@ Paloth

You are not the first one, and you will not be the last one.
But : yet another reaction without looking..

LOOK at the examples given. => There is one example exactly for that.

Poser can do the very - exact - same thing if you want it to.
But it does not do it in preview; Poser does it at render time.

Set crease angle to 180° on all groups you want smoothed using the Scenefixer script.
And render with Smoothing enabled.

This can also be used to get a "Smooth" Genesis for those that want that.

Quote - Does 'lipstick on a pig' come to anyones mind when we are talking about great textures on craptastic models?

Miss Piggy perhaps?  Her felt skin texture would be fun to play with in Poser, but I would use it on different figures for the laugh. :)

Piggy furr skin can be created by putting a noice in displacement. :-)

I will have to try that. :)

LOOK at the examples given. => There is one example exactly for that.

All of the examples of Eva in this thread appear to be "subdivided" since I can detect polygon edges that are wavy between their points. This doesn't happen with real polygons.

Poser can do the very - exact - same thing if you want it to.
But it does not do it in preview; Poser does it at render time.

Not exactly. Poser has a form of smoothing, but one of the reasons given for Poser's inability to serve as a platform for Genesis is that it lacks the ubiquitous Catmull–Clark subdivision method and consequently doesn't bend the figures as nicely.

Try Posers Smoothing. I think you might like it.

Often the results are better then DS Catmull-Clark SubD.

And please no DS - Poser fight..

Compare first.

Genesis advantage is its poly distribution.
And Smoothing with crease angle set to 180° plays that game beautifully.

Just curious....

This is a thread about a character that someone is going to give to the community.

And there are people saying, this and that, etc.

It is ironic how when a character comes out, people say this should be done this way, that should be done that way.... I dont like this, I dont like that....
Someone is giving something to the community. A thread was started about it and it is turning into a discussion that has absolutley nothing to do with the said character.

With as many people that appear to know what the perfect character should have, we still don't have one do we? Ironic isn't it....

If anyone knows what the perfect character should look like, be rigged like, and wired like. By all means take the time to make it, and then give it to the community.

Then all the threads about it can run amuck with all sorts of stuff that has absolutley nothing to do with it. Think about that for a bit...

Food for thought.................

Not to sound snarky, but if a thread is supposed to be sunshine, kittens, and rainbows instead of real opinions on a matter, that should be on a big sign in the first post, or in the title. 

So the figure is free. Great. I admire the dedication to the community...but I'm not going to sit here and LIE and say I think it's great just because it's free. As it stands, I'm not going to use the figure. It would need improvements to draw me in. If the creator wants to know what those improvements are, I'll happily spill, but apparently doing so without being directly asked by the developer has somehow become a mean thing to do. And that, *to me, *is kind of sad. 

Also, it saddens me that a discussion cannot *evolve *anymore, but must stay rigidly "on topic," instead of spawning many different threads that can be explored and woven back into the original tapestry of conversation. 

Quote - Not to sound snarky, but if a thread is supposed to be sunshine, kittens, and rainbows instead of real opinions on a matter, that should be on a big sign in the first post, or in the title. 

So the figure is free. Great. I admire the dedication to the community...but I'm not going to sit here and LIE and say I think it's great just because it's free. As it stands, I'm not going to use the figure. It would need improvements to draw me in. If the creator wants to know what those improvements are, I'll happily spill, but apparently doing so without being directly asked by the developer has somehow become a mean thing to do. And that, *to me, *is kind of sad. 

This. And you don't need to be a modeler to see what's wrong with a human figure.

Laurie

Quote - I think Gabe has the realistic female genitals covered ;). Whether they work or not is something I'll leave to someone else to find out (I don't do porn either). They look real good from the outside tho ;). Laurie

im not really interested in making them 'work', LOL --  creating a MIMIC-capable vagina isnt really my thing.

but yeah, IMO the surface geometry - like ive been adding in all my figures - is necessary whether or not your renders/art are erotic in nature.  its a human being - it belongs there. id no more leave off genitals than id make a figure without a nose or without thumbs.

removing nipples and having neutered Ken & Barbie doll-crotches is absolutely ridiculous.  the presence of genitalia doesnt make it porn, it simply makes it human. 

Quote - LOL..yep. "The Slit" with the inner parts hanging out and no contour at all outside. If I'd woke up like that one morning, I'd go see the doctor...lol. I however, can't get past the calves ending on the top of the foot. So many figures like that nowdays you'd think it was hard to make a thinner ankle :P To be fair tho, her overall proportions and head seem a bit better than some I've seen lately.

Laurie

Is it that we lack proper references?  Do we need to start laser scanning or taking physical molds to get it right?

"Argue that point with Ken1, not with me! And what has standing up got to do with it? She's not a statue! But, frankly, I happen to like her that way!"

* *

Sorry Dave, but it looks like she has a scrotum :-)

I'm not religious on polycount. I think it may be a selling factor with new users. I don't know that people who've been around awhile and been bitten before are that easily impressed. Actually, you also find people using the 'turbo-mega-optimized mesh - Only 1 Poly!' argument as a selling point as well. I wouldn't bite based soley on either one.

I think Dave is spot on with the texture compatibility point. It may be somewhat easier to find good quality textures these days but I still don't see that many that I like. There is also always a dearth of good ethnic ones. It's not realistic to expect a new figure to be well served in that department natively. Clothing, maybe you get a converter or go dynamic or do nudes. Hiar can be tweaked as can poses but no skin = no win for me. The 1st thing that occurred to me r.e. Cynthia was with luck she'll have one decent base texture and maybe someone will create one or two more.

I think that BVH has been around long enough not to be deterred by honest opinions. Maybe critique of a novice needs to be done a bit differently but either way, as long as it's not simply mean or nasty...

I used to get very excited about every new figure - and an anatomically correct one, whoo wee. Now, I more realistic about what I'm likely to actually get much use from. Now, gasp!, I may have enough. I'm more likely to want a cute toon than a another general figure. I'll probably get Cynthia because the collecting bug still lives, and BVH does great work. 

Thanks to the OP for the heads up. Since most of BVH's free garments are now only for his commercial figures AFAIK, I haven't been there lately & would have missed this new figure.

Quote - Not to sound snarky, but if a thread is supposed to be sunshine, kittens, and rainbows instead of real opinions on a matter, that should be on a big sign in the first post, or in the title. 

So the figure is free. Great. I admire the dedication to the community...but I'm not going to sit here and LIE and say I think it's great just because it's free. As it stands, I'm not going to use the figure. It would need improvements to draw me in. If the creator wants to know what those improvements are, I'll happily spill, but apparently doing so without being directly asked by the developer has somehow become a mean thing to do. And that, *to me, *is kind of sad. 

Also, it saddens me that a discussion cannot *evolve *anymore, but must stay rigidly "on topic," instead of spawning many different threads that can be explored and woven back into the original tapestry of conversation. 

Well said.

Nobody seems to have noticed that development on the figure...which was going "gangbusters"...has come to a standstill. Possibly one of those, "life got in the way" issues?

Quote - > Quote - LOL..yep. "The Slit" with the inner parts hanging out and no contour at all outside. If I'd woke up like that one morning, I'd go see the doctor...lol. I however, can't get past the calves ending on the top of the foot. So many figures like that nowdays you'd think it was hard to make a thinner ankle :P To be fair tho, her overall proportions and head seem a bit better than some I've seen lately.

Laurie

 

Is it that we lack proper references?  Do we need to start laser scanning or taking physical molds to get it right?

I think Peter Levius has plenty of references on his site. But I mean, all you need is a dirty magazine really. Or a willing girlfriend...lol.

Laurie

Quote - Just curious....

This is a thread about a character that someone is going to give to the community.

And there are people saying, this and that, etc.

It is ironic how when a character comes out, people say this should be done this way, that should be done that way.... I dont like this, I dont like that....
Someone is giving something to the community. A thread was started about it and it is turning into a discussion that has absolutley nothing to do with the said character.

With as many people that appear to know what the perfect character should have, we still don't have one do we? Ironic isn't it....

If anyone knows what the perfect character should look like, be rigged like, and wired like. By all means take the time to make it, and then give it to the community.

Then all the threads about it can run amuck with all sorts of stuff that has absolutley nothing to do with it. Think about that for a bit...

Food for thought.................

This attitude has always driven me nuts.  If a creator doesn't want feedback, they can either post in the gallery and turn off comments, or simply just post the figure somewhere when it's done.  If it is posted in the forums than it is assumed you are wanting feedback.  Well IMO this thread has offered a lot of valuable feedback about what people want in models, and what people see in this one.

I personally used Peters references for my morphs.  I also used my 30+ years experience as a female lol.  That mirror scene from Fried Green Tomatoes comes to mind lmao.  j/k  I did really get sick of seeing that particular body part though, and I fancy myself a big fan of the female form.  Too much is too much.

I can not stop smiling here.

On one side, the USA is SOOOOOOO censervative.
SM and DAZ are sooooo conservative?

A nipple OH!
A penis !!

You will all burn in hell!!!!

And some "artist", sorry for the description,  models a 10.000 poly detailed vagina.

Are Poser and DS for art or for porn?

I absolutely love a naked human body.
And I adore the beauty of a wonderfull lady, and all Poser figures should come "complete". 

Cynthia is neither.
Not anatomically correct, not beautifull, nor well made.
Poly distribution is a mess. And the mapping is good for a sadistical nightmare.

But ?
Anyhow,
I do not need a wide open vagina staring in my face when I open Poser.
That is enough to kill the app for the rest of the week.

I fear most modelers have never seen a naked lady in their life.

17 years into Poser, and I still have to discover the first figure with breasts that are normal size and in the correct position on the chest.

But???
I should thank all these figure builders.
That is how I learned how to moprh. 

I am just sooooo tired of doing it over, and over, and all over again.

Oh yes.
One more detail.
Ladies??? Are all your breasts soft or hard as rock????

My girlfriends breasts go up when she lifts her arms.
And her breasts go down when she lowers her arms.
Oh, miracle !!

I can not believe she is the only lady suffering from this medical problem in the whole world?

And one last remark.
Bra sizes?

They start at D in the USA?
Never seen a default figure with a A or a B cup either.
Your backs must all be super tired of hauling all that weight around.

Shaking my head.

Well, it is true that American men seem to have an obsession with boobs...lol.

Laurie

Just fell of my chair.

Got a brainwave!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How would a woman model/build a Penis?

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote - How would a woman model/build a Penis?

From plastic? Anyone got a battery?

Laurie

Quote - Just fell of my chair.

Got a brainwave!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How would a woman model/build a Penis?

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL. Probably they'd model it to look like the ones they'd seen.  In my experience, it's only men who are deeply concerned about the size, shape, and other peculiarities of this particular organ.

Quote - > Quote - How would a woman model/build a Penis?

From plastic? Anyone got a battery?

Laurie

If JimmyJane is any indication, the dildo isn't really where it's at. :)

So???
We can conclude that NOBODY that ever modeled a female figure has ever seen some real breasts?

They model them like they want them to be?????????????

@LauriA

You are excluded.
You can do the feet. :-)

Ha-ha-ha-, boink !
(Second drop from same chair.)

Ps; use rechargable. :-)

Quote - So???
We can conclude that NOBODY that ever modeled a female figure has ever seen some real breasts?

They model them like they want them to be?????????????

Yeah, you'd think with all the attention paid to them that they'd get them right.

Laurie's standards of realism notwithstanding, I can understand if the the back of the heel or the little toe is wrong, but the breasts? It does seem odd.

Actually, I'd rather build one from chocolate, but whatever ;).

Laurie

Attached Link: http://www.cheddarchocolate.com/shop200477_cat21463_pair_of_chocolate_feet_chocolate_shapes.htm

There ya go.

Wasn't talking about feet...lololol.

Laurie

Quote - So???
We can conclude that NOBODY that ever modeled a female figure has ever seen some real breasts?

They model them like they want them to be?????????????

If I were to model a toon from scratch, this would be how I did it, since I would be making it for me to enjoy using once it was finished.  Mine, however, would have preset dials for size, apparent gravity (and not just when standing), and apparent cleavage to simulate constriction from clothing when only body painted to look dressed.

So, yes, they would look how I want, I just would not want them to only be exposed and / or gravity defiant.  Most of the real ones I have seen are either the "wrong" shape, size, firmness, . . .  Poser allows me to Frankenbabe a toon into what I want to use, not what others insist is correct.

Attached Link: Dphoadley's Large Breast Alert (Nudity}

Dphoadley's Large Breast Alert.02  (Nudity)

Dphoadley's Large Breast Alert.03  (Nudity)

dph

Well, at least they have flotation devices for visiting the beach.  Mine would be in trouble. :)

Do not show the government.

It might give them an idea for a new tax :-)

The large breast fascination is not limited to America - though perhaps we may have exported it to some degree. I've read that Japanese prostitutes started using industrial silicone as breast enhancement during the post-WWII occupation to appeal to American servicemen. Now, they have their own J-Cup fetish. I think it's more instinct by now than anything. IMO Even men who may prefer smaller breasts are still drawn visually to large ones. Hell, even gay men probably look :-) I know that I can register a female form in a banner add faster than should be accounted for by normal visual facilities.

The problem with Cynthia's sanctum sanctorum is (per the pic at least) that it's too detailed for 'art' and too rudimentary for graphic erotic or medical images. I'd say that it's neither fish nor fowl but that might be too much. 

Quote - I'd say that it's neither fish nor fowl but that might be too much.

Mamalian fur bearing Beaver anybody?!

Quote - IMO Even men who may prefer smaller breasts are still drawn visually to large ones. Hell, even gay men probably look :-) I know that I can register a female form in a banner add faster than should be accounted for by normal visual facilities.

I'm a heterosexual female, but if I see a woman showing off excessive cleavage, I find it hard not to look too. I don't know if it's some sort of morbid fascination, or admiration, or what... But I don't think I'm unusual. I'm told that women check each other out quite a lot. Must keep tabs on the competition, I guess.

A-B-cup women can still look pretty at 50-60.

Balloon women are sagging badly at that age.

Sorry but with age, gravity takes over. No matter what you try.

LOL. Actually, when it comes to breasts, the worst thing I've ever seen is a 70 year old with implants.

Quote - > Quote - IMO Even men who may prefer smaller breasts are still drawn visually to large ones. Hell, even gay men probably look :-) I know that I can register a female form in a banner add faster than should be accounted for by normal visual facilities.

I'm a heterosexual female, but if I see a woman showing off excessive cleavage, I find it hard not to look too. I don't know if it's some sort of morbid fascination, or admiration, or what... But I don't think I'm unusual. I'm told that women check each other out quite a lot. Must keep tabs on the competition, I guess.

It IS checking out the competition..lol. FWIW, I'm not a fan of the implant look, like Cynthia ;). Natural looks better...lol.

Laurie

I've said it before and I'll say it again but it seems to me that we here in the UK must be living in boobie heaven, since most of our females seem to be well endowed in the chesticles department.  Not to say we don't have smaller breasted women but by and large, (pun intended) our lasses tend to be well equipped.

Contrary to belief, though, they don't necessarily turn into spaniel's ears as they get older; excercise and a properly fitting bra can do wonders for their anti-sag properties.  Then again, I have seen women with quite small breasts which sag beyond all mortal understanding.

As for the reproductive bits, I have seen a couple similar to the one modelled by BVH.  I guess they're all shapes and sizes, kinda like their male counterparts.  I prefer 'em neat and tidy, rather than looking like a badly packed doner kebab.  :) 

I must be strange.. boobs are not what I look at in a lass. infact, one lass, who was 44HHH in size dated me because I was the first man to talk to her face... big, small, whatever.....

True, I've seen 50+ women who were still quite bouyant. I agrre that the bra probably has a lot to do with it. You see a lot of sagging in cultures where women traditionally go topless - though part of it may be genetic as well.

*"LOL. Actually, when it comes to breasts, the worst thing I've ever seen is a 70 year old with implants." *

She must have been a pioneer or gotten them fairly late. The nursing homes are going to be full of silicone inflated, tatted, pierced grannies rocking out to hip hop. It will not be pretty.

I'd rather they be natural whatever the size and these butt injections are insane - even when not done with Fix-A-Flat.

I've decided that the only way to go is to create the 'vital' area first and build the rest of the model around it. If you look inside the free ZWoman figure, Zygote had the right idea - detail :-)

*http://www.sharecg.com/v/6516/gallery/11/Poser/ZWoman-for-Poser *