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
Thanks! Actually, my first try at a reflective surface with Iray (the rules are so different). I turned the reflectivity way up, because when I look into a mirror the things in the backgorund aren't blurry. Used one overhead mesh light and 3 points vertically in front of her, at about 2000. Hey, I can make my arms do that!
Art - is what people say it is. Two examples:
1) on a news story about 6 to 8 years ago; a couple who worked in the post office all their live who had acquired a fair-size fourtune in contemporary art just by befriending new artists. One of their pieces - a length of sash cord, frayed at both ends and tacked to the wall. Signed by Christo after he became famous. Seriously?
2) at the Smithsonian museum of modern art, in the 1980s. Two canvases, each 4 feet square; unframed. One painted semi-gloss black, the other semi-gloss white. Each with a lavender stripe about 1 inch wide running vertically from top to bottom about one third of the way in from the left side. And I went back and looked at the work five or six times that day . . .(and I can no longer remember if the black canvas was to the left or to the right - they were hung side-by-side with about a six inch gap between them - and I'm not sure if the stripe was on the left or the right side; all I'm saying is that it struck a nerve with me)
So yeah, it's pre-made material. So you selected the figures, the materials, the outfits. You posed the figures and dressed the scene. You set up the lighitng and selected the camera angle, and rendered the image. Explain, please, how this is different from a professional photographer hiring models, specifying wardrobe, setting up and lighting a scene, and taking a photograph.
Saying that we are not artists because we use premade content is like telling a child its not art because they did not make their crayons or paper. If premade content is not counted as being usable for art then Zbrush, 3DSM, Lightwave and all other 3D programs should not be used either because they count as premade content since the artsit using them to make models did NOT write the code to the software!
This argument has been around since the first caveman borrowed some pigment from his buddy Og instead of crushing the berries himself.. It's never been resolved.
I use DAZ Studio. I create art. Is it good art? Opinions vary. But it's art. Art of image, art of story, art of humor, art of message. There is more to art than the image. And I am an artist.
I also use a camera to create art. Someone may believe that I am not an artist because of the tools that I use. I will continue to call myself an artist, and no one has the authority to tell me that I cannot. No matter how loud they yell, or how high they lift their nose.
Well.... http://cavemancircus.com/2015/07/30/15-ridiculous-pieces-of-art-that-sold-for-millions-of-dollars/
I would say pretty much anything can be called art, even my garage doors.
Maybe the thing to do is to think of art like pornography. I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it. Same with art: I know it when I see it. It doesn't matter how it got there, art is art.
This old argument... Argued by people who want to feal superior over others to compensate for their own insecurities.
Your art is whatever you want it to be and who cares whatever anyone else thinks. Personally, I like to think of myself as a stage/movie director as far as daz content is concerned.
That's a really appropriate way to look at it! We are really directing actors, even if they are made of pixels!
I'll tell you, though ...my 14 year old daughter did this spectacular painting yesterday. I can see where people draw the distinction between graphic and physical art. I get where that comes from.
I get where that comes from too. I used to be a traditional artist, but made the shift to digital art. I started of with Fractals, then Vexel art, then 3d art. Now I do all 3.
Mainly because if I stick to 1 art medium, I will soon get very bored. but that is just me.
The attatched image was created in 3DS max and ZBrush.
The artist used a photograph, and he tried to make what he did as close to possible as the photograph.
http://www.evermotion.org/tutorials/show/10167/making-of-marooned-
See link for details.
This is considered art. And what he's done is beautiful, and very well executed.
So whilst he did everything himself, there is nothing original in the composition. Yet the textures are copies of the originals.
@OP
Next time you see this 'friend' throw this in his or her face.
Is it art? Yes, but the artist used the biggest tool of all, the real world (specifically in this case: a very small and specific portion of it.)
The whole composition is about using something already created.
well, I'm not an artist, and sincerely I dont care or even make a life goal to be an artist.
but I sell renders on dA and sells very well!
so, I'm a mercenary and pays the bills!
The first thing coming to my mind would be "who cares what others think?". I think you'll hear this kind of talk in almost any field. I'm an amateur / hobbyist on the 3d rendering area, I'm a semi-professional within the field of digital audio (sound engineering). Not a musician but a sound designer.
Same can be said there: most digital audio workstations ("DAW's") provide a huge library of sound samples. From the sound of a violin right down to the sound of a clarinet, organ, obviously percussion, etc. Within the same line of thinking one can say that some people only arrange all those samples in such a way that they create something musicalyl when mixed together. But the original sound material was already there; ergo it's not "real". I beg to differ of course, even though I do agree that sound design and composing are 2 different lines of work.
And within that reasoning I don't see why the same wouldn't apply to 3d rendering? I've set up some of my own renders where I did indeed use pre-made models and pre-made materials which I used to set up my own poses, my own lighting, my own effects. I may not have designed (textured?) the models I used, but I did spend plenty of time creating the perfect pose for me and applying the right levels of lighting. To me it boils down to posing vs. texturing (for example), comparable to sound design vs. composing.
Still, in the end I only care about 2 things: first, for myself, that I'm having fun and second that the end result is to my liking. Everything else is just that :)
I sometimes give a presentation about Studio at small fantasy or science fiction conventions. I have a slide (blind men with an elephant) on 'What's it like?" It's like staging a play. It's like building a model diorama. It's like photography. It's like dressing up a Barbie doll. You can come up with other analogies. How creative an activity it is is up to you.
It seems to me that when people ask (or negatively answer) the question, "Is it art?" they really mean, "Is it _good_ art?" And of course, a general answer to such a question will always be at least partially wrong.
Nope sorry, art is part what you do with your medium, whatever that may be, and then how it affects others emotionally or otherwise. Even being able to model and texture everything from scratch does not make one an 'artist', knowledge does not guarantee skill, nor does it imply any particular creativity or unique insight, it is the results and how they are received by the audience that matters. Stick figures can be art, a blank canvass with a red dot in one corner can be art, its all perspective. Not wanting to respect someones work because they built it out of readily available predesigned components is not a statement about art, its a statement about you.
+1
@OP
I wonder why they would make such comments; perhaps what you're doing (the art you're creating) bother's them from an emotional artistic perspective, otherwise, why even bother?
I mean, your art ellicits a response.
IMHO, I see DAZ and Poser as a PC version of creating photographs as fine art.
It doesn't matter if the props and models are pre-made, since they are as well in traditional
photography and that is without a doubt, an art form.
When we create scenes in DAZ, the process is essentially the same. It starts with an idea,
models and props are selected, a subject is conceived then it is formulated through composition,
shaders, lighting, camera settings, etc. The final result being a work of art that hopefully conveys
your ideas in a way that provokes an emmotional response in the viewer. So, there really is no difference
if I use a "real" camera or a virtual one. The end result is the rendering.
I would say to those who say it is not art: start using the software, create your own renderings and let's
talk. Who know's? Perhaps they will be as hooked as we are.
I wouldn't worry about it when they are still arguing whether photographers are really artists. DAZ Studio's models are becoming flexible enough to create original looking images that don't have the preset look, LOL, even when they are using presets, so that's a lot of fun.
Besides, Picasso is not a real artist, Jackson Polack is not a real artist, Andy Warhol is not a real artist and even you yourself and most honest people would recognize that there were likely many more talented artists laboring in poor anominity when those famous artists were having there time in the sun. So are you creating art because you enjoy it or are you creating art to be a hipster or to be rich?
I wouldn't be drawn into arguments with people that are trying to rob you of your joy.
A ridiculous argument:
This is an interesting discussion, even though I am very late to this, let me drop my take on it here:
The way I see it, Art is not just something created by a human. It is created by the person's WILL. Technically, if by pure accident you dipped your hand in something dirty and touched a wall - you created something. But that was never your intention to do so - so its not art. However if you desired a "random" outcome to something - then the "accidents" become art.
A pretty artsy example of this would be "A Camera's journey".
Let's say you had a camera tied to your backpack. When you return home, you notice it was doing some photos now and then. This was not art, this was an accident.
HOWEVER!!!!
As an artist you now got an idea. "What if I set the camera to snap a photo every 10 seconds, while its tied to the backpack like that?" - Now you are creating art. "A Camera's journey" is born, showing a a set of photos that can be put together in a sped-up short film, showcasing what a camera would see, when its not in use.
You have relied on a purely random effect here, but it was your DECISION to use that random effect.
Your DECISION and WILL was what created art.
Now, onto the DAZ example.
The problem is that there exist people who take ALL PRESETS, dial everything to 100% with shaping morphs and expressions, choose a ready pose and a ready camera preset and just snap a render. What do you think is the final result of that? If they use a character preset with a character pose made for them - it might be kinda ok. If they just mixed things without thought - the result might be an abomination.
Its as if an adult took a coloring book - a tool that helps children ease into the drawing process - and carelessly filled it with 3 colors, because he had only 3 crayons, not caring about fully filling spaces or if he passes the lines. His work won't be considered art. He never "intended" for the final result, he just mechanically performed the task.
DAZ can be used for art, even if you never make any custom content for it - if you CHOOSE for it to be that way. You chose Bethany 7 with no additional morphs because YOU INTENDED exactly Bethany 7 there. You chose SPECIFIC CLOTHES for her. You set a camera in a just right place, because the frame is exactly how you INTENDED it to be. You setup the lights from a preset you bought because those are exactly the lights you INTENDED to have. The result is your art - the exact one you INTENDED to have.
I'll stop the caps now.
In reality speaking - it would be really hard for a real artist to just stick to "ready-to-use" content. And not because of any pride or ego reasons. You just "need something very specific" when you create your art. Beginning artists will not use much custom content, as they are learning their tools - and that's really good. They are creating their art, but "not yet what they truly wanted". They are practicing. As time passes, Bethany 7 will not be good enough - you will buy shaping morphs. If you can use Z-brush or such programs - you will just mold the form to your liking. If not - well... I use hundreds of different shaping morphs to get my desired look. And as time passes you will change so much... oh, a lot....
Your art is not a show of technical ability - your art will be in the photo.
....and speaking now like a technical geek:
DAZ Studio is a program with good rendering capability and is capable of animating and posing figures. It's technically capable of art. Whether its good or bad art - it depends purely on the artist there and not the program itself.
Everything else is just the tools.
We should judge people by their created art, not the tools they used.
The subject of art is silly no matter how you look at it, it's not a question about if it's art or not, it's usually a question of who made it these days.
If a kid makes a drawing at kindergarten it's not art, if an "artist" that makes "abstract" art make the exact same drawing it may be art if the "artist" is famous just like the silly canvas painted blue, I can do that also but it's not art because I am not famous.
If kids mess up a subway cart it's vandalism if an art student do the same things it's art (happened last year here).
We have seen people forget rubbish on the floor in exhibition halls and people think it was art just because it was there, people think it's art not because it is good, fine quality, good craftmanship or impressive, they think it's art because it was at that location and no other reason.
Just because “the two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity”, and not necessarily in that particular order.
Where it's been said a an artist has to produce everything he/she use to create art by him(her)self!?
Yup, some of the old masters mixed their paints themselves... but I can't remember that Da Vinci planted and harvested the linen to make his canvas from, nor did he raise a boar and planted nor logged a tree to make his brushes from, nor did "create" the model for his famous "Mona Lisa", by himself. (Very unpractical, you'd need to wait around twenty to thirty years to actually begin to create your art. Not to mention the costs and the effort you'd have to put into first). And, as some say, Da Vincy wasn't even really interested in women...
Did Michelangelo create the marble himself which he made his "David" from!? Any "yes" would create an incredible theological problem... and more than just a heated discussion. Although, some heat would be a great part of it, at least in the "good ole times"...
You can create endless lists of what he and his colleagues didn't create themselves... so the logical conclusion would be, that they wouldn't really be artists, too... and their so called "art" only worthless crap. That's a thing I wouldn't dare to tell any museum curator around the world.
Funny story, really happened: around two years ago I went to a museum in my hometown. Although there was a sign at a wall there only was a white curtain hanging from the roof. So I wanted to find out why they actually hide this piece of art and tried to peek behind the curtain to have a look at it. Hm, nothing there!?! I was kindly told that I "shouldn't touch the artwork, please!" ***The WHAT?!?***
Ah well, silly me, if my curtains at home would be white I could sell them for 25,000 bucks a piece. On the other hand, maybe I could charge 50,000 for blue ones...?
I take this more a sarcastic reply than a seriously meant statement...
You just quoted one of my all time favorite authors and didn't give him proper attribution.
Shame on you.
"The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -- Harlan Ellison
No jelly beans for you.
conclusion:
We make art
your friend make art
the only difference, he starts from zero, we use presets, his jealousy is because you don't start from zero, regardless art or not being art is pointless, he wants you start from zero, modelling all your assets, that's all.
Fine Art comes in all shapes and sizes, a bit of this, ab bit of that, some calling a brick placed in a corner art.
Art is everything that was made by someone with a thought behind it.
I only use DS, I do not make models, hair, clothes, lights, shaders BUT I use all of it to create something new.
Art is what you love and what makes you happy, even if it is putting a brick in a corner :)
that's a gorgeous piece of work. i only hope one day i can achieve that level.
I'm solidly in the “we make art camp.” I've had this discussion a number of times since starting with 3D and DAZ Studio. If we are using other arts to gauge the artiness of using DAZ Studio with premade content, then photography and installation art indicate that we are indeed making art.
Some elitists will say that those other things aren't art, and some other elitists will be shocked that we would dare to compare creating art from premade digital assets to creating installations from purchased or found objects.
As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, the real battle is to create good art. Some of us want to produce good art, while others are using the tools more for entertainment.Me, I want to make good art, but I've got a long way to go.