Quote - Hard to define "better." Pagan is clearly beloved of his pixie, but she's not very realistic.  She's got pointed ears, fer crissakes.

 

People are still not getting the difference between a real face as asked by the OP and realisism, which was not asked for by the OP.

Pixie's face is a real looking one, yep she has pointy ears, that's why she is a "Pixie", but that does not detract away from her natural looking face.

If the OP wanted realistic faces, then they would have put it in the first message. It's others misconception of a real looking face to a realistic face that has taken people away from the original message.

All the best.

LROG

I think the problem with the OP's question is that it's an ambiguous one. We have to define what 'proper' and 'real' are referring to. I've tried to define it at one end of the scale with the concept of a physically accurate translation of a real world face via 3d scanning. Others are looking at it in terms of all the right elements (eyes, nose, mouth ears etc) in the right places within a certain set of boundaries that the mind considers acceptibly accurate without direct reference to a RW face (I'd argue that this is relative to the individual observer, and that without direct reference our minds tend to stretch those boundaries, be it in relation to form, surface quality or placement within a scene). That's fine, but there is a difference.

The term 'character' is also used, which to me is more open-ended to interpretation - i.e. anything that isn't default V4 - on that point, any morph on V4 would fit the description, even a cartoon character.

I know, it just seems like I'm being pedantic.

 

PoserPro2014(Sr4), Win7 x64, display units set to inches.

                                      www.danielroseartnew.weebly.com