Attached Link: For Further Reading

So, I have been here on Renderosity for a while now, and I have seen some well-composed images.  But they are peppered sparingly in with thousands and thousands of these "perfectly centered nudes".  Now, I realize that a lot of the artists here are young, and the subject matter is what arouses their interest - heck I was young once too.   Carter was president then.

But I implore you - all Poser artists who may read this:  Try a little creativity in the composition of your scenes -  something other than purple hair or blue nipples.   There are many ways to compose images other than to center your subject perfectly in the frame. 

good point and good link! thanks for both... as it is right now, with all the kids wetting their panties in excitement for p7 and v4, you should not be disappointed if your thread passes more or less unnoticed ;) A.

I try..;) I'm not perfectly-centered, why should my pics be?..;)

Thanks for the note and the link!

Very very useful advices for Poser or Photographs!

:thumbupboth:

poser users range in age from teens to probably nonagenarians. if ya see a bad render in the gallery here, it's actually more likely it was produced by someone nearer the mean user age (~38).

I approach poser.. just like I approach photography... same principles apply.. every light, every pose, ever character is placed in a specific position for a reason... dof, pov, etc....  because I just consider it Photography without the kids that won't sit just the way you like when the light hits them just right :)

You know what, I have this overpowering urge to post a lot of crooked nudes now.  I mean mega crooked, we're talking at least 7 or 8 degrees off center.
ps: nonagenarian is a cool word.

There' s no beating the rule of thirds.  There's something about that number--3.

Quote - poser users range in age from teens to probably nonagenarians. if ya see a bad render in the gallery here, it's actually more likely it was produced by someone nearer the mean user age (~38).

So young people put their figure to the left, and older people to the right? Unless they're Arabic or Japanese, in which case they do it in reverse? And Chinese artists who are young put it at the top, but if old at the bottom?

I thought it was Democrats on the left.......
But seriously, folks......
(Great advice and invaluable link, BTW)

That's a rule in comics as well. No family photos (a term I've heard used to describe perfectly centered pics with no camera tilt or interesting angles). 

Its especially true when doing action poses. The camera should never be straight. There should be no symetry along the left/right side of the body ie arms should be posed differently, legs should not be the same pose, hips should never be straight, head should be tilted etc.

I've seen some pretty nice renders that are complete snooze fests because they lack composition.

I must admit that this is a far better response than I had hoped for... I posted my comments for 2 reasons. First as a discussion starter, and second in the hopes that a little more artistic value might come to pass.

In regards to composition, I have heard it said that Ansel Adams would find a good landscape shot and wait all day hanging in a tree for the light to be 'just so'.  In virtual art, we can move the Sun with a click of the mouse...

If you don't know who Ansel Adams was, close that mega-breasted pinup render and google for his art.  You won't be sorry.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled boobies.

funny, I thought you were just trollin, especially considering the name...
http://dictionary.reference.com/wordoftheday/archive/2003/06/18.html

:rolleyes:

funny, how all kinds of 'no good, try harder' seem to be so easily regarded as 'trolling'...

I think most of us are older. I WILL NOT admit my age, but it's been awhile since they asked for my ID at bars, LOL! KIds don't have the money for Poser. I know what you mean, though. I was taught that in art class - back in the days when computers were just a twinkel in Thomas Edison's eye.........

I said that because "bombast" typically IS trolling.

Quote - funny, how all kinds of 'no good, try harder' seem to be so easily regarded as 'trolling'...

If that is so, it is mainly because:

1. No one likes to be told what to do, least of all in something as personal as art.

2. Too many people in this place have trouble accepting that everyone has different goals in doing a render.

3. A lot of the people making these 'no good, try harder' posts don't seem to have the skill to lecture people in the first place.

Yeah yeah, whatever, how about some crooked nudes people!

It actually is good advice, composition is a good thing to learn to make your pictures different and more interesting.

Yes, but somehow this person comes across as arrogant and assuming we are teenagers. LOL! I WISH I was a teen.

Quote - There' s no beating the rule of thirds.  There's something about that number--3.

Oh, I can beat cha at that un. ;)

Try the 'rule of 1:1.618' (otherwise known as the Golden Ratio, Golden Rectangle, Golden Section, Golden Mean, Golden Proportion, Divine Proportion).  Da Vinci, Michaelangelo, Durer, Rafael, and other masters used it.  It is related to Fibonacci numbers, spirals, architectural design (Egyptian and Greek, for instance). It is probably one of the most used and longest standing uses of space for design and aesthetics in human history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rectangle

Now, it does have relation to the 'rule of thirds' (or the other way round, actually), but it far exceeds that basic application in how far it is taken (square-golden-rectangle spatial subdivisions, proportions, spiral flow form, and so on).

also to be found many places in the natural world. things like the human body. the universe, sound and plant life to name a few

billy

Quote - > Quote - There' s no beating the rule of thirds.  There's something about that number--3.

Oh, I can beat cha at that un. ;)

Try the 'rule of 1:1.618' (otherwise known as the Golden Ratio, Golden Rectangle, Golden Section, Golden Mean, Golden Proportion, Divine Proportion).  Da Vinci, Michaelangelo, Durer, Rafael, and other masters used it.  It is related to Fibonacci numbers, spirals, architectural design (Egyptian and Greek, for instance). It is probably one of the most used and longest standing uses of space for design and aesthetics in human history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rectangle

Now, it does have relation to the 'rule of thirds' (or the other way round, actually), but it far exceeds that basic application in how far it is taken (square-golden-rectangle spatial subdivisions, proportions, spiral flow form, and so on).

one doesn't need to be able to do something to make a point about it.
he didn't give an order for gods sake, he just made a valid point about composition. something everyone should know about. ok so they don't have to use it if they don't wish but swtop being so fast to smash people down. it wasn't posted with any malice. why can't people just be nice for a change.

billy

Quote - > Quote - funny, how all kinds of 'no good, try harder' seem to be so easily regarded as 'trolling'...

If that is so, it is mainly because:

1. No one likes to be told what to do, least of all in something as personal as art.

2. Too many people in this place have trouble accepting that everyone has different goals in doing a render.

3. A lot of the people making these 'no good, try harder' posts don't seem to have the skill to lecture people in the first place.

And where's my goddamn crooked nudes!

I believe that the rule of thirds is a simplified version of the golden mean.

Quote - one doesn't need to be able to do something to make a point about it.

Not when you are talking about a technical skill... would you take advice on how to drive a car from someone who never drove one himself ? Or who occasionally bangs into the nearest pole ?

Quote - he didn't give an order for gods sake, he just made a valid point about composition. something everyone should know about. ok so they don't have to use it if they don't wish but swtop being so fast to smash people down. it wasn't posted with any malice. why can't people just be nice for a change.

Maybe i was too harsh and i apologise for that... However i am very tired of seeing these sort of posts here. I admit they do contain the occasional valid point, but they are often couched in such a  condescending tone that it is very hard to take them 'nicely.'

knowing about composition and not being good at it is a bit different than someone telling us how to drive.  i think composition is more a visual skill. we can all see it but some like me have trouble recreating it. thats jmo. whilst i have to agree that some are condescending as you say, i don't think this one was.  

i do applaud your reply and your civility. thanks

billy

Yeah, I can see what you are saying about Tekmonk.  i didn't feel that at first, but i can definately see why most would.

I am glad for the little reminder.  It is a rule I know too well (especially the Golden Mean).  A Bachelor of Fine Arts would suggest that I could make better art then I do!  When working as a photographer I always took all these things into account.  I shot so many photos that it became second nature to me.  I looked through a lens and I saw the perfect composition.

With Poser and all 3D I find myself spending so much time on so many little details that in the end I'm just happy to get the pic rendered.  I try to remind myself, but I can forget.

That said, a perfectly centred nude can be a good thing.  I will defend a few fine pin up artists (from here and elsewhere) who use centered nudes.  But these people don't center.  They make the body parts fall into areas within the rule of nine, the golden mean or which ever.

Things don't have to be "off centre" or crooked to be interesting or well composed.  If every artist did that, then we would be getting people complaining that no one takes the time to center their work.

In the end, the composition has to fit the subject matter.

Other points to consider are playing with the focal length and actual angle.  Not everything has to be from straight forward.  We can move above or below the subject to create interest and new meaning.

Still, I'm happy to be reminded.

(Hey, it's better then someone coming to my gallery and just saying, "This sucks".)

Ishtar demands spanking!

With those breasts, i think any crookedness is perfectly understandable. In fact I'm amazed she can even stay upright !

(Nice work BTW, great pose and lighting)

Actually anyone whom ever knocks any "Boob.," immediately attempts to devolve under my skin!

Needless to say, I personally, totally disagree with the premise of this post, %100.

Technically, it much more scientifically sound to have a figure your developing centered in your scene, especially in 3D sculpting.  When you begin making changes to one side or another your change would appear symetrical.  Developing a Character Study without the figure centered would be like trying to do it drunk, cock eye, or otherwise disabled.

In dealing with (Your own...) Human form, you'll never be able to focus your attention, toward the center/apex, of your image too much.  Such recreation is only heard of in Fairy Tales...If you happen to see Aphrodite, or the Sirens around somewhere, let me know?
 

Q:'Technically, it much more scientifically sound to have a figure your developing centered in your scene, especially in 3D sculpting. When you begin making changes to one side or another your change would appear symetrical. Developing a Character Study without the figure centered would be like trying to do it drunk, cock eye, or otherwise disabled.' yes and no, angel! it isn't that easy. let's say, you you want to morph a face. sure you will leave the character in zero-pose. (but you will constantly move the camera around, otherwise you'd get one of those lips-full faces that are oooh sooo sexy from the front but from the side she's like kissing a fishbowl.....mmmh - i'm losing the track...) but when you set up a portrait of that face it is not exactly a good idea to render that zeroed character straight from the front. no matter how pretty or realistic the face is - it will look awfully boring ('family photo'). side-side and twist the head a little bit, a bit brows arch and smile, the camera a bit y-rot and x/y-trans, and the resulting render will always (ALWAYS!) be more attractive for the viewer. do you agree? this is what this thread is about..... ;) A

a). When I first came here many many years ago, I thought everyone was probably quite young, simply because I tend to think of the computer as the domain of the young. I was actually quite surprise over the years as I found that so many of us are middle-aged (or late -middle aged). Therefore I didn't think the original poster was being arrogant at all. b). not all 38 year olds are mean. c). I've tried to start threads directed at the 'art' aspect of what we do here and watched them fizzle. All too often people ignore that in favor of the technical aspect of what we do. I'm glad this one is living instead of fizzling for the simple reason that both aspects are important in our development as Poser artists. d). Centered is not bad. It can impart a sense of stability to an image, which is sometimes entirely appropriate. It really depends on the subject. As an example, the famous painting "American Gothic" (the farmer with the pitchfork standing next to his wife in front of the farmis one that comes to mind where the subjects are centered. It's not dynamic but that actually would be quite contrary to the artists intention to depict the couple as stable, traditional, and perhaps even eternal. I try to use the rule of thirds most of the time, but sometimes it's good to break the 'rules.'

crooked nude for ya!

haha - there ya go pjz99 and Tiari!  Now I feel protected from false advertizing liability.

And don't think of this thread as complaining. What I'm trying to do is inspire LOL

Merry Christmas!

*"but you will constantly move the camera around,"

When you switch to side view you still keep your character in the center of the Document Window.  In other words you do'nt rotate the y-axis 90 degrees and then leave your X-Tran so her nose touches the side of the screen, but the back of her head is half a Document Window away form that opposite side.

*"it is not exactly a good idea to render that zeroed character straight from the front."

Family Photo is deviant term.  If you're not prepared to show us your figure at it's Zero pose, then you are'nt done working.  I think any work done well would benefit from a Zero pose the most, it's the view the artist himself worked from. 

And I ca'nt understand why anyone would specifically rule out Zero poses, in a request for material?    

@ angel is 'police record photo' better? anyway, i've tried and i failed... none the less i would like to draw your attention to an image pjz99 posted not long ago: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/media/folder_8/file_363156.jpg pls take a look at it and tell me what you think. @pjz99 say, do you have a bigger version of this image? A.

That will be the centerpiece for my first real effort in Vue.  I've barely got started on it, having problems getting Vue to properly use the Poser shader tree.  I am doing a complete hardware/OS/software upgrade starting tomorrow so I haven't pushed to hard at doing it yet, I've been doing small scale stuff... really everything in my gallery or that I've posted in the forums is sandbox stuff, I've yet to produce "finished" art.  So anyway, not quite yet.  Even then it will be a raw render because I've not begun to learn much about postwork (I only have so much brain, I've only been doing this stuff for about eight weeks now and I'm learning as fast as I can).

eight weeks?! that's dang good, eight weeks or not, my compliment! i think, after eight weeks in poser i knew how to get rid of this effing awful box-like thingie judy has youknowwhere... look, from when i saw it first on i fancy to shift the whole thing - in the end just a little bit - and to ask you for your opinion about this change. for that i would have to postwork the hair a bit, which would be much easier with a bigger version. so, back to my question.....;) A. ps: 541 posts in 8 weeks???????

What can I say, I'm a night shift worker with a very dull and boring job in 12.5 hour shifts - I sit in an operations center and wait for work to come to me, and for long periods of time it does not.  I can't play games, I can't leave, I can't do drugs or "abuse myself", but I do have a computer and internet connection... So I think, and I write, and I read, and I generally make an idiot out of myself on some forum or another.  You don't even want to know how much money I've spent on this stuff in the short time I've been working with it.

Regarding the image, I first rendered it at 1600x1200 mostly as a test of the P7 renderer (which I had configured poorly up until then) and had to reduce it to get the forum to take it.  The scene is saved along with the dynamics because I do plan to do a big Vue scene around that, but I can render it again if you really like?  Although what would you change exactly?

ps: nice of you to say, I learn as fast as I can... but still so slow!  I am months away from really getting to what I want to do at this rate.  :cursing:

i'd be happy if you don't mind taking the trouble of rendering it again. 1600X1200 would be cool. y'know, the bigger, the better. i'd like to change the width-height ratio to don't know, move the character to don't know, and make the rear ends of the hair (the gray strands) darker to bring the 'center' a bit closer to the character - i know that at least :D. i'm not even sure if i would like it more with those changes, but i'd like to try...in the end it's just a question of taste;) sending my addy via site mail. A.

All right, although it'll be 5.5 hours minimum before I can even start another render (at work).  I'll give you a bit more light to work with too.

don't know what you have to do when there IS something to do, but when they pay you for rendering your lassies most of the time - can't help it...that doesn't sound too bad! i'd say, leave the lights as they are..... A.

*"is 'police record photo' better?"

Sure...And next time we catch a murdering rapist; they'll think twice...just for you...

"anyway, i've tried and i failed..."

The "I's" have it...

Hey, ask a crooked question, and get a straight answer, what a system!

No, that's the not-fun part, I have to sit here and basically read tutorials and work on my script and visualize, I couldn't bring Poser/Vue up here and work on it - not entirely bad because if I did I'd probably burn out pretty quick and my script would never get done.

Re: lights, are you sure?  easier to take it out than to put it in right?  I think that scene is lit with one whitish infinite pointing at her front, and one yellowish spot near grould level behind her pointing at the hip - you don't want a little more light on the hair?  ^_^ up to you!

the more light you add, the more my lack of pshop skills would become obvious - no, thanks. apart from that i think the lights are ok...

ok :) I will get one done once I get home (probably it will render while I sleep)

Its not really the chronological age thats important, more the time spent using poser.

What's your poser age?

Amacord, mail sent to you bounces because apparently my providor is a dirty rotten spammer?