get the point I was trying to make. I'm not advocating that extreme realism should be the goal of everyone working in 3D (heck, if you look at my gallery you'll see I work almost exclusively in highly stylized b&w -- makeup and skin pores are not even a consideration in the bulk of my work). I'm merely saying that if realism is something you are striving for, then you need to train your eye to see how your model's makeup is influencing the mood, tone and "realism" of your final render. In reality, a professional photographer will have a professional makeup artist on set as part of the team, which also includes lighting technicians and other specialists who contribute their talents toward the final goal: Creating a great photo. In our case, the 3D artist has to do it all, and that brings me back to the original point I was making: If you're trying to take your work to the next level, then you need to think about how the model's makeup is affecting your final render.
mmitchell_houston and j cade, I agree with you both about the hyper-realism in details such as pores etc. My idea of realism has more to do with the ability/resources to model such variants as age. I find it difficult to model a mature subject if the still look like fit 23 year old supermodels.
Aging is difficult. Even in real life people don't age all the same way. Some people, men and women alike, grow mature and then seem to stop aging for decades, naturally, while others seem to age speedily. Same have deep wrinkles between their eyes, others on their forehead, others- none. Besides, the more body fat the less wrinkles. But DAZ figures are all supermodels, no fat, so they should have lots of wrinkles. Maybe they all had cosmetic surgery.
Thanks for the kind comments mmitchell_houston
Your 1st sentence is very insightful and meaningful. CG/3D art is a form unto itself. There is an inherent look and charm to good 3D comnpositions/enders. It is a different art form than painting or photography. It CAN look different and often should, in a sense. Realism is a matter of perspective and taste.
Photography has "imitated" painting and vice versa. Now, just in the last < 20 years this new CG artform has been added to the mix. CG art does not have to look like either of its predecessors. Cross-media imitations are fine. But CG & CG/3D art is what it is. A new art form. And oddly enough, 3D art is a kind of blend of painting, photography, and film. We are the Pioneers.
On what do I base my statements? I have worked and been paid well for paintings, photography, AND CG vector and 3D art. Experience.
I'm pleased to have started this discussion. Some very intelligent things have been said, others not so much (and I've no interest in naming which is which -- although you'd probably be surprised if I did). Not because I don't agree with the views stated (as I said, many excellent points have been made), but a few comments seem more than a little self-serving as rational (i.e. excuses) for failing to achieve their intended goals toward Realism. Yeah, note the captial R.
Is Realism the only worth goal of an artist who choses to work with these digital tools (3D, Photoshop, etc.)? Of course not. I never even implied that it was. I hardly ever work in color, and most of my favorite 3D artists actually strive for more painterly and abstract effects (most of them are over at Renderosity, and I'll PM names/links if anyone is interested). BUT, when artists are striving to achieve Realism in their work, it behooves us to help them grow, which was the intent of this discussion. To get them to think about something they haven't thought of before or, perhaps not in the way a portrait artist or stage manager might -- as a tool to help tell the story. In other words, to grow as an artist.
I think a lot of well-meaning discussion here has actually been contrary to that effort. I love discussions about the Beauty Myth and challenging ideals in makeup and beauty. I'm old enough to remember the New Wave makeup from the 80s (check out the film Liquid Sky and some of the early music vidoes from that era), or let's look at (and possibly celebrate) the attempts at gender ambiguation from Marlene Dietrich to Annie Lennox, from Boy George to Caitlyn Jenner. And let's celebrate some of the "alternative" looks available for sale here at Daz3D. I love THE OLD HAG and the very stylized Old Man Rex (which I'm planning to use in some highly stylized artwork I've got in the pipeline). I even like the firghteningly Stepford Wives look of the promo art for Smiles Delight V4 and M4 Bundle (let's talk a Barbie girl in a Barbie World -- it's fantastic, wrapped in plastic). I love it when I sense "intent" in artwork of any sort and I love to watch novices spreading their wings and growing before my eyes -- traveling down the timeline of someone's gallery from early work to new (or, more typically for me, from new to old) is a pleasure. So, getting back to the strippers, sometimes the stripper makeup is intended. Sometimes when I look at the stripper face I do see intent. And that can be fun. But sometimes I see someone struggling to achieve a look and obviously falling short because the light skin tone is washed out in black clothing and the blonde hair clashes with strong makeup on cheekbones that are too severe because the hair is shaped wrong for that person's head. You can bandy about well-meaning phrases like, "Realism is a matter of perspective and taste" all you want, but it doesn't help the young artist in any way, shape or form. Because phrases like that -- encouraging to some -- are actually detrimental to those artists who are just now learning that hair, makeup, wardrobe don't just happen -- they are created and coordinated by the artist who must learn to use them as tools which can be just as important as posing, lightening and rendering.
And why do I dismiss your phrase? Because it's too often a platitude used to justify bad art. Who's to say some art is bad and other art is good? Each and every single person who looks at it, that's who. And on what do I base MY statements? I don't have a clue as to why you felt the need to rattle off your bonefides, but since that seems to be soemthing we're doing, I've been a creative professional for more than 30 years. I pay my bills through a combination of different skills and talents, including writing, graphic design and commercial illustration. I have also commissioned and bought artwork for numerous publications where I've been the editor (or in charge of advertising). And, I have taught graphic design and layout at college.
Getting back to the actual discussion point I started, I hope some artists -- whether or not they are striving for Realism or something more stylized -- start looking at makeup and hair with new eyes.
LOL...looks legit to me.
I'm actually working on a 7 foot sci-fi combat-nun character. I'm hoping for more badass and less bondage by the time I have the look down.
7 foot? She won't need a yard stick anymore.
I'm using rawarts creature morphs for the species. They go from 7 to 8 feet.
Here's an older render of one. She basically needs equipment and some sort of robes. So, not exactly realistic, but I want to get away from the space bimbo look with them and more into the 'yeah I can see that working' sort of thing. Plus, they'd have different styles of uniform according to specific duties, orders, and whatnot.
Precisely why I buy mainly male figures from DAZ. The few female figures I do buy, must either come with realistic clothing (and incidentally, why I buy the Pro versions, because they come with more clothing options). However it does go the other way too, there's only so many jeans and tshirts combinations men can wear without being more fo the same. There's over 500 female swimwear products, only about 8 for men.
I did find the aging morphs a great add-on for the females though, and combined with the Growing Up products, getting realistic women is easier than ever.
Linton: I bought the Growing Up products recently and have used them to create a teenaged male superhero. I found the tools very easy to use, and only had to tweak the hair a little to keep it looking correct. These look like great resources and I'm looking forward to using them more.
Being a woman, I just do my own makeup. I bring the plain face map into PS and do it the way I like it. I am not into that heavy made up look that so many vendors use. I like just a little to highlight features.
To be fair, how many of us know guys IRL that look like M4/5/6, Gianni, Scott, or The Freak?
I think Boris is the most realistic looking male figure in the shop, and he's not exactly an average, regular guy build.
Anecdotally speaking, I can't say I know too many guys that look like the Daz figures. A friend of mine is a competitive bodybuilder, and I suppose some might say he looks like The Freak....except he's only 5'4, lol, not exactly Freaks height.
My point being that I don't think the Daz Guys are any more realistic than the Daz Girls.
This is all subjective, but personally I like that the Daz figures, both male and female, are well above-average in looks and build.
*To the OPs original point though, I have to say the idea of a CG Model being used to sell make-up for a human is slightly disconcerting. I suppose if the advertisement is an accurate representation of what the make-up looks like when applied to human skin, it shouldn't be a problem, but it still seems disingenuous.
You are right, the built of the males in DAZ isn't very realistic, about as much as the females. Both are idealized. And the males have ridiculously big shaped chest muscles. Some of them look, when clothed, like they have female breasts. In fact I was once asked by a friend why I used a female body for my male elf, because of that.
But, and that's a big "BUT", the Males get more of these little imperfections, they show more creases and wrinkles, so their faces don't look so much like plastic dolls.
And while I can diminish muscles very easily in Hexagon, adding creases, wrinkles and such is way more difficult.
I've also had to tone down the pecs a few times to make the hero look more masculine.
Daz has always been focused on creating fantastic art (meaning not excessively realistic figures in SF, fantasy, superheroes, horror, etc.). More Boris Vallejo than Norman Rockwell.
However -- I can't help but wonder if the new levels of realism that can be achieved with Iray might inspire some artists to strive for more realism. That might call for more custom morphs and textures.
DinoVincent You know... it's funny you asked how many of us know people who look like the perfect people from Daz. The other day i was at the dog park, and a couple walked in and there was just something about them that instantly made me think they had walked right out of Daz Studio. They were perfectly trim: He was a good-lloking white guy with blond hair, nice jaw, good teeth, she was a petite light-skinned Asian with some kind of pixie hair cut. They were tone without being overly muscled. Their clothes were trendy and expensive (you could tell his t-shirt and shorts and her capri pants and baby doll t-shirt did not come from Wal-Mart), and fit so perfectly that they almost looked tailored for them (seams fell in exactly the right places, there were a minimum of wrinkles). They just looked so idealized that they looked like walking Genesis 2 models. Even their little dog was perfectly adorable.
For a split second I stared at them to see if I could spot the colored XYZ movement handles floating near their bodies.
Aren't most face textures symmetrical? They simply take one side of a face copy it then flip it over to the other side. Which is why I always take any model as unrealistic right off the bat. It wouldn't seem realistic at all if you made slight changes to one side of the facial features, which is what I do. As far as the fantasy female appealing to most males. I do know there is a cinematic mod to the old game Half LIfe 2 which a large number of the game's fans dispise simply because it makes the main female character look like a stripper. When I first saw her myself I said she looks as if she's been shot in the face with the makeup shotgun Homer Simpson invented for Marge.
Anyway, I wouldn't be suprised if someone did use a 3D model for an advertisment geared toward women. A lot of people today are convinced today's music is far superior to anything from the past simply because a lot of singers voices are autotuned in post production on computers. They're not real voices that occur in nature. So it isn't too far a jump to see a symetrical artificial model taken as today's human ideal.