When I started CGI in 1998 we all ready had procedurals. So I don't know how long procedurals have been around. LW's been around since the Amiga days, they'd know.

eventually I'll work allegorithmic out ,maybe. for now I'm going forward getting ready to ,make textures with photoshop ,zBrush .

would be real nice if someone would make procedural app that's easy to use. procedural could be a lot better n faster .

and it would be killer if we could trash the flat 2D UVMaps and have a 3D UV Map so there are no bloody seems.

patorak3d ,you've been working hard on your morphs. are you going to lay a skin over the top the character primitives ? or is it a robot or a cartoon character ? where are you going with this ?

"would be real nice if someone would make procedural app that's easy to use. procedural could be a lot better n faster .

and it would be killer if we could trash the flat 2D UVMaps and have a 3D UV Map so there are no bloody seems."

You can bake procedurals out into maps in most fully featured 3d apps.

3d painting paints across uv island boundries, seamlessly. The only problems you will run into are if your mapping has alot of stretching or scaling differences. This will reflect on your final maps.

"patorak3d ,you've been working hard on your morphs. are you going to lay a skin over the top the character primitives ? or is it a robot or a cartoon character ? where are you going with this ?"

I hesitated to mention this, but as you've raised the subject... I don't think he actually knows the purpose of his "steps" demonstrations to be honest, other than showing that he has a base mesh and lightwave. His steps have nothing to do with any kind of Poser figure creation workflow that I'm aware of. Not being mean here, just pointing at the elephant in the room. I won't bother pointing out why my critical comment is relevant to the topic, of which there are several glaring reasons. I don't think anyone who actually knows would say anything lest they risk being "mean" or "misbehaving". Or even more likely, wouldn't take the trouble to bother due to forum veteran contracted disillusionment. Why bother when all it will get you is boos and hisses? Just another day at the forums. Of course, being a poser figure creation hobbyist dilettante such as myself (see my ShareCG account), I'd be perfectly willing to eat my hat if anyone can discredit my observations. :)

...that being said, (ran out of edit time), I would be willing to lend some help if there were any questions about basic, practical Poser figure creation processes. After I'm done eating. Volunteering to do so always seems to result in a barrage of "oneupmanship" from suddenly helpful people who probably wouldn't have offered help in the first place. Which from a help perspective isn't such a bad thing. There's a forum truism that if you want to get some help and your pleas are met with silence... deliberately posting some outrageous falsehood or technical nonsense is sure to get the squeaky wheel oiled by a motivated mob of concerned citizens. ;)

EldritchCellar quote You can bake procedurals out into maps in most fully featured 3d apps.

If I don't have any procedurals to bake ,it's all kind of pointless. but most procedurals I've seen can't cross UV seems seemlessly

EldritchCellar quote 3d painting paints across uv island boundries, seamlessly. The only problems you will run into are if your mapping has alot of stretching or scaling differences. This will reflect on your final maps.

you left out there biggest problem .angles .3D painters streak angles

@ RorrKon Correct but. When you UV-Unwrap properly, then add a procedural texture, and THEN, in Blender, paint over the seams. Blender allows to paint directly on the obj, or on the map's, whatever your prefer to correct the seam. Then rebake. Or resave.

tonyvilters posted at 6:46PM Tue, 08 March 2016 - #4259968

@ RorrKon Correct but. When you UV-Unwrap properly, then add a procedural texture, and THEN, in Blender, paint over the seams. Blender allows to paint directly on the obj, or on the map's, whatever your prefer to correct the seam. Then rebake. Or resave.

ya that's preety much more or less how any app works. n your not 3D painting across angles. n no matter how you uv map a polycount of 6 cube you have angles. who ever makes a better ,faster way has my money.

"would be real nice if someone would make procedural app that's easy to use." Has anyone tried procedurals in Poser?

patorak3d ,you've been working hard on your morphs. are you going to lay a skin over the top the character primitives ? or is it a robot or a cartoon character ? where are you going with this ? For now low poly figures. Step 5 I'll connect the cubes and capsules.

"I hesitated to mention this... ... motivated mob of concerned citizens. ;)" Glad to see you're joining in. There is a lot of work to do and the more the merrier. We'll be getting to Poser in step 7.

"@ RorrKon Correct but. When you UV-Unwrap properly, then add a procedural texture, and THEN, in Blender, paint over the seams. Blender allows to paint directly on the obj, or on the map's, whatever your prefer to correct the seam. Then rebake. Or resave." Have you been able to get the results into Poser?

Now on to step 4c continue with the morphs. This time fantasy morphs.

Hmmm. You wouldn't happen to be Patorak. As in Plain Jane, the Thing Patorak would you? I refuse to eat my hat. Lol.

"Have you been able to get the results into Poser."

I have. Baked procedural derived textures and 3d painted maps out of Modo on my humble creations. Displacements out of Zbrush. Also have a couple of new figures in the works...

If this guy is who I think it is, this thread should suddenly become very interesting. I think he's having a bit of sport with us... ;)

Well I'll play along

shaders .procedural shaders ,materials what ever there called all app's have them. you can buy Poser shaders in the store. but there no where near advanced as SL's .no ones are. google "substance designer materials" n your see what I mean.

you paint a 2D texture you mix nodes or sliders to make procedurals ,no painting. you can google "substance designer nodes" "poser nodes" "blender nodes" to see what nodes are.procedural Sliders are better then nodes ,nodes are to slow n aggravating. I avoid nodes like the bubonic plague. there like running a race with flat tiers. if you haven't guess yet I really hate nodes.

you can use nodes for more things then procedurals also. blender has nodes for a lot of things.

you can turn any procedural in to a 2D texture for Poser.

most app's if you Boolean or change the meshes vertices # it breaks the morphs. I'm not sure where your going with your character but I'd make the final mesh first .then morph map etc etc.

most make low polycount characters by sculpting a high polycount character for the normal and then retopology it for the low polycount version.

Yes rorrkonn. I know. Thanks for the lecture on making stuff, pbr, and using the Poser material room though. Lol. Next time I'll take a look at some of your things before proceeding. Pbbbt.

One would think that Patorak was forgetting vertex number and order problems with his workflow. But perhaps not. We'll see.

Oh. And don't bother dragging Diamond and Chrome out again for the umpteenth time. I knew what they looked like 10 years ago. Still unfinished. Tread carefully dude, I've been saving up a little something for you. :)

Death Metal my last post was aimed at people that didn't know. I know you know .PBR snails ? don't cuss at me ;) REALTIME !!! YA ...

unless you know of a way to high polycount sculpt characters and then retopology them for the low polycount version, backwards. Diamond and Chrome will never be finished. there outdated meshes from before zBrush days.

I see this thread has sort of gone towards the "We need another character to support" direction.

Here is the biggest hurdle with that. And I am going to be blunt.

You wont support it after it is done....

Yep, I can say that with certainty, because I have helped with a lot of figures that everyone said they would support, then didn't... I know, that is too close to the truth to be relevant right? No, not really, it is a sad truth.

The truth is that most people don't really know what they want, other than something else. As soon as a new figure comes out, it turns into a bash fest because it is missing (insert whatever you wanted that wasn't there). It is the same old story, and everyone here knows that even if they wont admit to it. Then they go down the Genesis route... Oh boy, that poor dead horse.....

You want a new figure to support? Great, lets support Pauline.... Wait you say, why would I support Pauline? (insert whatever your reason for not doing so here)

Here is a perfect example of why we should, the EULA attached to her. Yep a simple thing like that, can make all the difference.

I know, Pauline is (insert whatever) and (insert whatever), but you have to admit she is a first based on the merchant resource part of the EULA.

Poser has the capability to support very complex figures, or simple ones that are easy to work with. Take your pick, because you can do the same thing with one figure.

Pauline can look basically stock, like this....

Or you can inject HD morphs with a ton of dependencies, and she looks like this.... Bends far better than most figures, and has muscle movement that does not have to be added to the cloth for it to work, etc.

But, why support any Figure? If everyone did there would be nothing to complain about in the Figure department, and the forums would not have a lot to talk about other than things people are actually interested in.... lol... People might actually have fun again. Who would have thought, having fun again??? That's an odd concept isn't it.

Yep, lets just make a new figure, so everyone can ignore it just like all the rest of them.......... It appears to make perfect sense to do so, because that is exactly what happens with just about every figure ever released.

We don't need a new figure, we need people to support the ones that people spend countless hours on.... Stop not supporting figures, and no one will be asking about one to support. Yeah I know, that's a stretch isn't it.....

All of these renders are of my re rigged Pauline Advanced... Soon I will release it, just so many of you can ignore it....

Nudity, Language, and Violence flagged because I murdered the cr2 to get it to bend extremely well and still use default content without using scripts. Nudity, because someone will see something that is actually there. And Language just so you can read it....

Carry on..........

Well said shvrdavid. Good luck on Pauline Advanced.

I hope the New Pauline is successful .So can we modifie Pauline n Paul any way we want ? I just have Pro 14 can you just buy Pauline n Paul separately ? Rummor has it there going to change the rules on more of Poser characters. Might be fun to terrorize Roxie n Rex. Any time date on Roxie n Rex ? I've been waiting 20 years for some one to fix Posetta topology and wield that lose vertice.

patorak3d you can learn a lot about character creation buy studying or modifying others characters.

Patorak is a figure creator Rorr. He knows these things.

I say we all should just make our own figures. Suited to whatever kind of art we wish to make. And who says we need to create just one? This is how the rest of the the 3d art world and artists do things. Can't model or rig? Shrugs... Poser is cursed with the burden of its instant gratification user base, market mentality which rewards the most conformity (see the desire for Genesis, and most of the art being T&A based generic sexdoll crap, the summit of technical achievement usually resulting in a "photograph" of a living room), and the make art button. Harsh words? The truth. Ironic though considering how much I like the freebie community and the artists that contribute to it. Without the demand I suppose there would be no need for the supply. I guess my thinking is kinda schizophrenic on this point. Not sure how I feel about makehuman or other automations, similar to how I'm wary of 3d printing since I come from a traditional sculpture background. Sorry.

Someone needs to write an updated version of 'secrets of figure creation' that includes all of the nice features of Poser's content creation tools that have come along since it was published. Alot of things are woefully hidden or buried in forums in this regard. Fellows like shvrdavid, Netherworks, PhilC, etc. should be involved in a project like that.

... just want to clarify on the 3d printing thing. I think It's awesome. If you're using it as a production tool for your own intellectual properties. A pile of plastic naked V4 sculptures? Not so much. And this isn't OT at all if you think about it...

Could be quite possible that, sad as it makes me, I'm outgrowing Poser. Most of the art and things I see being made with it just don't feel real anymore. Unless you make all the content in an image yourself, it's not really your creation alone. You had help. It's appropriation. Which from an art perspective is one type of way of doing things. Mostly with Poser users it just seems like its "the only way". It's a big subject, worthy of a graduate thesis. I'm conflicted in my genuine like for the program, and my dislike of the bulk of its users mentalities, for the most part.

EldritchCellar posted at 5:49AM Thu, 10 March 2016 - #4260204

I say we all should just make our own figures. Suited to whatever kind of art we wish to make. And who says we need to create just one?

Some (many?) of us do make our own figures, but those people are not the ones that usually ask for a Poser figure to be supported. There is merit in supporting a figure, and that has far more impact on a program than one might first think.

Take Genesis for example. Genesis is a figure, and at the same time is a program as well. The two are dependent on each other to achieve one goal. Basically, point and click. I am not bringing up Genesis to start an app war, more as an example of how a figure can have a strong impact on the direction a program is developed. Studio is primarily based around the Genesis concept at this point, and no matter what you might think about it Genesis has been successful in that regard. It also drives a content market, which is one of the differences between SM and DAZ.

Poser on the other hand, is not tied to any figure. There are hundreds if not thousands of figures floating around that will happily load into Poser and off you go. The main difference is the content, and getting it to work on other figures. Here is a perfect example. This is Earth Breaker for V4, converted to a lot of different base figures.

I don't have any problems converting clothes from one figure to another and I do it all the time. I did these conversions because someone in the forums was talking about how hard it was to do with things like armor and retain the detail. Many users do not have the Pro version of Poser, which will make conversions like this harder. Yes, it can be done, but point and click is basically out of the question until you have everything set up to do the conversion. I have Pro, and know how to do these conversions. Not everyone else does.

There are users out there that need a well supported Poser figure, simply so point and click works in both the standard and the pro version of Poser. Yes the tinkers can, and do, use whatever figure they want too and there are plenty of examples of that.

But, let's not forget about the people that just want to point and click either.

Those users need a well supported figure that is going to have content developed for it. For a long time that figure was V4, and all of us know that support for her is starting to drop off. Yes there is tons of content for V4 out there, but V4 does not take advantage of many of the new capabilities that P11 offers, and that separation will only increase as future version of Poser are released.

Carry on....

Strange irony shvrdavid. Your ability to convert clothing means you're not supporting those particular figures. You may have used Pauline somewhere in that image but her use is not documented in any way that a potential content creator would recognize. Skilled users don't have as much need for morphs, new clothes and such. If you want something done right do it yourself, which some do, which is admirable but leaves us "point and clickers" with a bunch of potential figures with watered down support. How can one figure have much support when those able to create want to "contribute" to the community by offering/fixing/modifying yet another figure.

I'd like to learn more about converting clothes, rigging, texturing, morph creation, modeling, etc, for my own satisfaction and because it's obvious that Poser users are being catered to less and less. But the more I learn, the more I can create for myself, the less support I'll give to any marketplace or figure. Right now the only modern figures I'm interested in are the HW3D family.

What is the purpose?

To enjoy 3D ? Or to make money?

If you want to enjoy 3D? Any app and any figure will do.

If you want to make money? You are 10 years too late. There are more vendors then customers right now.

Only the sites that sell the content make money. => The many vendors get the left-overs. (And pay taxes)

"I say we all should just make our own figures. Suited to whatever kind of art we wish to make. And who says we need to create just one?".... Poser is cursed with the burden of its instant gratification user base, market mentality which rewards the most conformity (see the desire for Genesis, and most of the art being T&A based generic sexdoll crap,"

The majority of the user base is not interested in any of the usual Nerdy Mcnerd techno babble about creating the ultimate figure that utilizes the latest capabilities of poser.

E.C.( quoted above) just stated clearly why this is the case

@ shvrdavid ..Sir what uniform standards ( yeah there I go again!!), did you apply in creating that "advanced pauline" and who will enforce them, and what version of poser is required to implement them??

You see the problem is bit larger than a fickle user base with genesis envy.

The problem is the business model of the poser application itself It cost money to have the latest version and many do not always upgrade in a prompt fashion.

It is therefore very diffcult to have a central authority (Like DAZ does) Dictatiing to ALL vendors a set of basic uniform standards regarding rigging and content compatibility that will be supported by the host application.

This is the core reason why antonia FAILED this why Project E will ultimately FAIL and scarlet and Dawn etc etc etc..

Just do a cursery study of how important UNIFORM STANDARDS are in other industries that rely on external content for their various delivery platforms.

I don't think it's uniform standards that prevent new poser figures from ousting Victoria 4.

From what i've seen the last batch of poser native figures are ugly, have dreadful topology, bend and balloon like defective air bags and are a pig to use without a level of wizardry that would put gandalf to shame.

sorry but most hobby users don't want to spend hours trying to fix figures that aren't comparable to and better than the millennium figures of 10 years ago. You also have all the Victoria 4 user demanding that all their old clothing fit new figures?

Without decent native Figures that are at least attractive from the first day of purchase Poser will continue to lose ground to the genesisis

wolf359 posted at 12:43PM Thu, 10 March 2016 - #4260251

"I say we all should just make our own figures. Suited to whatever kind of art we wish to make. And who says we need to create just one?".... Poser is cursed with the burden of its instant gratification user base, market mentality which rewards the most conformity (see the desire for Genesis, and most of the art being T&A based generic sexdoll crap,"

The majority of the user base is not interested in any of the usual Nerdy Mcnerd techno babble about creating the ultimate figure that utilizes the latest capabilities of poser.

E.C.( quoted above) just stated clearly why this is the case

@ shvrdavid ..Sir what uniform standards ( yeah there I go again!!), did you apply in creating that "advanced pauline" and who will enforce them, and what version of poser is required to implement them??

You see the problem is bit larger than a fickle user base with genesis envy.

The problem is the business model of the poser application itself It cost money to have the latest version and many do not always upgrade in a prompt fashion.

It is therefore very diffcult to have a central authority (Like DAZ does) Dictatiing to ALL vendors a set of basic uniform standards regarding rigging and content compatibility that will be supported by the host application.

This is the core reason why antonia FAILED this why Project E will ultimately FAIL and scarlet and Dawn etc etc etc..

Just do a cursery study of how important UNIFORM STANDARDS are in other industries that rely on external content for their various delivery platforms.

Much of what you say is true but clearly there needs to be a new definition of success that is not based on what we remember from Generation 4. The days of one cross platform figure with 10 years worth of product are gone. Even at Daz there are those who never upgraded past Studio 4 and the original Genesis, are still using gen 4 figures or are interested in 3rd party figures including Dawn. In fact I'd guess half of the users I see in the HiveWire forums are Studio users, I don't know why they aren't totally in on Genesis.

At this point success for a Poser figure to me is going to mean a good set of morphs, continued content development and a version 2 at some point. I'm a Mac user. I'm used to not being catered to. Poser users will either have to fill in the blanks or move on.

Did this in November within a day or so of getting the figure. When Shvrdavid finishes his improved Pauline I will give her a more attractive head.!

goodle warlords monsters dragons fantasy sci fi anime etc etc. your see a lot that's never been seen in DAZ Poser.

I've never agreed with the one mesh for all mentality.

Genesis 1 is the last female character DAZ would ever need. Roxie is the last female character Poser would ever need.

Same mesh for male n females ,never would I. it's just so beyond wrong.

Sure I like hot babes but can we have some warlords monsters dragons etc etc a long with the babes.

I'm convinced the sheer lack of anything new and 0% imagination is what kills Art.

but hay make more panties for the new hot babe mesh that looks just like the old hot babe mesh and then wonder why you don't have enough for a 5th of Jack n a pack of Reds.

The Bastard that made a killer collection of warlords monsters dragons etc etc .wouldn't give a damn about vicky or venders support while he's enjoying his Jack ,Reds n Babe.

I'm going to go hang out with the Vikings

wolf359 posted at 4:39PM Thu, 10 March 2016 - #4260251

@ shvrdavid ..Sir what uniform standards ( yeah there I go again!!), did you apply in creating that "advanced pauline" and who will enforce them, and what version of poser is required to implement them??

Pauline and Pauline Advanced are Poser 11 figures. Pauline has geometry handles that do not load in previous versions. You can load her into P9 and P10, but there are some things that will either work differently, or will not work at all. Pauline Advanced has a lot more translations set up in it than the default Pauline, and P9 and P10 will ignore those when loading. It is not a deal breaker simply because none of the translations are linked to the rigging and left for end user tweaking. (once you see it you will understand what I mean, there are some oddities with translations and because of that they are not linked to dependencies) Even thou Geo Handles will not appear in P9 and P10 those bones appear in the hierarchy editor.

You actually reminded me of a few pose files that I need to make for Pauline Advanced so some things are easier to do in older versions as well. The default Pauline Advanced cr2 does not show any of the Geo handles in the pull down menus of the preview and the parameters pane. I did this because more often than not all they do is clutter up those menus. I also have a few more pose files to change the handles than the default Pauline does.

Pauline Advanced will load into P9 and P10, but since the cr2 contains P11 only features you obviously wont be able to use those features in an older versions of Poser. She is rigged to work without using the P11 features, but she will not work as well as she does in P11.

As far as uniform standards?

The re rig is sort of done backwards. It is not re rigged to be a completely new P11 figure, it is re rigged to be as compatible with existing content as possible without pulling your hair out. More than a few vendors have already made things for Pauline and I did everything I could to make as much of that as possible, still work.

Some of the content is not going to be needed, like jcms to correct the default rigging. All of the weight maps are as smooth as possible so they transfer to clothes within the program with minimal clean up needed afterwards. The JCM's follow the same idea, and in many cases they are not even needed in the cloth at all (depends on the offset from the body).

There are no JCM's on the elbows and knees, which makes setting up content on those joints very simple. Those joints don't really need JCM's,

The breasts are scaled differently to work better with the rigging of the breasts. I rarely use the breast scaling and the grouping of the figure has disadvantages no matter how you map it. I have included more than a few morphs with the re rig to get away from needing to use breast scaling at all.

Keep in Mind that in P11, many of the joints are mapped for rotation, scaling, and translations. This opens up far more possibilities than previous versions of Poser could offer.

Not sure what else to tell you, lol....

///Back to the regularly scheduled thread...

Carry on....

"unless you know of a way to high polycount sculpt characters and then retopology them for the low polycount version, backwards."

I suppose there's any number of "the latest things" that could be done. I dont worry about tech too much. I run with what I've got. Displacements? Create a reasonably low poly mesh, uv map it, give it groupings and a basic rig, create morphs; in particular expressions which are easier to do on a lower res mesh, subdivide it, fix any stretching on the maps introduced by the subdivision, transfer the rig, create further morphs that are better achieved by the higher poly count. Transfer the low res morphs over to the higher res mesh, tweak joints and the rig to satisfaction, add any dependencies or bells and whistles to the .cr2 such as synced eye rotation dials, easypose, movement dials, jcms, body handles, altGeom, magnet handles (much better than body handles IMO for certain deformations. My new tech interest actually... just need to sit down with it. Chocolate's Haru uses them to great effect I think... need to catch up on Poser magnet lore and dig around in some .cr2's), create your textures, displacements, clean up the final distribution .obj and .cr2 if necessary, create material files, promo renders, have fun. (I'm sure I missed something but work has been rough lately).

Send out into the world (or not)...

Someone is bound to appreciate it if you poured your heart into it. Especially the satisfaction you get from creating something that is truly yours alone. Doesn't matter how simple or complex it is as long as it serves it's purpose, whatever it may be. It's art making, not sweating over the latest trend or automation. Creation, getting it done, form fits function. You gave it your best shot. It exists. And then... on to the next act of creation. That's just how I do it and look at it. To each their own I guess, call me old fashioned... Doesn't matter really what anyone else is doing in terms of art making just as long as I'm enjoying my own things. To be honest I have a list of figures I want to create that could be made with, say, Poser 5, wings3d, a text editor, and photoshop alone and I wouldn't require or need anything else to do so. And the figures would function just as well without the latest features such as weight maps, pbr mats, control props (which is just body handles added as an in app automation), dependent parms (in app erc), etc. Model your vision to the tools at hand. It helps to not be so obsessed with the photorealistic chick syndrome that so many see as the summit of art in the Poserverse I guess... I think with Poser 11, zbrush, c4d, substance, houdini, photoshop, manga studio, and god all whatever else you've got you're fine in the tool department.

You puzzle me rorr. But hey, whatever... right ;)

...and incidentally, I agree with many of the comments you made in your last post... which was a crosspost I think.

Art imo is about communication not specifically rigid creation. You can clearly have art without implicit strict creation but not truly without communication. It's a brave man who can stand and say that something is or isn't art. As the intangible reality of what actually defines Art is a cornerstone to it actually being defined as Art.

Is the world's most amazing sculpture ever created that is then placed in a void never to be seen by another living soul, other than it's own creator, truly art? Or one man's introspective delusion, merely a dream existing only internally.

Is a sculpted platonic shape that is placed in an empty gallery space truly creation? What did the artist uniquely create? Not the shape itself, not the sculpture method, not the space. What he did create was a dialogue triangle between the Viewer-The installation-The artist and this is something I do see in common with most of the object given the label as "Art".

I saw a great little thank you note at the end of a movie I was watching recently, the film was Bedrooms to Billions about the rise of the Computer game industry. I think it suits somewhat to the context here.

" And a special thank you to all those who told us that the video game industry was too niche, not art, or not an art form worth covering! Your closed minded lack of belief and knowledge was an incredible source of inspiration for us! Out of mass negativity can always be found a power of pure positivity, so never, ever give up! "

There's also a saying that a work of art is finished in the eye of the viewer. Probably why conceptual art is usually so highly mediated as to intent. I'm not adverse to your line of thinking razor. But, I've got to be selfish to a certain extent. It's simply a creative survival instinct on my part I think. Your analysis is just as loaded with your own peculiar judgements as well. Whether you're aware of it or not.

Explain an artist like Henry Darger with your rationalization.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Darger

Keep in mind that I'm also a graduate of a "fine art" school, so I'm well aware of the different modes of thinking. And how permeable they are. I didn't intend to define what art is or isn't. Simply my preferences in this little (very little) corner.

oh I'm no puzzle .I'm just insane. I learned to draw Marvel ,DC comics with a pencils then markers then Conan with inks. then Acrylic ,oils then air brush. then they invented CGI so I learned box modeling ,the they invented zBrush so I had to learn how to sculpt. I learn a medium make 1 or 2 pieces with it and then move on to another medium or app. spent some in the store & made 3 or 4 renders in Poser 4 back then they where 600x600 pixels. there's one Acrylic painting hanging in my Moms house ,My brothers have 3 Oil Paintings of mine.

I went threw the trouble to learn MS5 and it's a killer app .then I make one peace and left it alone.

Once I conquered / accomplish something more or less .Guess I look for the next challenge.

I get on my own nerves about it also. I know If I would ignore the next challenge and just settle down and make a plan I might accomplish something more then one or two .jpgs.

Oh, I think some of the most interesting art I've encountered has been in games also. But... that's like film in a lot of ways. Usually, very usually it's a collaborative work. I tend to think like a mad hermit in terms of my own efforts. Lol.

Ditto rorr. I actually have a copy of MS 5 EX that I won. Have yet to seriously use it though. I deleted my gallery here, but you're aware of my traditional media work. I won't bother with a show and tell, over indulgent.

Of course my view is slanted to my own experience and beliefs, it wouldn't really be my view if it wasn't. And I'm not saying your view is wrong, I just lean towards disagreeing with aspects of it.

Henry Darger would fit perfectly fine with my rationalisation of what does constitute art, as all of his work was introspective until the point of its discovery where he became recognised as an "Artist" externally. If his work had eternally remained undiscovered, to himself he would be an artist (or at least a creative), but I'm sure there would be no wikipedia page recognising his contributions to the visual art field nor any validation externally of him being an artist if that was the case.

What my rationale suggests is not that Henry Darger was not an artist, but each piece of his work wasn't truly art until it had been shared or discovered by others. I guess it's like 'If a tree falls in the woods and no one's there to see it, is there really a tree?' Or if I dreamed last night of the most beautiful world with its semi clad inhabitants, does that make me a creator or just a dreamer? As these things only existed unto myself and they have no actual existence other than my own memory or imagination. Darger was indeed a communicator, albeit in isolation, after all his work was built as a story which is in basis, a form of external communication.

I also noted this part of the linked article on Darger " Darger's human figures were rendered largely by tracing, collage, or photo enlargement from popular magazines and children's books (much of the "trash" he collected was old magazines and newspapers, which he clipped for source material). " Does tracing the human figure make him more or less of an artist or indeed just a cut and paster?

I'm curious how you would make a field such as fine art photography fit into the definition you have outlaid here. This is how wikipedia describes what separates a fine art photograph from journalistic photography. It seems to suggest that the intended communication of the photographer is the main notable difference between the two fields.

"Fine art photography is photography created in accordance with the vision of the artist as photographer. Fine art photography stands in contrast to representational photography, such as photojournalism, which provides a documentary visual account of specific subjects and events, literally re-presenting objective reality rather than the subjective intent of the photographer; and commercial photography, the primary focus of which is to advertise products or services." (1)

One other question that occurred to me is what is the point that an artist stops being an artist and becomes an engineer? In my view it seems that the primary goal of an engineer is to create for functions sake as a priority with communication between the creator-creation-user as unimportant, in fact most functional object we use are not considered art if that 3 layered communication is absent. Generally Art is communication with functionality considered as irrelevant in most cases.

Of course all of this is just opinion based with truly no black and white to what is "right" or "wrong". So in essence neither of us are right or wrong, we're just sharing idea's.

I don't think that documentary photography can ever be truly objective, closure is interpreted differently depending on the viewer, and certainly not commercial/ product photography which 9 times out of 10 is concerned with aesthetics and manipulation.

Sorry, Darger is significantly different than your average point click 10 renders of v4 a week Poser/DS user. This is where I'm critical. No further explanation is necessary, regardless of appropriation...I'd say any comparisons are really reaching.

"in fact most functional object we use are not considered art if that 3 layered communication is absent. Generally Art is communication with functionality considered as irrelevant in most cases."

A few images. (I said I wouldn't do this, but it's to make a point).

Functional objects. You can hold and pour liquid from the pitcher. You can eat off the plate. Dinnerware is functional. These objects are dishwasher safe. ;)

A pitcher and a plate. 100% my own creation.

Is this art?

The three figure pitcher sold for $800, the plate for $400. Out of a real world fine art gallery, within days of being contracted to the gallery, noob rate. This isn't bragging but just a little context for my next statement. I recently posted these images to my cgbytes gallery. Guess how many comments I got as compared to, say, a nearby picture of a scantily clad vickie? Yup, zero. Quite a dichotomy between the two realms of art huh? Lol. I won't elaborate with my thoughts on this. Hope that answers your questions razor... glad some people kinda like my Poser/model stuff though. And yeah, I only use my own creations there now too. Not elitist. Just the truth.

EldritchCellar I always though your Art would make a killer Heavy Metal Album Cover. Ya my Renderosity gallery gets very few comments. Think we should throw a naked Vicky in there some where ;)

Razor42 I know a lot wouldn't call Games ,Art or the Transformers ,but to me it's Art. If I like it then I like it. others can like it or not .call it what they want. Every one has there very own personal definition of ART.

EldritchCellar ya games,movies n TV studios have crews. but there working under a impossible clock. But if you have the skills to make characters then you don't need a crew. I'd still work under a semi impossible time frame . those that don't seem to take to long to reach the goal line or never reach the goal line.

this was 30 years a go .I used black n gold model car enamel paint.to paint a simple lions face on a mirror. about the size of plywood. My Momma saw it and had me take it off the wall n put it in her car for her. the gallery went nuts .I told them it's Momma what ever Momma wants she gets.one of my kids has the lion now.

Yes all of the pieces you have shown here are definitely Art and very nice pieces too, but it's not the functionality that makes them art, it's the communicative qualities the artist (Yourself) has placed into the objects. So in other words if you remove the functional element of the piece, it would still be considered art, but if you removed the communicative elements from them they most likely wouldn't be. It would just be a blank generic plate and a plain pitcher, the function would be just as practical in a $2 mass produced plate or a 2$ pitcher. People didn't pay for the function or perceived the function as the item's true value, they payed for the form and appearance which is the communication that you infused as an artist into each piece.

Each of the items you have shown share the relationship I outlined, and indeed form a triangle of communication. Between Yourself the Object and the Viewer. What function does the Monalisa serve? A Vermeer? Michelangelo's david?. Though I think you may be slightly missing my point as I have not really communicated it very clearly, I'm not saying Art cannot be functional, look at examples like Architecture. I'm trying to say that it's not the functionality that makes a piece "Art". Art doesn't need functionality to be considered Art. But it is it really Art if instead of a triangle, you only have a two fold relationship such as Item-User, with the absence of a creator's touch or artistic communication through the form and appearance.

Here are two lamps where the function is basically the same but one is built purely for function and most likely cost efficiency, the other is artistic and communicates with the viewer as a thing of interest. If the both lamps stopped working one would still be considered to have value, would likely be worth repairing and still be a thing of beauty even if it was irreparable, whereas the other would be landfill. What makes them different?

Razor42 I know a lot wouldn't call Games ,Art or the Transformers ,but to me it's Art. If I like it then I like it. others can like it or not .call it what they want. Every one has there very own personal definition of ART.

This is what my point actually is Rorr, that what constitutes art is made up of a communicative relationship between the creator and item and the viewer. How naive or simplistic the method is or how the end result appears to others, really is irrelevant. Personal taste is a different thing again though. It is possible for someone to not like a genre or movement but it still be considered as art.

From what I can tell Eldritch is saying that the Point and Click Poser artwork, that some are creating, isn't really artwork because the level of creative input by the creator isn't enough to sanction it as uniquely their own creation. Basically saying they are the equivalent of the generic lamp. I'm attempting to say that P&C pieces are still "Art" as there is a communication triangle happening, even it is not to a particular viewer's own specific taste or definition of Art. There is a level of choice, control and direction added to the picture by the creator, even if it does use 3rd party elements, they still make it a communicative piece in my view. But you wouldn't have to look far to find an expert that will invalidate any picture made on a computer as incapable of being true "Art". And we're a long way off from decrying a NVIATWAS movement ;)

Anyways, We are getting a long, long way of topic...

Actually, this may be what is next for Poser, people actually having discussions about things without all the craziness that used to happen.

Razor42 posted at 8:59AM Fri, 11 March 2016 - #4260358

Razor42 I know a lot wouldn't call Games ,Art or the Transformers ,but to me it's Art. If I like it then I like it. others can like it or not .call it what they want. Every one has there very own personal definition of ART.

This is what my point actually is Rorr, that what constitutes art is made up of a communicative relationship between the creator and item and the viewer. How naive or simplistic the method is or how the end result appears to others, really is irrelevant. Personal taste is a different thing again though. It is possible for someone to not like a genre or movement but it still be considered as art.

From what I can tell Eldritch is saying that the Point and Click Poser artwork, that some are creating, isn't really artwork because the level of creative input by the creator isn't enough to sanction it as uniquely their own creation. Basically saying they are the equivalent of the generic lamp. I'm attempting to say that P&C pieces are still "Art" as there is a communication triangle happening, even it is not to a particular viewer's own specific taste or definition of Art. There is a level of choice, control and direction added to the picture by the creator, even if it does use 3rd party elements, they still make it a communicative piece in my view. But you wouldn't have to look far to find an expert that will invalidate any picture made on a computer as incapable of being true "Art". And we're a long way off from decrying a NVIATWAS movement ;)

Anyways, We are getting a long, long way of topic...

You haven't considered "good" art vs "bad" art in your discussion so far. Is there such a thing?

I think of those that make Poser renders as directors and producers like Ridley Scott .

There directing actors like Roxie ,Pauline and Sigourney Weaver.

Me and Death Metal are the Aliens. ah creators ;)

3 different types of Artist but All Artist.

shvrdavid posted at 9:15AM Fri, 11 March 2016 - #4260399

Actually, this may be what is next for Poser, people actually having discussions about things without all the craziness that used to happen.

I really hope so

false1 posted at 9:18AM Fri, 11 March 2016 - #4260416

Razor42 posted at 8:59AM Fri, 11 March 2016 - #4260358

Razor42 I know a lot wouldn't call Games ,Art or the Transformers ,but to me it's Art. If I like it then I like it. others can like it or not .call it what they want. Every one has there very own personal definition of ART.

This is what my point actually is Rorr, that what constitutes art is made up of a communicative relationship between the creator and item and the viewer. How naive or simplistic the method is or how the end result appears to others, really is irrelevant. Personal taste is a different thing again though. It is possible for someone to not like a genre or movement but it still be considered as art.

From what I can tell Eldritch is saying that the Point and Click Poser artwork, that some are creating, isn't really artwork because the level of creative input by the creator isn't enough to sanction it as uniquely their own creation. Basically saying they are the equivalent of the generic lamp. I'm attempting to say that P&C pieces are still "Art" as there is a communication triangle happening, even it is not to a particular viewer's own specific taste or definition of Art. There is a level of choice, control and direction added to the picture by the creator, even if it does use 3rd party elements, they still make it a communicative piece in my view. But you wouldn't have to look far to find an expert that will invalidate any picture made on a computer as incapable of being true "Art". And we're a long way off from decrying a NVIATWAS movement ;)

Anyways, We are getting a long, long way of topic...

You haven't considered "good" art vs "bad" art in your discussion so far. Is there such a thing?

Any Art that promotes stupidity ignorance hate etc etc is bad Art

Well what makes good art or bad art is quite a difficult question to answer. Though Rorr's answer is quite a good one imo

For example take this picture 'Dust Heads' depicting two junkies high on Angel Dust painted in 1982 by Basquiat.

Would you say in your opinion that this is good or bad art?

Would you be surprised if I told you the current owner paid close to 50 million dollars for it a few years ago at a Christie's auction in New York? Obviously the purchaser considered it to be quite good or maybe he/she just seen it as an investment piece. Though it's not really to my own personal taste there is something that I do like about it. Probably not 50 million dollars worth of like though. Hard to say whether it's good or bad art. Some like it, some don't. Some think it's worth millions, others may discard it as trash if they didn't know its true value.

Does it seem better or worse art knowing its value?

Of course Basquiat is dead so that increases it's value. People have also paid millions, I think, for certain comic books though the art may be described as primitive. Does color, spacial relationships, originality, concept or subject matter not come into play? They're rarely spoken of on these forums.

EldritchCellar posted at 12:41PM Fri, 11 March 2016 - #4260344

I don't think that documentary photography can ever be truly objective, closure is interpreted differently depending on the viewer, and certainly not commercial/ product photography which 9 times out of 10 is concerned with aesthetics and manipulation.

Sorry, Darger is significantly different than your average point click 10 renders of v4 a week Poser/DS user. This is where I'm critical. No further explanation is necessary, regardless of appropriation...I'd say any comparisons are really reaching.

"in fact most functional object we use are not considered art if that 3 layered communication is absent. Generally Art is communication with functionality considered as irrelevant in most cases."

A few images. (I said I wouldn't do this, but it's to make a point).

Functional objects. You can hold and pour liquid from the pitcher. You can eat off the plate. Dinnerware is functional. These objects are dishwasher safe. ;)

A pitcher and a plate. 100% my own creation.

Is this art?

The three figure pitcher sold for $800, the plate for $400. Out of a real world fine art gallery, within days of being contracted to the gallery, noob rate. This isn't bragging but just a little context for my next statement. I recently posted these images to my cgbytes gallery. Guess how many comments I got as compared to, say, a nearby picture of a scantily clad vickie? Yup, zero. Quite a dichotomy between the two realms of art huh? Lol. I won't elaborate with my thoughts on this. Hope that answers your questions razor... glad some people kinda like my Poser/model stuff though. And yeah, I only use my own creations there now too. Not elitist. Just the truth.

actually they are nice. but to my thinking showing amateur poser user artists "high brow" art (lets face it bro, sculpture, ceramics, oil and water color painting, leather craft, metalurgy, wood sculpture, etc) have always been considered "High Brow") you may NEVER get a response let alone a positive one.

I used to do this sort of art....(actually ALL those I mentioned above but for reasons too much to discuss no longer can. But doesn't mean I can't appreciate. And as a Poser user, I am grossly limited by the technology. I ate technology because i can't wrap my head around it enough to get those ideas out of my frelling head is like trying to sculpt with my feet! It sucks the unholy one. I have come to the point am bored by it all. I spend hours spinning dials and NOT creating any finished images. I did more creative work (hell, award winning work at times, published and commissioned work occasionally) with Poser 4 and the early Mil2 figures than I seem to be able to complete usinf Poser 2014 Pro and now Poser 11!

Bottom line, Wolf, you know me, If I could create my own Poser Sheitz I would and would have NO NEED for anything new. Having no need for anything new or anyone else's stuff I would never venture here into these sites or forums.which from a greater view, is a waste of time.... I can't, as so many Poser users CAN'T. Poser was created mostly for amateurs who wanted to be artists, for painters who needed a quicker base image upon which to create their digital paintings rather than drawing it from scratch, or for video artists who needed a simple way of comping animatic motions and scene views to help set up visuals for more advanced apps or working film or imaging....you know that man!

It is a catch 22. If you create a figure believing if it is out there they will buy it. Wrong. Failure comes from that mind set ans so many have failed. The standard for creating and selling any new figure is hugely based on what is already out there. V$/M4 are the highest standards and having been out there for so long have developed a wonderful following and support network. They have been a standard from which all others are judged. It drives me crazy for instance, seeing SM produce figures that SUCK for use in in Poser. I am not just talking about human figures but animals, creatures, animals, clothes, props and architecture. You would think they would see the importance by way of MARKETING that developing higher standards for their creative offerings to be a prime objective. I hate buying stuff from them because it is off by much....textures, joints, proportions, everything. there are very few content creators there who actually are good t what they offer but apparently get so little support selling their goods they create/offer very little. On the other hand if a figure is created no one will get it because they argue, there is no support stuff for it.

I see wonderful fantasy figures i can not for the life of me convince the creator to launch a more aggressive marketing campaign to get support for. He (actually it is they because there are two such creators of similar figures out there) refuses yet will not create extra content for to get attention for the wonderful figure. It drives me crazy. I bought the figure from one of them seeing promise but because I can NOT create my own stuff for it,I am afloat without a paddle in getting more use out of it. DOA is the term I think of. Having felt burned I did NOT buy the similar figure from the other for the same reason: Stupid stubborn refusal to add support content for what would have been a nice fantasy figure. In my country it is referred to: as swallowing the donkey and choking on the tail! mentality. BLAH!!!

As mentioned DAZ does and has almost always maintained a higher standard for content creators and thus the reason I have allowed my credit card held captive there for so long. But now it is time to take it away from their control. They failed to remember about the huge poser user base upon which they have based their stupendous growth on. They create content now exclusively for their free flagship app. Business wise it is viable for them. But for "unable to create my own content" users we are depressed there is no more support for our software o choice: Poser. Where do we go to get it?

Here....for now. If I could wrap this useless head of mine around learning new stuff I would get their free D/S and use it. But I can't so I don't. Also, having spent THOUSANDS of dollars there since before they were DAZ...since the latter days of Zygote and the first content CD I bought for the P4 humans, I am spent out. They actually did me a favor with this whole stupid Genesis thing and the useless Downloader and their DSON Importer(32bit) they don't even know how to help me get to work on my 64 bit Mac! I have saved tons of money NOT investing on any more of their offerings. What frelling kills me is their insisting to only offer animals, non-genesis based creatures and sets and simple un-posable props for D/S with NO Further support for Poser. I may get away from using new figures but I love some of their environments and nature sets by creators that used to offer for both platforms now supporting only D/S. Despite the insistence of content creators there saying DAZ does not force them to do so I just am NOT buying it knowing the long established content standards they adhere to...nope NOT buying it....literally and figuratively.

For as long as I can find support stuff for my greatly invested in Mil 4 figures and now my last version of Poser (v11+) for my Mac I will continue as I have always been including whining about stuff I would love to have for this or that and hoping there are some more creative techies out there interested in creating content for my apps and figures of choice and shamelessly begging fhr help to get this or that as needed hoping there is someone listening and willing to help.

Razor42 posted at 1:27PM Fri, 11 March 2016 - #4260430

Well what makes good art or bad art is quite a difficult question to answer. Though Rorr's answer is quite a good one imo

For example take this picture 'Dust Heads' depicting two junkies high on Angel Dust painted in 1982 by Basquiat.

Would you say in your opinion that this is good or bad art?

Would you be surprised if I told you the current owner paid close to 50 million dollars for it a few years ago at a Christie's auction in New York? Obviously the purchaser considered it to be quite good or maybe he/she just seen it as an investment piece. Though it's not really to my own personal taste there is something that I do like about it. Probably not 50 million dollars worth of like though. Hard to say whether it's good or bad art. Some like it, some don't. Some think it's worth millions, others may discard it as trash if they didn't know its true value.

Does it seem better or worse art knowing its value?

The value of any art is set by a gallery knowing its consumer base and pricing items it has showcasing in their facilities geared to those willing to pay for it as "INVESTMENT". There was an artist who got launched such a gallery and subsequently had some articles written on him in pubs like Art Forum and the like who prompted an art investor named S.Stalone to buy one of his pieces. This artist publicly ridiculed the collector for spending so darn much money on one of his pieces. The value of his work was artificially inflated not by the gallery as much but by the person willing to pay for one of his pieces and obviously as such things go, went up from there. Kind of silly rally if you ask me but just how the whole art world works.

qaz posted at 1:35PM Fri, 11 March 2016 - #4260280

Did this in November within a day or so of getting the figure. When Shvrdavid finishes his improved Pauline I will give her a more attractive head.!

this is a beautifully sculpted and textured face. If your body work for this is just as nice, get it out there.