Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL


Subject: "The native Poser figures are ugly" - er.. no

TrekkieGrrrl opened this issue on Jul 12, 2013 · 119 posts


lmckenzie posted Sat, 20 July 2013 at 10:44 AM

“If Poser native figures came with a better, more photoreal look, they would lend themselves to better, more beautiful renders.”

Which seems to be predicated on the notion that in order to be ‘better’ or more ‘beautiful’, the work has to be strive for photorealism. That may be a requirement for some medico-legal application or Hollywood FX job but surely for fine art or illustration, it is an elective and neither necessary nor necessarily sufficient? If that is not the case then there’s gonna be a helluva big bonfire in art collections around the world. At any rate, Zygote’s still in business. Maybe they have some of Posette’s relatives in storage ÷)

Someone is supposed to have asked Abe Lincoln how long a man’s legs should be. Abe reportedly said; “Long enough to reach the ground.” How ‘real’ or ‘attractive’ a figure should be is real or attractive enough to blow your skirt up. Unless you’re dependent on someone else’s opinion on the matter for your livelihood or your happiness then that’s it, that’s all there is and there ain’t no more. Some are going to see Posette being real enough, pretty enough, and gosh darn, people like her. Someone else is going to say that the body scanning laser’s wavelength was off by a nanometer, rendering figure X useless for serious work. One of the few things you can take to the bank is that one size will never fit all – thank goodness. The inability or refusal to recognize that (coupled with a tenacious zeal to make it not so) are probably behind 90% of the arguments here – maybe in the world. As W. C. Fields said; “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then give up, there’s no sense in being a damn fool about it.”

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken