What is a "proper" face????
A face you see on the streets, or a Barby doll face?????

I prefer the face/figure from the street, and that IS not perfect.  It can not, and never will be perfect.

But it sure as hell is not a V4 or Gene face.

A celebrety morph? With or without botox and or the other plastic parts?

And the next poster will let me pump the helium back in the breasts, yeah. :-)  Back to Poser and DS balloons. No thanks.

She is modeled from a real person. One without botox or helium. And she will stay this way.

Unsubscribing.

Art of any kind is subjective, what one one person calls realistic is not what others call it.

One person may put a green splodge on a blue background and say it is New York at Sunset. That is realistic to them, to me it's just a splodge, but in the end it is all art.

All the best.

LROG

whoa, major thread drift...

Laurie

Quote - whoa, major thread drift...

Laurie

You think? Hate to say it but, Dunning-kruger effect for a few pages...

I purposely marked mine as OT.

Back to the V4 thing...

Part of the reason that a lot of renders look the same is simple to figure out. A vendor makes a character set that a lot of people like. People buy it and make a render of it and are pleased with what they did. Then they post it.

If it is a good selling character set, your gonna see a lot of it in a case like that. And there is nothing wrong with that at all. After all, they paid for the character set and are having fun with it. (That is why a lot of people do it, to have fun.) The saturation V4 has, makes it even more obvious.

Poser users are a diverse group. But that diversity is not evenly spread out thou. Some people just render what they have, that could be any character set they bought. Some Poser users don't buy much of anything and make a lot of their own stuff too, but that group is far outnumbered by the load, pose and render group.

I know people that use Poser that have never used the Setup, Hair, or Face Room at all. Some don't even venture into the Material room either. They couldn't even begin to explain the file structures, etc. But they have fun with it, and thats all that really matters in the end.

Does that make their art "less art" or "less creative" than someone that uses every room? No, not at all. But you will see that same face in other renders.

The character in the picture started out as Sally Birk, but became Siobahn, the naughty elf recently.  She is seen without her elf ears here.  :)

*"Poser users are a diverse group"*Give that man a cigar, and a Pabst Blue Ribbon if they still brew it. I am endlessly bemused by how many people cannot fathom that simple fact. If everyone agreed on what a 'proper' face was, 99% of the human race would never get laid and and the cockroaches would be ruling the planet - more than they already are. The messianic zeal about whose figure is better or how many polygons can fit on the head of a pin belongs in church/temple/mosque/coven/late night dorm room pot party or the locked ward at some institution where the inmates all wear those Hannibal Lecter masks. As Mr. Mencken said,

"Deep within the heart of every evangelist lies the wreck of a car salesman."

There are not many character sets for V4 with an "interesting face". Most have that bland "advertising industry" look, just like many real life z-list celebrities.

So to make a "real character" takes a fair bit of work. But, for me at least, V4 is a pretty decent base mesh with plenty of potential to make all kinds of original faces.

Just imagine if V4 and M4 worked in the Face Room. That would be brilliant!

Quote - *"Poser users are a diverse group"*Give that man a cigar, and a Pabst Blue Ribbon if they still brew it. I am endlessly bemused by how many people cannot fathom that simple fact. If everyone agreed on what a 'proper' face was, 99% of the human race would never get laid and and the cockroaches would be ruling the planet - more than they already are. The messianic zeal about whose figure is better or how many polygons can fit on the head of a pin belongs in church/temple/mosque/coven/late night dorm room pot party or the locked ward at some institution where the inmates all wear those Hannibal Lecter masks. As Mr. Mencken said,

"Deep within the heart of every evangelist lies the wreck of a car salesman."

I've been spending time on other forums, and I have to say, I really wish these ones had a rating system for posts. Because if they did, I'd definitely give points to that post.

Attached Link: Pez

Doric

Quote - There are not many character sets for V4 with an "interesting face". Most have that bland "advertising industry" look, just like many real life z-list celebrities.

So to make a "real character" takes a fair bit of work. But, for me at least, V4 is a pretty decent base mesh with plenty of potential to make all kinds of original faces.

Just imagine if V4 and M4 worked in the Face Room. That would be brilliant!

I'll agree.  Far too many of the faces released have that look I call New York ad agency, and New York anything is not what I'm looking for.

V/M4 in the face room, yes, that would be nice.  It would also be nice if the Poser kid figures worked there too.  I don't know why that omission.  Kate has more of a kid face, but the ability to tweak it a little would let it serve a lot more purposes. 

Doric.  (At this time in the morning, AKA Leonardo Di Puncci.)

Well, my favorite face so far, by far, that I've ever seen is the face Mark@Poser posted in this thread. LOL. It's adult and actually looks like a person. I find most V4 characters look way too young for my confort zone ;).

Laurie

"… I'd definitely give points to that post."

It's the thought that counts :-)

PrecisionXXX, thanks for the Pez link (I was afr4aid it was a pic of a Pez dispenser). She's cute enough to take home. Maybe not 'proper' or 'real,' but that's probably why Poser's virtual population is 90% nubile, agile and with a  fashion taste runs toward budoir chic. There's nothing wrong with reality, but I can see it down at  the Burger Barn, in all its strained spandex glory. Now for my reality, I think Pez needs a unicorn. 

Quote - "… I'd definitely give points to that post."

It's the thought that counts :-)

PrecisionXXX, thanks for the Pez link (I was afr4aid it was a pic of a Pez dispenser). She's cute enough to take home. Maybe not 'proper' or 'real,' but that's probably why Poser's virtual population is 90% nubile, agile and with a  fashion taste runs toward budoir chic. There's nothing wrong with reality, but I can see it down at  the Burger Barn, in all its strained spandex glory. Now for my reality, I think Pez needs a unicorn. 

In my VR world, I use Koz Messy hair, she takes a different look, adding a smile gives her a different personality.   The morph doesn't seem to limit what you can do with the expressions too much.  Maybe a render later.  When Leonardo Di Puncci quits playing with my twisted sense of humor.

Doric.

Doric.

I just saw this post. I think you have encapsulated everything I have thought on this subject!

Quote - *"Poser users are a diverse group"*Give that man a cigar, and a Pabst Blue Ribbon if they still brew it. I am endlessly bemused by how many people cannot fathom that simple fact. If everyone agreed on what a 'proper' face was, 99% of the human race would never get laid and and the cockroaches would be ruling the planet - more than they already are. The messianic zeal about whose figure is better or how many polygons can fit on the head of a pin belongs in church/temple/mosque/coven/late night dorm room pot party or the locked ward at some institution where the inmates all wear those Hannibal Lecter masks. As Mr. Mencken said,

"Deep within the heart of every evangelist lies the wreck of a car salesman."

Very interesting Shvr!

Quote - OT:

Quote - The main problem with ALL hi poly figures is that they have a VERY UNEVEN poly distribution.

I don't know what high poly characters you have been working with, but I have some that are within 8% surface area per face. (including the head)

The attached one is a tad over 18% variance (not including the head on this one). And it is done that way on purpose so the morphs reduce the variance difference if you go to more of a pinup character. This started out as the Sydney G2 mesh, it can use 3 different UV setups by swapping out displayed body parts. I have 3 versions of it, low, medium, and high rez like pictured. They are not simple subdivisions, there are substantial differences to the meshes, but they all share the same topology, clothes, and joint centers. I have completely bone driven versions (Blend Shaping) for Poser as well.

I am in the process of doing this with an entirely new mesh as well. Aiming for 5% variance.

...

Depending on what you are doing with a character, you may or may not want even poly distribution. In Poser, it doesn't really matter in the end because you can't easily swap UVs on most characters anyway.

If UV swapping is needed you have to set it up like the old (P2) characters, and basically have 2 or more of each body part in the cr2. Swapping them out with weight mapping is murder to set up as well. You will be renaming a lot of maps....

UV swapping will get rid of a lot of texture stretching at the joints, and the higher the mesh resolution is, the less stretch you will get if it is weight and UV mapped to take that into account.

To me a low poly character is all but useless in Poser because it is not handled as a control cage.

Using them in programs that support control cages is another story. You all but want a low poly version then.

The biggest difference between the two is how you get details to show up on the characters. In Poser you can use displacement maps on low poly characters, but it wont work as well as it does in a program that can do selectable levels of subdivision or use a particle system.

Right now in Poser, you are better off with a higher poly count than you are using a low count and displacement.

Quote - My point?

STOP dial spinning.
START making.

If I can do this with my limited tools?
Everybody can.

Have a nice day. :-)

You mentioned start making, so start making some characters. If you can do the clothes, you can do a character.

....back to regular thread topic....

i hate to derail the topic by going back to the original question i've been chatting with other rendo members in a thread where realism is seen as the technical but not art worthy side of poser , but i think faces are just part of the problem, there are any number of real world (ish) morphs out there and of course there is dial spinning too, but unless you are just rendering a portrait, most face morphs don't come with a full realistic looking body morph, not talking eye candy, bikini babe, slutwear model, but real world, bit hippy, maybe a little extra weight in places it doesnt appear to obvious unless she wears something revealing. And then there is the clothing, how many outfits for a size 14 model, virtually none. I do mention morphs purely because in most instances they seem to be favoured by many due to the ease of application, click done.

It seems that many poser users, daz too, don't want to get realistic, in fact they veer away from it violently as if satan himself were leading the cause for realism, because they want to create pure fantasy, not a blend of real world and the ethereal. I guess it's the old question of who uses poser and why, and when the op says realistic, does he/she mean realistic attractive or realistic plain?, i think that is more the question.

Using more dynamic than conforming, clothing isn't as much of a problem.  But to get a halfway realistic body usually requires some dial spinning.  With the Pez figure, I normally dial in .1 to .2 heavy morph, just gives her a little more realistic body.  There are times to get what I need, I have to resort to the morph tool, one of which is what I call "Mummy Tummy", there just doesn't seem to be a realistic morph available by dialing unless I make it. 

(Did I mention I suck with the morph tool?)  Another bone of contention is the "Barbie legs",  They're all too long, well, other than the latest crop of poser figures.  I dial the legs back about three percent for each thigh and shin, seems a little better, but then nothing fits again.  Oh, well.

Doric.

Yeah, what a strange and worrysome concept : Making the virtual model of a real life item actually look like the real life item it is meant to represent.

Scale modellers will bite your head off if you put a wooden two blade propeller on a Spitfire Mk II because only the earliest Mk I's had one.

Or if you overlook that an early German Panther Ausf D tank had only 16 bolts per boogey wheel instead of the 22 of the later Ausf G.

They will also happily dismiss a scale model of a Ferrari as a mere "childrens toy" if the manufacturer couldn't catch the distinct shape of the original.

Also a client wouldn't be amused if an achitecture model of his million dollar project would be based on eyeballing and guesswork instead of sticking to the exact measurments of the real world building it is meant to represent.

In short, "toys" are models where resemblance to the original item is (sometimes deliberately) loose.

Models OTOH are representations of real world items and the closer, the more "true to life" the model is, the better it is generally considered.

Yet, when it comes to Poser (and often CGI in general), all this flies out of the window in the name of "artistic expression".

But in reality, it's just marketing.

Now, I don't mind if it is done deliberately to represent an anime or a comic book character. I'd love have a range of toon characters for Poser that are of the same quality as for example the "Incredibles".

But I don't like that sneaky advertising photoshop nonsense. The stuff they do on glamour mag covers, pandering to the lowest common denominator because "reality" isn't "glamorous" enough.

Don't try to sell me 8 to 8.5 heads tall Vicky and Mike as "realistic", because they are not.

Be honest enough to sell them as "idealized" fashion dolls, not as "realistic virtual representations of actual human beings".

This "wanting to have your cake and eat it, too" attitude is what makes me angry.

Realism doesn't mean ugly and ignorance of human anatomy is not an artistic statement.

If you want to render toons, then use toons.

Heck, if you want to render default Vicky with trout lips and a button nose, by all means, do so.

Just stop calling what you do "realistic". It's annoying to those who know better and makes you look stupid and ignorant.

I guess realistic is a subjective term then in the Poser Community, it seems to mean what is generally accepted as realism rather than what is actually realistic purely because of the content available to the average user.However that still doesn't answer the OP's original question it just gives two sets of answers from two opposing camps. I think I had better stop now, I've even started to confuse myself and I'm not sure what is real or not anymore.

:unsure:

JoePublic uses V3 and does amazing things with that mesh.

Proving?
That with motivation, and time, you can morph any mesh into any figure.

Hexagon and Blender being free, it is up to the man-woman behind the keyboard.

Rereading the OP’s original post (BTW did (s)he ever reappear?), I’m not sure whether it means distinctive, as in not like V4, anatomically accurate, or both. In any case, I’ll accept their 97% improper figure, why not. A better question might be to what percentage of Poser users does it matter? How many people have that finely tuned, (I can spot Vickie in a 4x4 thumbnail after ten iterations of a Picasso cubist PhotoShop filter) V-Dar – or care? Apparently, only 3%, minus those who hit on ‘proper’ by accident. Whatever, the CGSociety folks will be happy to tell us why its all crap anyway, no need to eat our own young.

I’m not sure that the average neolithic woman looked like those stone fertility goddesses, unless there was a Mickey D’s around back then. I doubt that Egyptian ladies looked exactly as they were depicted – or walked that way either. If the dudes in the Kama Sutra and those Japanese erotic woodcuts really had whangs that big, then I’ve been cheated. The ‘Hobbit’ bones they found on that island notwithstanding, there probably never were any faeries, leprechauns or pointy eared hobgoblins – OK, faeries are real but not the others. Whether for religious symbolism, political propaganda, erotic thrills or flights of fancy, people have always been fond of taking expressive liberties with the image of almighty’s sacred product. Forget the image, we’ve been tattooing, scarifying, shaving, powdering, lipo-sucking and implanting ourselves in reality to achieve a look that nature never intended – ever since Og said, “Woman, red stuff on mouth look like monkey’s cooter, give me idea.’

Reality? People have reality in their faces every day. Plain, common, average, proper – look in the mirror. The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable. Your cousin getting busted for drunk and disorderly again is a pain – Lindsay Lohan doing the perp walk in designer shades is entertainment. Please, nobody tell Denzel that you can’t roll an MD-80 and live to pick up your Oscar. Realism has its place. They have car shows where your otherwise perfectly restored 69 Mustang may lose because the serial number on the carb is from the 1970 lot. If you don’t want to buy a model tank because the bolts aren’t right, don’t – but oh wait, there were reports that on the Russian front some units made field modifications, it’s right here in the Wehrmacht compiled action reports – let me get the exact volume and page number.

Realism is relative, depending on the person and the context. There’s a different standard for counterfeit hundreds than there is for Monopoly money. Most people would probably consider the bolt deficient tank highly realistic, but most people aren’t accuracy obsessed military buffs. DAZ isn’t pulling some gigantic con if they call their models ‘realistic.’ They are realistic enough for the never skinned a cadaver, don’t freaking know or care how many head heights make up leg bone user. You can make a ‘realistic’ figure and launch a campaign to enlighten people on how they’ve been deceived by the Prince of Darkness, but Salvation awaits. All they have to do is repent, take up the real cross and pay a small fee. I’ll wait for the IPO.

Zygote will probably be delighted to sell you an accurate human figure. There was an ‘accurate’ 3D scanned figure, Dina, who would have been dismissed as too obvious to play the butch cellblock boss in a lesbian prison flick – and yet, somehow she wasn’t too popular. If you want really real acne scarred, small boobies, nanometer scale specular reflectance, body mass within .001 per cent of the UNESCO norm realism, go for it. Tis a noble quest, and no doubt a lot harder than what the fantasy besotted masses cling to. De gustibus non est disputandum (In matters of taste, there can be no disputes). Of course H. L., as always, said it best.

“We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.”
— H L Mencken

Of course if we are trying to reflect real life we should also be able to morph V4 to resemble those who have had so many face lifts that they have that constant 'surprised look', not sure I want to though.  I assume it is possible but no-one appears to have ever done it so perhaps there are limits to the reality.

That's true. We should count our blessings. At least V4 doesn't look like Joan Rivers.

Laurie

I read somewhere that most artists make human eyes slightly larger than they are in real life, because eyes are "psychologically important."  I think about that every time someone complains that Vicky's eyes are too big.

Heard that argument already 30 years ago from model kit manufacturers:

Granny Johnson doesn't care what prop the Spitfire model has she's buying for little Timmy's birthday, so why should we spend more money on better research?

The thing is, Spitfire models aren't just sold to grandmothers as birthday gifts, but also to detail obsessed miltary buffs.

And those won't buy "wrong" kits and will happily write scathing reviews pointing out every little flaw they can find.

And the kicker is, granny Johnson doesn't care either way. She'll buy the properly researched, highly accurate model just as gladly for little Timmy as she would have bought the stinker.

I'd like the default for Poser figures to be realistic. So that people have an accurate standard they can fall back on.

Let them actively decide if they want to use a fashion doll rather than an accurate virtual model of a human being.

Let them start the journey with some neutral canvas, not some artists' opinion of what is currently "hot".

If they still want the trout lips, button nose, mile-long legs and XXXX-boobs, modern Poser tech can give it to them with a single turn of a dial.

But so far, more or less all DAZ/Poser figures are virtual Barbie dolls. I'm pretty sure more realistic models wouldn't exactly hurt Poser's reputation.

Completely agree Joepublic.
Good post.

actually Joe, i think that's a great point, a "realistic" model as a starting point, ok, so people can add the morphs they want to or not, I don't see it harming anyone, vendors would have to adapt to new figure dimensions, proportions or continue to support the older models. So many times I have heard the argument that the vendors don't like change and people should vote with their wallets if vendors don't adapt. maybe just maybe, if a good new figure that fullfilled both sides of the desires list, came along,  then vendors would be crazy not to jump on board and provide support for it, heeheee. Who knows someone reading this thread or others like it with the skill might say "Hmmm sounds like a lucrative proposition, hey maybe it will become so popular that SM will want to include it as a base figure in some future release".

If I believed everything I read in the forums and here I paraphrase rather than submit my opinion or thoughts, it won't happen because vendors don't like change, they become used to a rigging style, have their preset blanks and adapt them for new clothes etc.

If that's the case then the future is pretty bleak imho, as it stands at the moment as far as I can see, the lines in the sand are drawn, there are 3 distinct camps, the new wave of Hermaphrogens, the series 3 and 4 supporters and the rest.

Does that mean there is never any space or future for a figure that changes the boundaries, no i don't think it does. At some point people will get fed up with the figures they use and consequently the demand for add ons for those characters will diminish, not saying it will happen this year, but happen it will....Maybe it will occur overnight when the figure hits the MP, maybe it will filter in slowly, like the serpent tempting Eve in the garden of Eden, I already have a name for it...Exodus.........and Mz Exodus :)

Got to be a couple, surely :)

PS I still can't understand why realistic is BAD...

Simple rule of all times : Vendors will go where the dollars are.

And realistic is GOOD :-)

If SM comes with killer figures in the next Poser version?
There might be a chance to overthrow V4.
But they'd have to be killer and error free figures.

Good looking, every day, and realistic figures.

I can't argue in principle with the last few posts but I just wonder where we are going to find the definition of realistic.  For the figure to be successful it would need to appeal to a wide audiance and be priced at a point that a large number of people would buy it.  So, on the face of it, the person building the figure would need to know what a large portion of the buyers regard as realistic.  Assuming of course that they wanted realistic in the first place.

I suspect most people don't want realistic.  As the original poster says, look at the gallery.  Look at the marketplace.  Unrealistically proportioned figures appears to be what people want. If it's true that vendors go where the dollars are, then the dollars are in supermodel/porn star/Barbie Doll Vicky.

Yes, but is it because that is the look they prefer or is it because there is no real alternative out there ?

Because once Posette and Vicky established a certain "look", that's what everyone went with without ever looking back.

Well, perhaps it's time for Poser to look for a new owner.

I suggest Mattel.

I'm pretty sure they know even better than DAZ what the average woman looks like.

;-)

I can’t argue with the premise of starting real and allowing transformation to other than real. It makes perfect sense. One of the great strengths of software and virtual items is that they are a lot easier to transform than physical things. That’s much the same reason I’ve argued for a more accessible interface without sacrificing a more advanced one for those who prefer greater control/flexibility. The default should cater to the largest number of user’s preference but one could argue either way. If it is possible to have a do it all figure that starts from some hypothetical ‘realistic’ base and yet be able to morph into what now seems to be popular then I’m all for it.

Now did this never occur to DAZ et al, or was it some limitation of the technology at the time or is it simply the aesthetic choice of the creators? We know DAZ has access to body scanning technology – the used it for the AMG ‘digital clone,’ and maybe the use it as a starting point on other figures as well. My guess is that they created an idealized, or fantasized figure because someone found it attractive. Now either that was an accurate take on what the majority wanted or the customers have just been drinking the kool aid. I’m always suspicious of these arguments that If Only the public were exposed to superior products, be it religion, operating systems. music etc. then they would adopt them in droves. Usually, when the mass adoption fails to materialize (see Windows vs. Linux on the desktop), the proponents claim corporate conspiracies, bemoan the tyrannical inertia of the installed base or (as a last resort) the stubborn ignorance of the masses. I think oftentimes, the simpler answer is just, ‘Dude, she’s just not into you.’

In the end, people make what people want. I’m disappointed that more people prefer ‘reality’ television to PBS, but such is life. If DAZ figures that RealVickie wouldn’t help their bottom line, then they’re not going to make one. That’s why there are always specialty markets for super accurate scale models etc. Usually, those markets charge a premium, reflecting the smaller demand. You can lobby DAZ, SM etc. or try to educate the public as to why they should prefer more realism but … I’m not even sure that if people were rendering mass scenes with plenty of roles for non hero characters, they wouldn’t make those ‘pretty’ as well. If you’re dealing with an office scene for a brochure or something then yeah, the real, average person on the street may be desirable but for the fantasy, escapism or whatever you want to call it that makes up a lot of Poser images, figures that transcend reality are probably always going to be very popular. IMO, its not marketing or education or any of those things. It is a fundamental characteristic of the human animal. That, ladies and gentlemen is probably the wrong windmill to tilt at.

Quote - I'd like the default for Poser figures to be realistic. So that people have an accurate standard they can fall back on.

completely agree!

just remember the first time you load Judy or default Alisson :scared: and than you will understand why the average user never used them... far below natural, realistic or even decent , average doesn't mean unrealistic, sure there are people with Simons eyes out there but this is a specific shape not an average shape, average means you put all possible shapes in mind and than create something in the middle...

Quote - "Unrealistically proportioned figures appears to be what people want."  

Yes, but is it because that is the look they prefer or is it because there is no real alternative out there ?

I think it's because it's the look people prefer.

Look at the characters and morphs sold for Vicky.  Rather than being more realistic, they push her even further in the Barbie direction.  Bigger boobs, smaller waist, bigger eyes, bigger lips, longer legs, etc. than the DAZ default.

The only real test of this theory would appear to be either to make a realistic figure or a realistic morph for V4 (or any other figure now available) and see how it sells.

I don't expect to be overwhealmed with takers any time soon.

Well, there may be a nearly 50/50 split there hornet ;). I'm one of the ones in the realism camp. Despise toons and comic book characters myself for the most part, even if I can appreciate the artistic nature of them ;). I'd like to see more realistic figures myself, but I wouldn't wanna be on the committee to decide what a "proper" face is. What IS a proper face when something that looks good to you may not look good to the next guy?. I think we're all better off deciding for yourselves what proper faces are. It's just that most Poser users are hobbiests and don't get into the nitty gritty of modeling, rigging or texturing, so the "realistic" decision is sort of being made for those ppl thru the market. Of course, if you don't like you don't have to buy, but then you'll have to learn now to do it yourself ;). It's the way the world works really, in all things. LOL

Edit: having said all that, I reserve my right to critique, even if it's not favorable to the artist...lol. I've actually learned some things from the things I did that ppl hated the most ;).

Laurie

Quote - > Quote - "Unrealistically proportioned figures appears to be what people want."  

Yes, but is it because that is the look they prefer or is it because there is no real alternative out there ?

I think it's because it's the look people prefer.

Look at the characters and morphs sold for Vicky.  Rather than being more realistic, they push her even further in the Barbie direction.  Bigger boobs, smaller waist, bigger eyes, bigger lips, longer legs, etc. than the DAZ default.

Have there ever been fully realistic (i.e. directly derived from full body scans) characters sold in the marketplace here or elsewhere for Poser/Daz?

Not saying that it wouldn't be the case that this marketplace would still lean toward non-realistic shapes, but it still seems relatively untested to me - even the most realistic shapes I've seen on sale here are still only 70% realistic IMO. And that isn't to say that if there was a 95-100% realistic figure that posed in a similar fashion that it wouldn't gradually attract a new audience, whether it was directly used/rendered in Poser or not.

I just sometimes wonder whether past limitations to creation and use have had a greater influence on how a particular user base and its trends might have developed here. I'm a little surprised that no-one has thrown a figure derived from blended body-scans into the mix by now, given the higher proliferation of scanning options available and the smartness I've seen in many of the users/content creators. Given the length of time it takes to hand model, rig and create morphs for a new figure I'd have thought the investment costs involved might be more comparable in 2013.

Have to admit I have no idea really though.

Quote - Well, there may be a nearly 50/50 split there hornet ;). I'm one of the ones in the realism camp. Despise toons and comic book characters myself for the most part, even if I can appreciate the artistic nature of them ;). I'd like to see more realistic figures myself, but I wouldn't wanna be on the committee to decide what a "proper" face is. What IS a proper face when something that looks good to you may not look good to the next guy?. I think we're all better off deciding for yourselves what proper faces are. It's just that most Poser users are hobbiests and don't get into the nitty gritty of modeling, rigging or texturing, so the "realistic" decision is sort of being made for those ppl thru the market. Of course, if you don't like you don't have to buy, but then you'll have to learn now to do it yourself ;). It's the way the world works really, in all things. LOL

Edit: having said all that, I reserve my right to critique, even if it's not favorable to the artist...lol. I've actually learned some things from the things I did that ppl hated the most ;).

Laurie

On the subject of the proper 'look', I've long been of the opinion that with a starting range of about 20 carefully chosen real faces you could cover an awful lot of bases in terms of character creation via blending morphs. A starting look could be an equally proportioned generic blend of all those faces, with variation achieved by changing the propotions of those morphs. By using a system that locks all those mophs into each other you could define different levels of proportional realism between the morphs.

I was recently thinking of a Trek game I used to play on my PC years ago where you adjusted the proportion of energy allocated to repairing the ship over all the different sections. Increase the slider for shields and the energy allocated to everything else was proportionally decreased. You could lock a section (or, say, a morph) and increase another slider etc. This way you have thousands of possible blends that maintain a proper ratio for a realistic face.

It's Kind of how apps like FaceGen work. Someone could probably code a python plugin to do this.

In fact, there was a FaceIntermixer by Ockham that did something not dissimilar to this, but you could load morph poses to mix together, and I don't think they were so rigidly linked together.

Quote - Have there ever been fully realistic (i.e. directly derived from full body scans) characters sold in the marketplace here or elsewhere for Poser/Daz?

Well, there was Dina.  She was supposedly built from scans of a real person.  A bit top-heavy, but her height and leg proportions were more realistic than Vicky (as I recall, she was about 5'-7", compared to Vicky's nearly 6'). 

And if more realistic proportions were what people wanted, they would be characters/morph packs to achieve it.  There are vendor add-ons to make the already leggy Vicky longer-legged...but not shorter.  There are some morphs to make Vicky's boobs smaller, but far more to make them bigger.  More realistic facial proportions are achievable, and there are some in the marketplace...but they are few compared to the big-eyed, fat-lipped, hot-selling dolls.

Quote - > Quote - "Unrealistically proportioned figures appears to be what people want."  

Yes, but is it because that is the look they prefer or is it because there is no real alternative out there ?

I think it's because it's the look people prefer.

Look at the characters and morphs sold for Vicky.  Rather than being more realistic, they push her even further in the Barbie direction.  Bigger boobs, smaller waist, bigger eyes, bigger lips, longer legs, etc. than the DAZ default.

is it purely a fact that it is "easier" for vendors to create these morphs based on the current skeleton/skin models than it would be to stretch the limitations? and subsequently we get what is available and as it happens so many times  with other products we rush out and buy the bells and whistles to add to our toys, when what we really want is a new toy completely. I don't know, from the small number of posters in this thread and several others, it doesn't seem like demand will outstrip the willingness to supply but  yet the possibility still has a market.

Whether or not anyone will create such a beast remains to be seen. I don't have the skillset to accomplish anything close and probably wouldn't have for quite some time, I'm sure many do but they probably haven't the time or inclination to produce something that may or may not be well recieved and or profitable.

I don't always necessarily agree with the logic of what sells is what people really want or need. Sometimes it comes down to that's all there is, for reasons dictated by other factors such as business viability (like the cost of investing time to achieve quality results set against expected sales) or skill-bases (content creators lacking the ability or knowledge to achieve certain results).

An example would be bb's materials - before he came on the scene realistic materials were few and far between. Now there are a lot more vendors including very similar shaders with their character packs. We could argue that they didn't exist because no-one wanted them, but this isn't the case as many more vendors see the value in including them (I also understand bb's materials packs are quite popular). Prior to bb coming onto the Poser scene most vendors lacked the ability to understand shaders in the way he does, and also the shader technology in the app has developed.

I might argue a similar case for ultra-realistic mesh-shapes - that before now the technology hasn't existed for vendors in this marketplace to be able to consider it viable, and the amount of time required to accurately sculpt such shapes is similarly prohibitive.

Just trying to remain positive about the posibility of someone trying I guess, but I'd definitely buy (and I don't buy for Poser generally) morphs derived directly from head/body scans. I want that level of realism available for use in Poser.

Quote - > Quote - Have there ever been fully realistic (i.e. directly derived from full body scans) characters sold in the marketplace here or elsewhere for Poser/Daz?

Well, there was Dina.  She was supposedly built from scans of a real person.  A bit top-heavy, but her height and leg proportions were more realistic than Vicky (as I recall, she was about 5'-7", compared to Vicky's nearly 6'). 

Don't buy for a second that the character called Dina currently in the marketplace here was derived from scans of a real person. Maybe it wasn't this character. Couldn'd find one at Daz either. Perhaps an old/retired product.

I find Blackhearted's morphs to be very realistic. They may be of a certain body type for sure, but still realistic. I think he's come closer than most ;).

Laurie

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Have there ever been fully realistic (i.e. directly derived from full body scans) characters sold in the marketplace here or elsewhere for Poser/Daz?

Well, there was Dina.  She was supposedly built from scans of a real person.  A bit top-heavy, but her height and leg proportions were more realistic than Vicky (as I recall, she was about 5'-7", compared to Vicky's nearly 6'). 

Don't buy for a second that the character called Dina currently in the marketplace here was derived from scans of a real person. Maybe it wasn't this character. Couldn'd find one at Daz either. Perhaps an old/retired product.

No, the Dina mentioned was released in maybe...I'm gonna guess...2002 or 3? Dacort and Dthuregrif (sp) made her. I have her, but didn't use her much...shoulders like a linebacker ;).

Laurie

Quote - An example would be bb's materials - before he came on the scene realistic materials were few and far between. Now there are a lot more vendors including very similar shaders with their character packs. We could argue that they didn't exist because no-one wanted them, but this isn't the case as many more vendors see the value in including them (I also understand bb's materials packs are quite popular). Prior to bb coming onto the Poser scene most vendors lacked the ability to understand shaders in the way he does, and also the shader technology in the app has developed.

That might be part of it, but I think what's driven this is more technology.  Namely, Poser's SSS capability.  People like that look, and I think they've been trying to achieve it for years.  (I remember being part of a group that made free Poser 5 MAT files for figures that lacked them, that used the then-"advanced" shaders to give skin and eyes that glowing look that P4 materials couldn't do.)  SSS is a quantum leap above that.

Quote - I might argue a similar case for ultra-realistic mesh-shapes - that before now the technology hasn't existed for vendors in this marketplace to be able to consider it viable, and the amount of time required to accurately sculpt such shapes is similarly prohibitive.

What's different about now?  Genesis?  Weight-mapping?  I guess I just don't see the technological leap in mesh shaping that we've gotten in materials.  Things like facial and body proportions...vendors have been adjusting those since Vicky 1 at least (remember Supermodel Vicky?)

the more i read these threads, i think i have come to understand, nobody wants realistic 100%, but almost everyone wants one or more of , realistic skin or realistic eye reflections, or realistic proportions or realistic material shaders, realistic hair, but it seems that the next progression to slap it all into one package makes people recoil and shout "but it wont be art then", or "that will devalue my use of the real hair if the figure looks real".

It's certainly confusing and it seems like people want their cake but are unwilling to eat it.