If you do a lot of muscular character renders, you might want to look at this before you buy Victoria 3. The figure on the left is Stephanie with the native Stephanie morph set to 1.000 (default) and Stephanie's Muscular morph set to 1.250. The figure on the right is Victoria 3 with the Muscular2 and Faerie morphs injected. Muscular2 was set at 1.000, Faerie was set at 0.333. This was done in the interest of fair play; Stepahnie morph is a slimming morph on Stephanie, so I wanted an equally slimming morph on V3 to see how it would affect musclarity. My conclusions--V3 does a more realistic job with abdominals, biceps/triceps, and breasts, but Stephanie does a much better job with symmetry of the torso overall, particularly with the lats/serratus muscles. And in the lower body, Steph is far more realistic--what's with those grotesque upper leg muscles on V3? (A third alternative, which I'll post after this message, uses a product from the Marketplace by Virus called AthleticVicki. When coupled with the Faerie morph, it is also very symmetrical). Draw your own conclusions, buy IMHO, Stephanie looks best overall if you want to render muscular/superhero type of characters. Comments/curses/rants welcome.

Here is a render of Virus' AthleticVicki. The Athletic morph is set to .850, the Faerie morph to .250. Uses subdividing MAT poses and the Diabolique texture, so it's not as "pure" as the previous examples, but I think the symmetry of the figure is quite evident. Again, comments welcome.

comments? unmmm stop steroid use? ;P

Show us what the legs look like without the faerie morph...

Here is another render, this time using Muscular1 and Muscular2 morphs. Gorodin, the first time I rendered the first-posted image without the Faerie morph, the legs were even bigger. There's no Faerie morph on this one, just Muscular1 and Muscular2. In this case the settings are much lower---Muscular1 is set for .666, Muscular2 is at .333. It's a little more natural looking, but the torso (around the waist) still looks a little asymmetrical to me. As always, comments welcome.

Well, I'm glad I have Stephanie...

Did you try lower the muscular1 pbm on the right and left legs for V3? That would probably fix it.

Wampyir,

I disagree. V3's biceps with the Bicep and Bicep flex morphs create a more realistic upper arm and bicep than Stephanie.

My comparison render is WIP right now. I'll post it tomorrow morning. It's time to crash.

Attached is a render using one of one of Steph's Muscle Poses. The morphs are set as follows:

Stephanie Morphs
Muscular - 1.0
Biceps - 1.0

Victoria 3 Morphs
Muscular1 - 1.0
Bicep - 1.0
BicepFlex - 0.2

While Stephanie has better symmetry, IMO, Victoria 3's has more realistic muscles than Stephanie.

I think it will be easy to get a wider range of muscle using V3.

And I'm guessing is't V3 on the left?

Milamber: I think we're both on the same page here...you used the same poses I did for the first pic. Looking at your render, I think the problem with the symmetry isn't a problem at all, but an illusion based on the way the torso of each model is twisted. Look at the waist of each model...the character's left side is straight, but her right side is bent. The difference seems more pronounced on V3 than on Steph...maybe that's why Steph seems to have the better symmetry.