It never ceases to amaze me how many people spend countless hours searching for even more improved ways to render the human form, while the most basic thing to achive realism is commonly overlooked:

SHAPE.

As someone who did scale modelling for 35+ years, unrealistc "eyeballed" models really make me sick, especially when they are done by people who DO have the technical skills to make an excellent model, but couldn´t be bothered searching for some correct blueprints.

While it´s true that only nerds (like me. LOL) might spot a wrong shape in a "Spitfire" plane, wrong shapes in more common things will be spotted by a lot more people.

And then it´s about something as common as the human body, everyone of us is an expert who easily can spot if something is "wrong".

At least one should think so.

While of course everyone is build different, there are rules about human proportion which apply to the "average" human beeing, and can be used as a blueprint just like one uses a blueprint or photographs when you model other things.

So let´s load Andrew Loomis human proportions chart into Poser and lets see how our favorite girl measures up against it:

The size of the human skull doesn´t vary much among adults, so we have to scale the chart untill the head size matches that of Vicky 3.

Compared to Loomis 5'7" "Ideal" woman, V3 turns out to be an awe inspiring 6'3" Amazon. (Or is that "Mammazon" ?)  ;-)

Ouch. Not even Supermodels are that tall.

So lets scale her down to make her more, well, not "average", because the average US woman is even shorter than Loomis "ideal", but at least more "human":

Body : scale    88%
Head: scale   102%
Stretch Arms:  0,5
FootPetite:       -1
Hands: scale 105% 

A lot better, don´t you think ?

Playing around with V3´s standard bodymorps, we can get even closer to Loomis "ideal" shape:

For those interrested, the texture used is Jochen38´s free Elizabeth texture. Most likely the nicest FREE V3 texture I´ve ever seen.
Head morph is my own. The bodymorphs, apart from a single magnet used to compensate for the neck deformation caused by the head scaling, are standard V3.

Now lets turn to the second favorite realistic model out there: Miki.

Miki´s body was patterened after Czech model Anetta Keys, so we know she is 5'5" tall:

That´s actually bit too tall for an average Japanese woman which are more like 5'0" to 5'2" , so I scaled her down by shortening the thighs, shins and the abdomen along the y-axis.
She´s now 5'3".
I actually would modify her body even a bit more to emphasize that she´s Japanese, but even right out of the box she has pretty realistic proportions.

Next to her is my "Euro-Miki", a V3-Miki hybrid that shows MIKI´s original body at 5'5" height.

Conclusion:

Right out of the box, V3 is pretty useless when you want render a realistically proportioned female.
(And so are all the other DAZ meshes)

At the very least scale her head to 112%, make her arms a bit longer and scale up hands and feet to match the head.
(And modify your other figures in a similar fashion.)

MIKI has a lot of other problems, but at least her shape is pretty realistic (for an average European woman).

And OF COURSE you can go on and use V3 and the other DAZ folks just as they are, because there is that thing called artistic freedom, so you decide what you like.

All I´m saying that if you want to claim "realism" for your work, first make sure that the models themselves are actually realistic.

Stahlratte

stahlratte - interesting reading. 
I do agree that if you were going for total realism then these facts should be taken into consideration. When I design my characters I do try for as realisticly proportionate figures as possible but in reality, there are many people whos proportions are very different to others & also how many people would notice if the body shape was slightly off? I do think it's worth trying to achieve though.

"Miki´s body was patterened after Czech model Anetta Keys" - I never knew this! I must admit that from what I can think of Miki & Anetta, I can't really see it. Maybe I'll have to do a comparison.

Yeah, Very interesting read.
Some of us over the years also have tried to achieve that realistic proportioned form (the beauty of th form idea).
But the policies of this site stoped THAT dead in it's tracks.
The figure you created useing the Elizabeth texture is great. But the MODS would ban it as looking to young!!! She looks to be 16 to 23, a bannable character.

So we're stuck with massive boobed, fat ass'd amazons less we get a warning.
The flesh is willing but the rules are weak.

I just downloaded this page, and saved it as a PDF file before the MODs can get their righteous little fingers on it.  Ha-ha.  It's nice to see that my antiphathy to V3 is based on more than just an anti-Daz instinct.
Since I don't use Vickies at all (except to dipict them as Hermaphrodite males, or using a dwarf morph, as dumpy little females), I'd be interested as to how well Posette, Judy (and Neja since I finally got P5 with the big CP giveaway), and Natalia measure up on the same scale.
I'm especially in hearing about Neja, since I have several hundred Posette head morphs I can use on her, and Judy is face room compatable.  Is she more reasonably proportione as compared to V3?  (I think she is, but I'd still like to have my prejudices confirmed by an expert).
David P. Hoadley

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

Very interesting - I always knew they were too tall - but you've explained it so well. Thank you for sharing the information.

The important thing is not to stop questioning.
- Albert Einstein

Indoda

6' 3"!!!! Damn V3 is a frick'in tight end! No wonder so many artists render her as Naked Vicky in a temple with a sword. This was a very interesting thread.

My Facebook Page

Sealtm2 - "Damn V3 is a frick'in tight end!" - It's a good job I know about US football or that comment would have sounded even funnier!!

Quote - Sealtm2 - "Damn V3 is a frick'in tight end!" - It's a good job I know about US football or that comment would have sounded even funnier!!

LOL! Okay how about this then...ehem.....Damn V3 is a frick'in second row!

My Facebook Page

I would like to see you try and tell Lucy Lawless (Xena) that she is proportionally incorrect..!

"You don't have to be mad to use Poser... but it helps"

Many thanks for the kind words so far.

Ok, here come Posette (Nea) and Jena.
Judy and Jena have the same body, so I didn´t include her in the test.

Scaled so that their head sizes match that of Loomis chart, Posette turns out to be 5'8" while Jena is 5'10".
Not perfect , but a lot better than V3.

Jena inherited a bit of "pinheadedness" from Judy, who inherited it from V2 which she was meant to compete with.

Here are both slightly modified:

Posette/NEA´s head was left as is, but I shortened her thighs and shins a bit. I lenghtened the abdomen, and made her arms longer. Nothing drastic, but enough to make her look a bit less "heroic".

Jena got her head scaled up to 102%, and also her thighs and shins shortened. I also added two magnets to lift her sagging shoulders a bit.) Her arms were lenghtend a bit, too.
I scaled the body down a bit so that her head again matches those of the chart and Posette/Nea.

@Ziggie: Lucy Lawless is 5'11", so even she would be dwarfed by a real world V3.

I´m not saying that V3 is "incorrect".
She is correctly proportioned  for a 6'3" tall woman.

But if you want to portray an "ideal" or even an average woman, then you cannot use her "as is".

Stahlratte

Quote - 6' 3"!!!! Damn V3 is a frick'in tight end! No wonder so many artists render her as Naked Vicky in a temple with a sword. This was a very interesting thread.

More like a Linebacker, if you ask me!  (Which, of course, you didn't.) ;=]
DPH

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

maybe she's NBA material (now there would be something interesting.;)

I wish I'd said that.. The Staircase Wit

anahl nathrak uth vas betude doth yel dyenvey..;)

Wow, Stahlratte that's great info.  I've been wanting to do that comparison for a long time as I've always felt something was a bit off with the V3 proportions.

Maybe this explains why I always want to put V3 in some scene kicking butt.  6'3...

Oh, btw, I'm flagging this for Nudity, I'me sitting at work and didn't know.  Almost an oops!

Thanks again for the valuable info!

@ ThrommArcadia: Opps, sorry !  Honest mistake !

My only excuse is that Rendo is slow as molasses for me today, and I made  about a dozend edits before I was happy with the original post so I simply forgot the nudity flag over all the wating for the side to load between previews.  :-(

Stahlratte.

Ahh, this thread explains a lot . For years I 'm trying to make some decent furniture based on the size of the poser units which is given in the manual: 1 poser unit is 8,6 feet or 262,128 cm. Allways when tried to make victoria sit on  one of my chairs, it appears to small and  I had to resize it. As an interior designer/engineer, I'm always trying to make my furniture as ergonomic as possible, which isn't easy, but when DAZ makes there models above the 95% standard ratio, you're running a lost race. I knew there was something wrong, but I never had the time to figure it out. But what to do now?  What  scale does DAZ use? And what was their intention? Or didn't they to do it on purpose which I wonder.I've attached a picture with jessi and vicki with the meter-stick of dr.Geep.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

stahlratte, could you be more specific (and possibly post a photo) on how you used magnets to fix jena's and Judy's shoulders?  Also a list of your specific changes to the arms, abdomen, thighs and shins would be appreciated.
Yours truly,
David P. Hoadley

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

Could you do one with Stephanie 3 and Aiko 3? I realy would like to know how they would compare as well. Great work on these comparisons!
:biggrin:

My brain is just a toy box filled with weird things

I'm sorry, I've made some mistake in the last render, so I attach a new picture with also a feet scale for imperial people among us. What do you notice? Victoria (3.0 sae) is much too big, but Jessi isn't small either, I've too admit she is more in limits than VIcki, but her body-proportions are much more similar to someone of a smaller size. I think that mr. Hoadley has a point when he says that posette or judy are more realistic than V3 or even like Jessi. What Vicky lacks is exaggerated at Jessi: the female proportion. Jessi looks like a comicbook Superhero, I 'm sure  that you can find a women with same proportions as Vicky, but sexy isn't the word that comes to my mind. Lucky enough, Daz comes with a huge set of morphs to make her look more feminime. I suspect that they make her look that way, so you had to buy the extra body and face morphs. When you're making clothes for Vicky, you won't notice the big size of vicky: You use her body object as a reference and make her clothes fit her body. As a furniture or prop-modeller it is something different: To make a realistic object, you have to know exactly which scale Poser use, so you can make your object not too big or too small. If some company just fools around with it, I don't have much appreciation for that.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Attached Link: Shoulder and neck magnets

Here are the values used for Posette/NEA and Judy/Neja:

NEJA /Judy

Head        scale  105%
Shoulder x-scale 105%
ForeArm x-scale 105%
Shin       y-scale 95%

Posette/NEA
Shoulder  x-scale 105%
ForeArm  x-scale 105%
Abdomen y-scale 108%
Shin        y-scale 95%
Thigh       y-scale 95%

The most important thing is that all adult meshes have (more or less) the same head size, like in real life, so I would leave the body scale of your most frequently used mesh at 100%, and scale all other meshes to match.
(After you corrected their head to body proportions.)

I made a download for both Judy/NeJa´s shoulder as well as the neck magnet one needs when V3´s head is scaled up.
See attached link.

@mylemonblue: I can do Sp3, but Aiko 3 would be pointless, as she isn´t intended to be a realistic human, so their head/body ratio is way off by default.  ;-)

Stahlratte

Without a standard reference, it's easy to fall into the trap of saying, "Jeez, V3's head sure is small for her size."

**NOW WE KNOW THE TRUTH!

**It's not small--SHE'S HUGE!

@___@ Wow.  Doing a comparative size examination of popular poser models is Superlative!

Sort of a Jane's Book of VR Models. :lol:

Since Poser Normal Units are crap to use, I've been using the Poser yard-stick that was come up with, like others in this thread.  I think there in lays the gordian knot of outlandish size.  If you don't KNOW how big something is, you can't really know how big or small something is.

Stahl----You are my hero.  This one article had turned my perception of Poser upside down.  That is NOT a bad thing, either.  I fully support this thread as a VERY important reference not just on human proportions, but how to achieve them in Poser and other CGI apps!

You deserve a prize or something for this!

More to do, of course.  Like Terai Yuki, Aiko, S3 and others.

Brilliant.  Bloody brilliant!

EDIT: Aiko is useable when REALISITC morph is used.  The only way I use her. ^__^ V,,

I cannot save the world. Only my little piece of it. If we all act together, we can save the world.--Nelson Mandela
An  inconsistent hobgoblin is the fool of little minds
Taking "Just do it" to a whole new level!   

Ok, her come Jessi and SP3:

Out of the box and adjusted to match the Loomis head size, Jessi is a massive 6'0", while Stephanie is a "not really petite" 5'8".

Lets see what we can do with them:

I scaled Jessis legs A LOT shorter, as well as her neck.
Made her arms longer and her head larger. She ALMOST looks human now, but her strange knees and shins, as well as her hands still give her away as an evil alien Fembot (From outer space)  ;-P

SP3 is pretty all around perfect, especially her legs.
But I don´t like her overly thin neck so I still scaled the head up a weee bit and made the neck wider along the x-axis.
I´m also not that fond of her squarish hip shape, but all in all she has the best out of the box shape foor a TALL (!) young athlethic woman, while Miki represents the best "average" body type.

Posette/NEA and Judy/NeJa hold up pretty well, and with a bit of scaling and better shoulders NeJa looks pretty good.
IMO her shins need some work just like Jessi´s, but her knees are a lot better.

Jessi and V3 sure are the most problematic. Only a major overhaul or some loose fitting clothes can save Jessi.
(But to be fair, she by far has the best shoulders and I like her face)
V3 can be morphed pretty easily, but SP3 can do everything V3 can and has the more realistic bodyshape out of the box. She also bends much better.

Stahlratte

Most people do not have the proportions of that loomis ideal proportion chart, it looks a lot like the greek ideal proportions, you would have to be at least 7 feet tall to have similar proportions.

No one at 5 foot 7 has the proportions of the picture.

Are you referring to bodyshape or headsize to bodyheight ratio ?

Loomis sure has shown an "ideal" bodyshape (Wide shoulders- small hips), but the headsize to body height ratio is correct.
And that´s why he called it "Ideal proprtions".
As I said the "average" women is shorter and stockier, and has a lower head to body ratio. (6 1/2 to 7 1/2 heads high instead of eight)

But even if we say that the headsize to bodyheight ratio is set too low by Loomis, V3 would then be even more taller than she already is.

But I´m always eager to learn more, so please feel free to backup your opinion with a different chart.

Stahlratte

The head size to body ratio is not correct, the picture shows a much more accurate set of measurements, the greeks used the eight head height proportions because they are supposed to look better and a lot of modern artists do it as well but it is not accurate.

This is not just something that I just read in a book, I have learned it through observation, the polycletus picture is actually still not totally accurate but it is closer than the eight head height idea.

What would need to be done, in your opinoion, to improve the shape of Judy's/Neja's shins?
DPH

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

You know Stahlratte, you ought to package some of your results and put them on the market.

My Freebies

Venus-figure about 25000, years old, found in WIlendorf, Austria.

pjz99 wrote: *You know Stahlratte, you ought to package some of your results and put them on the market.

*Before you do that you have to consider the following:
I didn't knew Andrew Loomis (shame on me, but I'm European) so I did some googling: Andrew Loomis was famous for his art books (and illustrations) which he published in the years 40 and 50. His proportion scales of the ideal female were based on the average dimensions and the ideal beauty image of that time (and that part of the world) SInce then the average western women and men have grown 3-4" (really!) and it is still going on. For my work I use ergonomic data which are about 25 years old and they are starting to be a little useless. That is one.
Ergonomics are based on the average measurement of people.  You use a scale based on a gaussian deviation. If a person lenght is below the 5% of that scale he is considered too small, and if he's above the 95% of that scale he is too tall. So if he's between the 5 and the 95% he's "normal". The difference in length between the top and the bottom of the scale is about 8 inch which is rather a lot. That is two.
"Ideal" proportions change with the time. The image of how a beautiful woman or man should look like is dictated by glamour magazines, fashiondesigners, Film and TV -makers etc. You only have to look at pictures of the various decades: women of the 20's would be considered plumb nowadays. These images of idealistic shapes are translated in the proportions of the most appealing bodyparts.That's three.
So my point is: there's is no ideal, eternal, universal woman. It changes with time,place and culture.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

But even with a average growth in length of 4" and a standard deviation of 4", I still consider Vicky too tall.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

But still when all is said and done, very few MEN are 6' 3", let alone women; which only goes to prove what I've said already in more than one thread: V3is the best MAN that DAZ has produce so far!

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

^^ bigger pecs plz

My Freebies

Quote - The image of how a beautiful woman or man should look like is dictated by glamour magazines, fashion designers, Film and TV -makers etc. You only have to look at pictures of the various decades: women of the 20's would be considered plumb nowadays. These images of idealistic shapes are translated in the proportions of the most appealing bodyparts

I agree, basically there is no 'average' human body shape or type. Whatever you like using in your work or whatever a client asks for is whats 'average'. eg if i used the 'corrected' figs posted here, most of my clients would reject them on the basis that they look like teenagers...

Also note that we aren't drawing or sketching here, but shooting from a (virtual) camera. Which means you also have to take into account the fact that depending on the lens, perspective distortion changes the look of the body shape dramatically. You can make default vicky look like a midget with a  small enough Focal. Its the same idea as that of a real photograph adding or taking away pounds on a person. This is why modelers try to aim for a middle of the road shape that will be usable across a reasonable amount of lenses and not look too horrible in any single one.

http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9336/camsav1.jpg

Or in other words rather then an ortho drawing, a much better guide is to use photographs of real people for reference and use your own judgment as to what looks best in a particular scene.

Here´s what I´d do with Judy/NeJas legs. Six magnets per leg toned them down a bit.

@Xantor and bopperthijs:

Yes, I agree that an "average" person is more like 7 to 7 1/2 heads height.
(look at Miki in my chart. She´s just 7 1/2 heads high)

If you think that an 5'8" woman should be 7 1/2 instead of 8 heads high, simply add 4" to the height I´ve given, thus making V3 6'7" instead of 6'3".

If you rather think 5'8" in real live is 7 heads high, then just add 8" to the heights I´ve  given, so unmodified V3 would be even 6'11" in "real life".

The body to head ratios are still perfectly valid, regardless what real world size you connect with a certain head to body ratio.. Just change the real life height numbers.

But, Loomis "8 heads is ideal" ratio is still pretty much valid and universally reckognized.
In fact, as the average height has indeed shifted upwards, an 8 head high person has become even a bit "more average" and less "ideal".

Stahlratte

"Or in other words rather then an ortho drawing, a much better guide is to use photographs of real people for reference and use your own judgment as to what looks best in a particular scene."

Sorry, but that statement is nonsense.
Yes, sounds harsh, sorry, but I´m soo fed up with these cop outs to justify that "everthing goes".
As a scalemodeller I have to be accurate to a fraction of an inch.
A model is either accurate or not.
If it´s off, I failed.

And while people are BUILD differently (Fat, thin, muscular), their PROPORTIONS are either accurate or not, too.

What a client thinks what "looks" like a teenager or not is totally irrelevant.
The only thing important is what a REAL teenager looks like.

And if you want to portray a realistic teenager, then do your homework while you create a model of one, and not just "follow your gut".

If you want to portray reality, then you must first create a realistic model of the real world. It´s that simple.

Yes, different camera settings will deliver different results, and guess what, the same happens in real live.

A 6' 3" Vicky monster doesn´t become "average" when you use the wrong camera settings.

Your camera settings might distort V3 so much that she appears to be more normal, but everything else in your picture will be then distorted, too.

If you WANT to picture a 6'3" tall Amazon, no problem with using Vicky as is.
But if you can´t be bothered creating correct replicas of reality first, don´t pretend that your renders are "realistic" in any shape or form.

You have the artistic freedom to do what you want in your renders, so feel free to create your own Bizarro world populated with unmodified V3´s and M3´s.

But you cannot change the basic laws of anatomy  in the real world just because you or your client feel like it.

Not as long as you claim to depict the real world in your renders.

Stahlratte

Sorry stahlratte but your way of working out proportions is not accurate, the proportions dont just affect the height of the figure, they also affect things like where the chest is and the hips etc, you cant just add or take away 4 inches from the height to make your proportions fit a real figure.

If you compare photos of nude people with the loomis version, they are really quite different.

Xantor, you constantly mix up "head to body" ratio with the way a person is build.
You also ignore the fact that Loomis shows an "ideal" person, and that I stated several times that an "average" person is shorter, therefore having a smaller "head to body" ratio"

Take two persons of the same height and one might have longer legs and the other a longer abdomen instad, but "head to body" ratio will be more or less exactly the same for both, because the head of a healthy adult person MUST be of a certain size.

And a taller person will have a higher "head to body" ratio than a shorter one.

So sorry, but the charts I showed are perfectly valid for an eight heads tall person.
If you want to show an 7 heads tall person, shorten the legs and scale the head up even more.

Stahlratte

Q:"Not as long as you claim to depict the real world in your renders." wow, wow, wow, now just slow down a bit, mate... all those people with short legs, long torso, big heads, small feet etc...what about them? are the not real? shall we gas 'em effing freaks?.....c'mon ;) when you look around, how many of those deformed cripples can you see? and how many that meet the ideal in size and proportions? i guess the ratio is 10000 to 1, if not worse, right? so maybe your ideal, which, as you say, is the only one worth of being rendered, is a bit unreal? and what if i'd decide that the Venus von Willendorf is, because of some art-historical reasons, the only valid ideal? i start a thread telling people to scale their v3 to 1ft height. and then i am rude to those who disagree? what you wrote about ideal size and proportions is correct (i guess) and interesting. but by now i'd say you carry this a bit too far...

Sigh.

amacord, you too mix up body types with "head to body" ratios.

Yes, people have short legs, long legs, big feet, small feet, etc.

But they don´t have large heads or small heads. At least not "NORMAL" people.

The head of a (healthy) average adult MUST be of a certain size,
It´s a biological fact. If it isn´t that person is severely handicapped.

OF COURSE you can render all the microcephalic people you want. Just don´t claim that that is what MOST people look like in  reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcephaly

"..and what if i'd decide that the Venus von Willendorf is, because of some art-historical reasons, the only valid ideal? i start a thread telling people to scale their v3 to 1ft height. and then i am rude to those who disagree?"

First, you haven´t seen me rude yet.
I´m just fed up when people dismiss scientifical facts like human anatomy as something "optional".

You can of course decide to willfully ignore the facts, that´s everybodys artistic freedom, and I have absolutely no problem with that.
Just don´t pretend they don´t exist because they get in your way.

And no, you cannot decide that the Venus von Willendorf is an "Ideal", because it´s simply not up to a single person to decide something like that.

You can decide that you have a fetish for obese woman and that such a woman is "your" ideal, but "THE" ideal woman is a construct created by a large group of people who all share a common taste.

So open up any fashion magazine or watch a movie, and you´ll see "THE" ideal woman, and it very much will look like Loomis "ideal".

 Wether that "ideal" is healthy, good, right, wrong, or whatever, absolutely doesn´t matter.
That´s a completely different dicussion.

But, at least for the the US and Europe, it "IS".

And it´s also a fact that the majority of people (At least her in Europe), are a lot closer to that ideal than they are to the Venus of Willendorf.

Stahlratte

do you have ideal size and proportions?

This is all based on extreme simplifications. Neither Albinus or Da Vinci, nor Loomis or even Richer could do more that try to get some average. No one really answers to that. Luckily.

The intention of people/teachers like Richer  was not to get their students to draw like that but to get them so far that they could compare the human being they saw in front of their eyes with that  template they had in their minds.

Loomis was perhaps a bit of an exception as he did loads of commercial work, and taught illustrators more than artists which does not strive for realism but a mean value.

"...do you have ideal size and proportions?"

While that has absolutely nothing to do with the statistical average proportions of US and Europe citizens, I can say that I´m a lot closer to the current western "ideal" than both V3, M3, or the Venus of Willendorf.  :-)

And again, you can be an extreme annorexic underweight or morbidly obese, and you STILL will have an "ideal" or "average" head to body ratio if you are of a certain height.
And your arms will still end up halfway on your thighs.
And your legs will be of a certain lenght.

That´s why people can use premade clothes.
Because most of us are different, but not AS different than DAZ tries to make us believe.

Stahlratte

Firstly this here is the actual page from the book containing the illustration you are getting worked up about:

http://img377.imageshack.us/img377/2674/loomis01hr2.jpg

And the one after that:

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8821/loomis02gt9.jpg

Notice the underlined parts ? Loomis himself was a very very well trained illustrator. He knew exactly what the media of his times demanded from an artist and he followed those rules just like we all do. Thats called being a professional. That you actually chose his work as your model for 'reality' is really quite amusing...

Secondly I am sorry to say this, but you are a very typical example of an engineer posing as artist i see occasionally. The same sort of people who draw up facial feature 'maps' or spend years collecting stat data on beautiful people trying to reduce beauty to mathematical formulas. Sorry mate it doesn't work that way... yes there are so called 'laws' of proportions, but they are 'laws' in the artistic sense, not absolute numbers that every one must follow. In fact they are not even terribly accurate in a real medical sense, but since they help the average artist to work from a firm footing, we fudge over the details and let em stand. They are meant to be a base to build on, not the kind of absolute gospel truth you are getting blue in the face about.

The only real guide to life is LIFE, not your own silly ideas of what it 'should' be.

"No one really answers to that."

Sorry, but science has the human shape pretty much nailed down:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_height

We now can exactly say what is "average" and what is not.

It has nothing to do with art.

It´s a purely mechanical thing.

If using default V3 makes you "feel" better, more power to you.

Just be aware the she is NOT build like 95% of the people you meet in real life.

Stahlratte

"...are a very typical example of an engineer posing as artist i see occasionally."

I take that as a BIG compliment, because I´m proud to be a skilled craftsmen, not an "artist".  :-)

"The same sort of people who draw up facial feature 'maps' or spend years collecting stat data on beautiful people trying to reduce beauty to mathematical formulas. Sorry mate it doesn't work that way..."

Actually, it does:

http://www.beautyanalysis.com/index2_mba.htm

Sorry to bust your bubble, but the "mystery of beauty" has been nailed down, too.

I´m pretty much fed up with the "artistic" types who inflict their "vision" on others.
Yes, my dream would be a model 100% based on the laser scan of a human being, with no "artistic" modifications whatsoever.
Not necessarily "ideal", but just a good AVERAGE.
Nothing added to make it look more "pleasantly"
Just 100% raw reality.

As a modeller I treat the human shape absolutely no different than any other shape.
As a scale modeler  who builds prototypes, correct shape and dimensions are crucial.
If my model is a tiny fraction of an inch "off", it isn´t a realistic representation of reality.

IWhile humans come in different shapes, I again want to get the dimensions as accurately as possible.

What I want is an accurate representation of a human being, not someones elses "artistic vision" of it.
I don´t care that the masses have been brainwashed into accepting "artistic" exaggerations as normal.

Look at an old car leaflet of the 60´s.
The cars are shown completely distorted to make them look bigger, better, roomier and sexier.

You might prefer a 3d model of that car the way  it looks in that  exaggerated drawing, but I want to have a model that was made after the real cars blueprints, so that it is an accurate representaton of the real thing.

The artistic part comes AFTER the modelling is done.
By creating expressions and poses.
By creating an environment and using certain lights.
By telling a story.

THATS when the "art" starts.

Again, too many modellers think of themself as "artists" when they really should improve their "craft".

Cutting corners is not "aristic".

Stahlratte

in the beginning i planned to carry this to a point of "but-your-science-says-you-can-not-exist". unfortunately Gongyla came a bit too early with her (correct) statement, that the whole thing is a template and not a law of science - and shot the fun of this argument down in flames winks to G. c'mon, man! a science saying that a woman must have a height of 5'7"...... :b_overwhelmed:

I think people are being a little bit unfair to Stahlratte for bringing this issue up.  Just looking at V3 you can see she's either got a) a really small head, or b) she's unreasonably tall, which is what has moved me to mess around with body scaling for my own characters in many cases (not that I'm any expert, but I know an uberly butch Amazon when I see one).  Hiding this pretty obvious visual scale problem behind "art" is nonsense.  I had thought the entire point of Victoria and Michael are that they're supposed to be as generic and "average" as possible, and to allow the user to modify from there as desired - but from the sound of some of the posters here, it would be "artistically OK" to have her head be the size of a baseball in relation to her body and some people wouldn't blink at it.  Sure people vary in size and shape, but I have to agree that the starting point is way too supermodel/basketball player in relation to most humans.

There is no reason to take a poke at a person for systematizing something like this - it doesn't make you or them any more or less correct.  People who are married to the current shape of V3 aren't morally superior for sticking to that standard, any more than someone who points out its flaws are morally inferior (or vice versa).  The "you're an engineer pretending to be an artist" comment was cheap, snooty, and irrelevant - art and engineering are both just ways of quantifying the world.  Leonardo da Vinci wouldn't have appreciated such a comment, as much as his name has been tossed around here.

ps: bigger pecs plz.

My Freebies

"He knew exactly what the media of his times demanded from an artist and he followed those rules just like we all do. Thats called being a professional. That you actually chose his work as your model for 'reality' is really quite amusing..."

Yes, I´m fully aware that Loomis "ideal" human is..."IDEAL".

Why ? Because it says so on top of the page.  :-)

But people DO grow taller in the US and Europe on average, so his "Ideal" of the 1940´s has become more the "average" of 2006.

Personally I prefer a 7 1/2 head ration for men and 7 heads for woman, but as people around here are so used to V3´s 9 head ratio, I rather didn´t want them to be scared away.

You already admitted that an 8-heads tall fully grown adult woman looks like a "teenager" to you, so what must a "really" realistic 7-heads tall average woman look like to you ?

Stahlratte

So for those who think "Ideal" is too IDEAL, here is a bit of "real" REALITY:

EuroMiki scaled to match a real live ADULT FULLY GROWN UP
7 head tall woman:

The ONLY things I did was to shorten her legs and slighly shorten her forearms.
Everthing else lined up perfectly.
No other differences between her and the 7 1/2 heads tall original version.

Now let´s say she´s 5' 5" tall, the EXACT US average for caucasian woman, and compare her with V3:

With both having the same head size, like in real live, like predicted, Vicky is now even taller. (6'11" ).

And you now can also easily see why all the Poser children look so horribly wrong to me.
Designed to match Vicky 3, they look way too old compared to a REALISTIC grown up woman.

Stahlratte

The V3 on the right really needs some 5 inch stiletto heels to make her look right.  That'd be frikken sweet.

My Freebies

@pjz99 big hands for your [edit=previous]comment. stahlratte brought an interesting theme and his rumIS smart. v3 IS unnecessarily tall (although i'm ok with 94%) and her head IS too small. one has to praise him for taking the trouble of making all those images to demonstrate his thoughts. as far as i'm concerned, the poking is for "You have the artistic freedom to do what you want in your renders, so feel free to create your own Bizarro world populated with unmodified V3s and M3s." and the likes. that kind of having an argument drives me straight to the barricades. reminds me of my old man, if you know what i mean... @stahlratte der ton macht die musik, stimmt's? lass' gut sein, alter, hast eh recht...

^^ you and I are in the same ballpark, I had scaled my "ideal" main model down to 95% and her head up a bit to keep proportion, to 103%.  I really like the fit look of Blackhearted's GND2 character so I started from there, but I took a lot off the breasts and put in some tummy.

My Freebies

"der ton macht die musik, stimmt's? lass' gut sein, alter, hast eh recht..."

Genau. Und wenn Leute (Und damit mein´ ich jetzt nicht Dich) in einen Thread hineinwalzen und sagen das die wissenschaftliche Arbeit von Jahrhunderten praktisch Blödsinn ist, dann handel ich halt ganz nach dem guten alten Sprichwort:
Wie man in den Wald hineinruft, so schallt es hinaus.

Tut mir Leid, aber mit Ignoranten hab ich keine Geduld. Ich teile mein Wissen gern mit anderen, aber wer Dumm bleiben will, der darf es gerne bleiben.

Den herablassenden Ton allerdings kannst Du Dir gerne sparen.
Für die Probleme mit Deinem Vati kann ich nix.
Falls dir solche Übertragungen öfter passieren, empfehle ich mal einen geigneten Therapeuten aufzusuchen.

:-)

Stahlratte

na, dann viel spanoch beim hirnwix'n ;)

"na, dann viel spaß noch beim hirnwix'n ;)"

Solange ich kleine profilsüchtige Trolls aus meinen Threads heraushalten kann, hab ich allen Spaß den Du dir vorstellen kannst. Keine Bange.

Ach ja, falls Du noch was zu sagen hast, dann Bitte per Sitemail.

Dieser thread ist für Leute gedacht die etwas über Poser lernen wollen, nicht um Deine persönlichen Probleme abzuarbeiten.

Stahlratte

bopperthijs, 

You hit it on the head, I got to this tread late. First off, When a person is shorter than average, there is usually slight differences in their perportions, the same holds true with the larger person.

The Vickys and Poser4  and all the charactures that are out there are set as a guide for the most Idealistic person of these times within the artist capablities. Case in point Look at the thighs touching in the Loomis drawing. That was great back then for Idealism. But today listen to the advertizements, One such ad in a weight loss promotion, a woman said, before my thighs touched now after so, and so,  they touch no more. 

I studied on Loomis's art and found it very inspiring. But were in a different era. If you look at the Nude paintings in the 1400-1500s Heavy women are more artistic to draw than a thin person. More things happen with the creases that lend itself to lighing and such. That is great for art, but that same reasoning can be implied to the drawing an old building which is more   interesting than a modern building for those same reasons. But keeping it all in context, You don't put a women out of perportion or overweigh in an beauty contest. They are two different reasoning there. It always comes around to what is happening in the the world at that time which is acceptable.

The example of the round anchent sculpture that bopperthijs showed was right on. Yes that looks cartoony for todays standards, but, if that wasn't Ideal for that artist, he could have made her thin. He migh not have had the great tools of today, but making her thin would have never been that big of a problem.

My biggest grip with M3 and V3 is they are so close to the same hight, which was mentioned and correctly so in these threads. It would be nice if V3 standard hight would have been about 3 inches shorter. Then when she wore her high heels she would be about the same size as M3, as apose to 3 inches taller in heels. I hate to have him lean his head back just to have her kiss him. LOL 

I don't do modeling of figures in 3D, I just don't have enough time. I do animation. but I have a big suspission that some of the problems are with the rigging  nature within Poser and the meshes is why some of the problems exist. Best example is the shoulders and legs. When the leg is lifted to high, the top of the thighs flatten out un-natural, as example. These are more probmatical than the proportions on making the figure look good. Things like that have to be touched up in renders and dealt with with magnets or mophs. 

What we are seeing is an evolution in Poser and all the charactures within and making them  so they function more natural. Remember Poser 2, 3 and 4 Charactures. The P4 charactures weren't that bad, but were way off  in capabilities to the Mike and Vicky upgrades. Todays figrueskeeping there body shapes to hold as they move so you don't have to tweek this and that. And messing with the Magnets. Thats great as an emergency solution. But when you have to use magnets in the middle of an animation that you can't get any other way slows the whole production down.

I think that the Loomis samples are a great thing to be aware of. I'm suprised that more people are not aware of the proportional issues in the body. Of course I'm old school, If you are not in an Art Instution where those are the building blocks and you just go into Poser for the fun of it, That will be the last thing a lot of people will think about.    The reality is, We are in the hands of the Artist who make the models. And overall I am pleased, and They are getting better at getting things the way we want them. Rome wasn't built in a year. If it was that easy there would be 10,000 models out ther, and everyone would have the characture they thought was best. 

Stahlratte said : Sorry to bust your bubble, but the "mystery of beauty" has been nailed down, too.

I'm sorry to say but I went to that website and  there was something to amazed me : They say that there are four qualities of a beautiful face :Color, texture, size and shape, further they say there are three known qualities: Color, texture and size and one unknown : shape. And as far as I see, shape is just the quality we are talking about.

So there goes your bubble.

 And here is another one: Loomis made his artbook for students as a guideline to make proportional "artistic" drawings. Like tekmonk showed in the images of the Loomis artbook, Loomis self  wasn't pleased with the actual, normal proportions of a real man which was 7,5 head.  He even drew a goofy moustache on the figure to make it look more dumpy. So he proposed a more artistic, pleasing 8 foot proportion. Loomis was an artist, not an engineer, he wanted to make drawings that were pleasing not realistic.

Engineers like me, try to grab the world in numbers and formula's to make the world more understandable and predictable, but the scientific discoveries of the last hundred years proved that's impossible. It feels sometimes better to work by intuïtion and emotion than by hard rules and formula's. It makes the world more exceptable.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Attached Link: Vitruvian Man

The Law of the Phi applies here, as it does to all aspects of life.  To ignore it is folly.
DPH

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

In a perfect cartesian world, phi is a constance, in our real einsteinian world it isn't.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Sigh.

As the saying goes: You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.  ;-P

And to be honest, stating the obvious over and over again gets old fast.

1. The 8:1 head ratio is the most universally accepted, that´s why I choose Loomis charts. 7:1 or 7 1/2 :1 is more "average" but
   obviously people are already scared by his "ideal" 8:1 ratio.
    

2. The various head to body ratios are a fact regardless of body type. Any Doctor can tell you that there are limits for head size.

3. The average height of an caucasian US or European woman is around 5' 5".  People way above or below that or not the average.

4. You can render anything you like. But when you make a street scene where all people are beyond 6' 0", don´t claim it to be "real" or "normal".

5. Even if advertisers want to make you believe otherwise, tall people are not "better" than average sized people.
   So don´t buy stuff just because it was advertised by a giantess.

6. Take Vicky as what she is: A pure fantasy.
   Enjoy playing with her.
   But again, all the lightning and shading tricks in the world won´t make her "real" unless you at least scale her friggin´ head up.

7. I´m all for art. But the modelling process is pure mechanic.
   Art has no place in it, not as long as you want to create a realistic 3d representation of a real world item, and that includes the human body.
   The art part happens when you bring the mesh to live with expressions and build a scene to tell a story.
   Before that, it´s all craft.

And finally, let me show you Mrs and Mr Average:

Thanks for looking and I hope some found this thread helpfull.

Stahlratte

I did and don't let the naysayers put you off.

baseline is : V3 is not a good realistic figure. she's out of proportion and to tall. sorry to those that think otherwise, but thats the truth..

now, if we can just get ppl to accept this... and that you need to change your light settings from default.. and you don't need to apply the postwork fad of the week.. and giving your figure an expression is a good idea..

I just know I'm on thin ice here...

It's obvious by some of the replies in this thread that some of you haven't even bothered to pick up an anatomy book. If you had you would see right away the glaring problems that most of the Poser models possess. It's also the reason why Poser art is a such laughing stock in the digital arts community.

I myself have some formal art school training and the first time I saw Victoria I was ROFLMAO. Wonky arms, tiny head and what the he** is going on with her hips? Sure you can go in and correct her with morphs, magnets, etc. but if you don't know your anatomy how are you going to know what needs correcting?

To the folks who are saying, "Well, Loomis was from another era so those standards don't fit today's standards."

Ridiculous.  Do yourself a favor a educate yourself about the human figure by buying some artistic anatomy books and see how much your artwork improves.

I am very new to Poser and purchased this software in order to assist me with my figure drawing. Instead I find myself a very frustrated new user having to scale down, morph constantly correct Poser model anatomy. I am shocked that a company whose original intent was to cater to figure artists cannot create an anatomically correct model!

I apologize if my post sounds confrontational but this is a very sore point for me. I refuse to spend any more money on this program until a decent model comes forward and I am eagerly looking forward to V4,M4. Hopefully the designers bothered to take some anatomy classes this time. For now I shall be happy with my pencils, pad, inks and anatomy books.

Rant over.

Are you saying that law of 1.618 to 1 doesn't apply to the proportions of the human body?  The first joint of your index finger isn't 1.618 times larger than the second joint?  The second joint isn't 1.618 times bigger than the third?  What does Descartes have to do with this anyway?
I think, therefore I am! -Or at least I THINK so.
DPH

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

Quote -

Here´s what I´d do with Judy/NeJas legs. Six magnets per leg toned them down a bit.
Stahlratte

Dear Stahlratte:
First of all, thank you for the shoulder and Neck magnets.
Second, could you please post an illustration on just how to set those magnets up?  A picture would be very helpfull in fixing Judy's & Neja's legs.
Yours truly,
David P. Hoadley

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

The golden mean is not an actual scientific rule.

If I was changing the heights of poser figures I would try and make them look like real people and not the idealized loomis way (which was actually invented by the ancient greeks or at least they were the first to be credited with it).

"The golden mean is not an actual scientific rule."

Oh?  Have you actually measured yourself to find out?  It seemed ot hold true for the various proportions of my body.
DPH

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

dalmatica
***"**It's obvious by some of the replies in this thread that some of you haven't even bothered to pick up an anatomy book. If you had you would see right away the glaring problems that most of the Poser models possess. It's also the reason why Poser art is a such laughing stock in the digital arts community.

I myself have some formal art school training and the first time I saw Victoria I was ROFLMAO. Wonky arms, tiny head and what the he** is going on with her hips? Sure you can go in and correct her with morphs, magnets, etc. but if you don't know your anatomy how are you going to know what needs correcting?

To the folks who are saying, "Well, Loomis was from another era so those standards don't fit today's standards."

Ridiculous.  Do yourself a favor a educate yourself about the human figure by buying some artistic anatomy books and see how much your artwork improves.

I am very new to Poser and purchased this software in order to assist me with my figure drawing. Instead I find myself a very frustrated new user having to scale down, morph constantly correct Poser model anatomy. I am shocked that a company whose original intent was to cater to figure artists cannot create an anatomically correct model!

I apologize if my post sounds confrontational but this is a very sore point for me. I refuse to spend any more money on this program until a decent model comes forward and I am eagerly looking forward to V4,M4. Hopefully the designers bothered to take some anatomy classes this time. For now I shall be happy with my pencils, pad, inks and anatomy books.

Rant over.* "
**

dalmatica** having had some formal art classes myself have to I agree.

By the way anyone who wants to can find real human references by Googling "Female Anatomy Photos by Akira Gomi". There you'll find free images of average off the street every day females in front back and side views for art . They are photographs. Anyone can paste them next to the Loomis chart in a photo image editor, size the images until the heads match and see for themselves. It's fun and very educational to see and learn about body size and proportions.

**
**:biggrin:

My brain is just a toy box filled with weird things

Attached Link: Judy and NeJa softer shin magnets

@ David:  Too lazy to make you a picture. Will a direct download of the magnets do instead ?  ;-)

@JOELGLAINE, pjz99, Khai, dalmatica and  mylemonblue : Many thanks for the support !

:-)

Stahlratte

Knowledge helps anyone do whatever they want to do better.  As a professional artist, I studied
physionomy  and anatomy of the human body to get the proportions right.

One of things touched here is soundly based in physical fact.  The human brain, when mature, irrespective of IQ or belief, comes in one basic size.  That size is determined by the genetics of the human species.  The braincase (skull) may have some statistical varience to size, but for the great portion of human-kind, has one size for mature humans.

The size of a figure is determinable by comparison of the skull, versas the long-bone proportion distributions. A dwarf will have a standard head, and shorter long bones.  A basketball player will have the same size skull and longer long bones.

I got this info from school and talking with a Forensic Anthropologist.  She stated that it is impossible to tell height looking at a skull, but is vary probable to within a half inch to determine height from one long bone only, if age and sex are known.

Art is as much inspiration as it knowledge and how to use it..  The more you know, the more you can do with it! ^__^ V,,

I cannot save the world. Only my little piece of it. If we all act together, we can save the world.--Nelson Mandela
An  inconsistent hobgoblin is the fool of little minds
Taking "Just do it" to a whole new level!   

also something else to make female figures more real

breasts are not identical.

one is always slightly higher and bigger....

I don't understand, Why do you have to keep tweeking Your models to get them right. If you have already tweeked them correctly, all you have to do is save her or him and you have the perfect model!

Quote - also something else to make female figures more real

breasts are not identical.

one is always slightly higher and bigger....

 

In actual fact, despite having two of lots of things we humans ain't symmetrical at all! :0/

LOL

Klutz :0)

********************************************************************************************************************

Life is a beta.

In faecorum semper, solum profundum variat.

Dalmatica wrote: *to the folks who are saying, "Well, Loomis was from another era so those standards don't fit today's standards."

*Please read my post again, I didn't say that literally, Loomis made his proportionscale based on a contemporay bias. People size and taste change in time, proportions don't, but Loomis scale was based on a tall,slim woman of that time (on heels) and it was supposed to be a woman with an ideal figure, not an realistic one.

And : *Ridiculous.  Do yourself a favor a educate yourself about the human figure by buying some artistic anatomy books and see how much your artwork improves.

*I actually have several artistic anatomy books, and I'm fully aware of the efforts done by the great artist of the past era. But that's what they were: artists, not scientists.  Their proportionscales were based on a artistic point of view and observation, they wanted to look their work beautiful not common. The only people I make an exception for are Da vinci and Dürer. I know that da Vinci really did some anatomy research.

Mylemonblue wrote: *by the way anyone who wants to can find real human references by Googling "Female Anatomy Photos by Akira Gomi". There you'll find free images of average off the street every day females in front back and side views for art . They are photographs. Anyone can paste them next to the Loomis chart in a photo image editor, size the images until the heads match and see for themselves. It's fun and very educational to see and learn about body size and proportions.

*I actually did that: just by using some transparant layers in Paintshop and to say the truth, the similarities with Loomis chart are stunning, most of the women have (I didn't do them all) his Ideal proportions, but there a few buts:   His arms are too long, his waist is too narrow and his woman is on heels.And: I've scaled all the pictures up to make them fit, so the actual width and heigth proportion are not the same as the original pictures, and there is no reference on those pictures how tall or small the actual woman are.

As matter of fact, I didn't want  to offend Stahlratte, I agree with him that the proportions and the size of DAZ V3 aren't correct, I even think that they originally scanned in a Barby-doll, cause that's what she makes me think of. ( That would also explain why her feet are always in a tip-toe position) I think that V3 is popular because of the same economic principle that made the VHS-tape rule, in spite of the technical better Betamax. It is the most supported product because it is the most supported product. That seems a little cryptic but it is true: people are tended to follow the mainstream. The fact that V3 is given away free and that the old V1 and V2 were more appealing than the  original poser woman Posette (sorry mr. Hoadley) only stimulate this.

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Just foolin´ around with the pictures from mylemonblue´s link:

Just a WIP made with the default morphs + scaling.
To get closer, I´d need magnets.

But I think even now it doesn´t look much like V3 any more, does it ?

Stahlratte

No, not really but it isn't my idea of an ideal woman either LOL.

Thijs

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Now that is a lot more like a real lady!  :0)

********************************************************************************************************************

Life is a beta.

In faecorum semper, solum profundum variat.

Well, at least she has the right proportions!
:lol::lol::lol::lol:

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Hey, I've been following this thread, and I'm finding it very interesting. I'm going to keep my opinions to myself, but I would like to share something that I thought was interesting. I've created my own Poser figure, ActionFigure:Diana, so naturally, I thought I'd test out her proportions, just to see how she stacks up. It's important to keep in mind that she was never intended to be realistically proportioned. I didn't use a photo of a person as a reference for her proportions, I used a model sheet for Harley Quinn, by Bruce Timm, from Batman the animated series. I did make some adjustments, to make her look a bit more natural, but a cartoon was the basis. While her features are clearly unrealistic, her proportions are pretty close to Loomis' ideal(with some noteable exceptions in the lengths of the body and legs). Weird, huh?

Thank you stahlratte

A most interesting discussion.

In striving towards realism there has to be more scope for assymetry in the model.

I suppose there has to be a compromise reached though. 

Otherwise we will shoot past realism into ugly, which has a limited market ;0)

LOL

Klutz. :0)

********************************************************************************************************************

Life is a beta.

In faecorum semper, solum profundum variat.

Well, you can laugh about the germans, but they are praised about their "gründlichkeit" or punctuality in plain english, I have two german books I use the most for my work: One is the "Neufert" architects data, which contains every possible data for creating a rabbit-home till an bowlingalley and the other book "Kleine ergonomische datensammlung" or "small book with  ergonomic data". And I have a lot profit of these books

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Quote - In striving towards realism there has to be more scope for assymetry in the model.

I suppose there has to be a compromise reached though. 

Otherwise we will shoot past realism into ugly, which has a limited market ;0)

LOL

Klutz. :0)

I guess it's how you look at it. For many realism is ugly. Just as truth can be ugly. I have found this a very wonderful thread. The only problem I see is if we scale V3 down to a realistic type female her clothes don't fit now...LOL!!

My Facebook Page

^^ PhilC's excellent Wardrobe Wizard for conforming cloth items...

My Freebies

.

Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it.
Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together.
All things connect......Chief Seattle, 1854

Don`t be fooled into thinking that using the loomis proportions will give you more realism.

Dphoadley, I read somewhere that the golden mean is not really a rule for every picture but I dont remember where I read it, the golden mean does work with most pictures that you use it in but you dont have to use it.

So that might not be the absolute optimal standard - imo it's visibly much better base to build from than someone with a miniature head.  If she'd started out with a few extra fingers or an extra buttock would people defend her this vigorously?

My Freebies

Thanks for this Stahlratte, V3 was beginning to irritate me with her apparent pinheadedness, and I sometimes scale her head up 102 - 105% to compensate. It's nice to know that there's some support for this from the worlds of engineering and art. Did you publish the morphs you used in your first post anywhere? I may have missed them - if not, I'd be interested to study them.

*Don`t be fooled into thinking that using the loomis proportions will give you more realism.

*no. alone they won't. but as part of an overall setup scenerio they prove to be a useful tool for making a realistic figure and should be taken into account.

but thats the choice of the artist making the image. no one is going to make you use them or even make a realistic figure... you do what you want to do.*

I should say that I was not arguing about making things like the head bigger,there is nothing wrong with improvements like that.

Quote - ^^ PhilC's excellent Wardrobe Wizard for conforming cloth items...

Yes, I have the program but can't seem to get the hang of it when it comes to the joint parameters. When I bend the figure the clothing rips at the arms and chest : (  When I finally get the shoulders and arm parameters correct so the clothing item doesn't tear there it tears along the chest under the arms.

My Facebook Page

    This Argument is taking on extreams, First off, V3 will not be perfect for everyone, that will be a fact. Some people like more extreams. Personaly I like V3 much better than the correct examples that you displayed. You did a good job of illustraing them, that is not my reasoning. But what is Ideal with you is not nessasly Ideal to me. techniquely you are right. but for personably I also have the same right to have a preference. All that I here is She is not the way that is correct to all the technitions. But who are you or anyone else to say I can't make a figure in the shape that I like best. Says you, thats fine, but I can make a figure the way I want, It's called freedom of expression! or do you want to challange that.
    That's fine. But why do Todays artist make legs longer on a woman than they realy are. Because that is the more desirable look. Shame on them for having a preference. We are not talking about extreams that the mass people don't reconize here, You show the stock figure of V3 with body texture and hair to a person on the street and they may say she is very sexy, pretty, or To beautful, not your average girl. They are not going to say what is it. 
   This is exactly the point everyone is talking about. No wons arguing that your head hights are not well founded. They are the standard you hold true, and the clients you represent. But other company have different standards, are you going to tell me they are wrong for making a characture the way their client find more appealing. Are you suggesting they tell their clients, you don't know what your talking about!

What I say, and what you say, and what anyone else says will never change that. Why do we have liberals and Conservatives, why do we have different religeions, Because we all see things differently. It's the way we want to see them. It's the way different artist express themselves. You should always be aware of correct proportions of the figure. But where does it say you can't make your charatures the way you like them. Wow, Elmer Fudd would have thought someone was taking a cheap shot at him. Where would we be without Elmer Fudd.  We would never have cartoons. It's called lighten up. The world will go on.

You make it sound like the guy is cutting your gonads off by just making the simple (and obvious, and correct) observation that V3 has a tiny head in proportion to her body.  Absolutely nobody including Stahlratte has suggested that you can't illustrate human beings any way you care to - only that the default V3 scaling is very unrealistic.

My Freebies

Quote - Why do we have liberals and Conservatives, why do we have different religeions

Because we are a self destructive and insecure race that needs these things to hide behind and to use as excuses for what we do to each other. steps down from soap box

My Facebook Page

Interesting thread, but boy howdy...  I sure hope Daz largely ignores it.  I mean, if they make V4 so that folks who want to can morph her into a "realistically proportioned" female figure, I have no objection in principle; but I am more interested in a V4 mesh which lets me morph her into any shape I want, "realistic" or not.  That means keeping enough polygons in those areas of Vicky's anatomy where significant changes in body proportions don't make the mesh break down or get too blocky.

All I kept thinking as I scrolled through the messages here was "great, now we have the Realism Police."  How long before they bang on Daz' door and pressure them to alter their meshes so far toward the "realism" end of the spectrum that the mesh can't do what I want it to do any more (i.e., Daz shifts too many polys from one body zone to another)?  Oh wait, seems like that's already happening in this thread. 

Though maybe my initial reaction is unfair.  Maybe this is more like a bit of a red state - blue state thing where on the one side we have users who want an out-of-the-box mesh optimized for creating "realistic" female figures and on the other hand we have users who want the mesh optimized to enable certain exagerations of the female form as "art" or fantasy.  And maybe I'm just one of the relatively quiet blue staters who haven't tended to advocate so loudly for our mesh preferences.  But I must say, I do get tired of all the aggressive prosyletizing and denigration which seems to come from the "realism" camp.

Maybe this divide could be resolved by someone creating a new mesh which meets all these insistent claims about realistic proportions.  But I'll bet "Realistic Rhonda" wouldn't sell as well as a Vicky optimized for fantasy, and I'm really hoping Daz has recognized that in their design of V4.  I do know that if V4 comes out looking like some of the figures in this thread, my wallet is staying in my pocket.

Quote - You make it sound like the guy is cutting your gonads off by just making the simple (and obvious, and correct) observation that V3 has a tiny head in proportion to her body.  Absolutely nobody including Stahlratte has suggested that you can't illustrate human beings any way you care to - only that the default V3 scaling is very unrealistic.

I think the issue is more complex than you've characterized here.  The person whose message you are quoting is clearly feeling aggrieved by the rather constant and over-shrill evangelism which goes on here about allegedly problematic disparities between 3D and real world female figures.  I'm guessing he's just tired of the explicit criticism of his desires to create fantastically-proportioned figures.  Plus, as I alluded to in my earlier post, in a polygon-constrainted world, base mesh design decisions can alter the opportunity set for figure construction, and I'm guessing that is what the earlier poster fears.  So while you're disparagement of the other poster's concerns is rather colorfully expressed, he/she is not being unreasonable.

*But I must say, I do get tired of all the aggressive prosyletizing and denigration which seems to come from the "realism" camp.

then don't read the threads .. it's very simple you decide what you read and don't read.*

Quote - You make it sound like the guy is cutting your gonads off by just making the simple (and obvious, and correct) observation that V3 has a tiny head in proportion to her body.  Absolutely nobody including Stahlratte has suggested that you can't illustrate human beings any way you care to - only that the default V3 scaling is very unrealistic.

 
   I never said he was wrong in his proportions, But what I heard was how bad V3 renders. We are talking about a Charature that is given away, A program that is at a price that everyone can afford. And we get how bad she looks when she is rendered, And if you don't render the person the "Ideal way" She is incorrect. Read his comments. 

   But if you render her not using his standards she looks terrible. I'm sorry, I disagree. No she is not perfect. But I can also look at what he has made in his Ideal porportions and say, I like V3 better. (note: I didn't say I was right) That can be my opion, and mine alone, I didn't saying mine is the only way you can make a rendered V3 characture look good. That is the basis of his argument. Which I accept, but that is not the final word.

   The one thing that he says that you can't get around is if you make V3 8 feet tall along a 6 foot man and try and make her look the same hight using different camera lense settings, you can't hide her hight  within a room that is furnished as example, the furniture gives perspective, Her body or his will show a distortion happening trying to get her to be his same hight. 
   
   My complaint with V3 is she should be at least 3 inches shorter that the man. so when she is in High Heels she is the same hight. That has nothing to do with porprotions, that is sizing of the characture Which is the easiest to correct in the stock figure.

Quote - *But I must say, I do get tired of all the aggressive prosyletizing and denigration which seems to come from the "realism" camp.

then don't read the threads .. it's very simple you decide what you read and don't read.*

Well, that's tantamount to saying "if you don't like what your political opponents are saying at the town meeting, then don't go to the meeting."  This is the kind of "shut up and keep your thoughts to yourself while the rest of us say what we think" that is the hallmark of this kind of prosyletizing. 

And let's be clear, this IS a political debate.  Politics is all about competition between interested parties, and in a polygon-constrained 3D world, the allocation of polygons to base meshes is an area of conflicting demands.  If I want to push back against those who insist on base meshes which match their preferences but conflict with mine, that is my right.  I simply want to make sure that Daz and other figure designers see that the "realism evangelizers" aren't the only interest group in the room.

sorr.. but being called 'Realism Police' kinda annoys me.

no it is not a 'political debate' - it was a discussion on making figures realistic until ppl who have no interest in the discussion came in and started to disrupt it. there is no 'politics' involved.

as to "realism evangelizers"... where?

there's been 1 thread in 3 weeks. if thats "realism evangelizers" then ye gods..

please get a grip on reality and calm down. and as I said :
***it's very simple you decide what you read and don't read.

---

Frankly I doubt DAZ would break their obvious tradition, which was why the very first thing I said in the thread was "you ought to put your results on the market" - I'd likely buy it.  I don't think anyone has suggested people should be dragged off and executed for wanting to render basketball player girls.  Look at it objectively, neither camp has any real moral high ground here.

Tguyus:
Quote - "*But I must say, I do get tired of all the aggressive prosyletizing and denigration which seems to come from the "realism" camp.

*I recall a lot of the direct and personal rudeness coming from the other direction actually, not to name names or anything.

My Freebies

Personal preference" and "Reality" are two very different things.

If you take an average woman and have her body professionally photographed and use these photographs to create an exact cgi-model of her, then, and only then you have an accurate model of an average woman.

If you distort her shape to make her more desireable, your model will be something else.

It may be usefull in the advertising biz or for fantasy renders, but it will be useless to depict reality.

Reality isn´t a matter of preferences. It is not optional.
It simply "is".

@**Tguyus : I kindly ask you to troll another thread with your unfounded drivel.

The charts and information offered here are based on centuries of scientific research.
I will not waste my time  trying to teach the willfully ignorant.
Nor will I give you a platform for self-expression.

I started this thread to educate.

If you feel the need to make DAZ aware of something, feel free to start your own thread.

If the trolling and underhanded personal attacks don´t stop, I´ll alert a mod and complain about you.

Thanks.

Stahlratte

**

Quote -    But if you render her not using his standards she looks terrible. I'm sorry, I disagree.

 

No one has said V3 is stinky, ugly, fat, stupid, has acne, bad teeth, or anything of the sort - only that she appears to either have a tiny head or she is really, really abnormally tall (which is pretty obviously the case).
Tguyus:

Quote - That means keeping enough polygons in those areas of Vicky's anatomy where significant changes in body proportions don't make the mesh break down or get too blocky.

And by the way no one has asked for polygons to be removed (why would ANYONE want that? wouldn't that would break all the skin UVMaps that are out there?)

My Freebies

Quote - sorr.. but being called 'Realism Police' kinda annoys me.

no it is not a 'political debate' - it was a discussion on making figures realistic until ppl who have no interest in the discussion came in and started to disrupt it. there is no 'politics' involved.

as to "realism evangelizers"... where?

there's been 1 thread in 3 weeks. if thats "realism evangelizers" then ye gods..

please get a grip on reality and calm down. and as I said :
***it's very simple you decide what you read and don't read.

---

Ok, I agree it is not fair for me to use terms like "realism police" and "realism evangelism."  That's the kind of denigration of one's opponents which I was arguing against, so I was being hypocritical and I apologize for that lapse.

But you are wrong in claiming this is not a political debate, in the "small p" sense.  I've been using polygon limits as a convenient shorthand, but one of the other things I dislike about the existing Vicky meshes is the short shins.  That seems to be more a rigging issue more than a polygon count issue.  My problem is that the existing Vickys were apparently given (according to my aesthetic) overly-stubby shins to make them "more realistic."  The only way I've found to lengthen the shins to a more (to me) aesthetic length (about 10 percent longer) is to use the yscale parameter.  That then fouls up all conforming shoes and boots.  So the more I hear people pressuring Daz and other mesh makers to make more realistic base figure meshes, the more of these kinds of limits I believe I have to face in creating the figures I want.  In that way, it is very much a political debate because, again, politics as a process aimed at the resolution of conflicting demands, which I believe is manifest here.  And it is not just one thread in the last three weeks, though this one is a relatively insistent one.  I have seen countless comments in countless threads in my five years here where people express surprisingly truculent disdain for exagerated figures (esp. large breasts). 

And finally, if we're going to have a civil discussion, I will agree to stop using terms like "evangelism"; but I would also ask you to not tell me to get a grip on reality or to shut up.

cheers...

Oh, I hope you're not going to hold up the 68DD breasts as the high point of artistic expression
(because they're really, really damn heavy)

My Freebies

I think that the "large breast" is a completely different subject. I do not think the makers actually care for realism here.

Stahlratte's work is valuable to me, since I did not know why V3 looked strange to me. His findings are not a matter of taste, since what he found can be proved.

If you modify V3 or another model in a way that makes her more realistic is your choice. If you do a superheroine web comic, you might even scale her head smaller to make her look bigger. Your choice.  But if you  want to make realistic pictures, following his advices can help. In my opinion, of course.

A ship in port is safe; but that is not what ships are built for.
Sail out to sea and do new things.
-"Amazing Grace" Hopper

Avatar image of me done by Chidori. 

Quote - @ David:  Too lazy to make you a picture.
Will a direct download of the magnets do instead ?  ;-)
@JOELGLAINE, pjz99, Khai, dalmatica and  mylemonblue : Many thanks for the support !
:-)
Stahlratte

Thank you Stahlratte, thnk you very much for the magnets.  I will put them to very good use.  Neja has definitely been the answer to the Eve 4 hip conundrum.
Yours truly,
David P. Hoadley
PS: Would you consider making an Evelyn with a 'V3 to V2' head and a Judy body?  I think that that would solve a lot of the V3 disproportion issue, and also shut up those who like to bad mouth Judy as 'Butt Ugly'.  Just a suggestion, as we know that time is priceless. ;=]

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

Quote - @**Tguyus : I kindly ask you to troll another thread with your unfounded drivel.

The charts and information offered here are based on centuries of scientific research.
I will not waste my time  trying to teach the willfully ignorant.
Nor will I give you a platform for self-expression.

I started this thread to educate.

If you feel the need to make DAZ aware of something, feel free to start your own thread.

If the trolling and underhanded personal attacks don´t stop, I´ll alert a mod and complain about you.

Thanks.

Stahlratte**

Well, that was not exactly a way to "kindly ask."  In fact, it was one of the more unkind requests I've seen lately.  Nevertheless, I will apologize, again but this time to you, for my intemperate use of the terms "realism police" and "realism evangelism" to which I assume you took offense. 

To be clear, I have not taken issue with your or others' substantive claims about real world human anatomical proportions.  My concern is that the thread's purpose seems to be more than simply "to educate."  After all, education always has a purpose and it is not unreasonable to interpret a potential purpose here as being advocacy for optimizing base meshes to meet certain needs or interests; particularly those of mesh users who want to create 3D models which match real life human forms, or at least what some here are characterizing as "ideal" (a highly normative term).  But optimizing meshes to meet someone's definition of "ideal" may have adverse consequences for other users, which is my central point.  Again, the prime example here is shin length and the problems I've faced dealing with shins of "realistic length".  If Daz is coaxed to alter their base figures to optimize for these "ideal" proportions, that could have further adverse effects on me and other modelers. 

Quote - Tguyus:

Quote - That means keeping enough polygons in those areas of Vicky's anatomy where significant changes in body proportions don't make the mesh break down or get too blocky.

And by the way no one has asked for polygons to be removed (why would ANYONE want that? wouldn't that would break all the skin UVMaps that are out there?)

I was thinking more about those Daz modelers, sitting in their offices tweaking the V4 mesh.  I'm assuming V4 will have a higher total poly count than prior Vickys, and that they must've had to decide where on her anatomy to ADD polygons and where not to.  They clearly can't add too many or the mesh becomes unwieldy.  So I'm assuming they have to make trade-offs between adding polygons to different body zones, with those choices being driven by their sense of how people want to morph the figure; ergo, the conflicting interests of advocates of realism versus fantasy.  And BTW, the existing Vickys do not have enough polys in certain areas, at least for my taste, so this is not simply an academic concern. 

HHHmmmm......

Perhaps we need two versions then.....

The glamourous Daz 'idealised' one and a modified 'realistic' one?

Klutz :0/

********************************************************************************************************************

Life is a beta.

In faecorum semper, solum profundum variat.

I do not think Stahlratte proposed any body shape as "ideal", that term came from the drawing reference he used.

Of course education has a purpose. But education is not brain washing.

If you like the DAZ meshes, fine. I seriously doubt that DAZ will start all over with it's models simply based on this thread. I'm sure DAZ knows exactly where they differ from reality. So probably, they will not change that.

Just my few cents.

A ship in port is safe; but that is not what ships are built for.
Sail out to sea and do new things.
-"Amazing Grace" Hopper

Avatar image of me done by Chidori. 

Quote - HHHmmmm......

Perhaps we need two versions then.....

The glamourous Daz 'idealised' one and a modified 'realistic' one?

Klutz :0/

My point exactly in suggesting earlier that someone create a "Realistic Rhonda" (name copyright 2006 Tguyus ... hehe).  They could use all the proportional doctrines enunciated herein and everyone would be happy: both realism and fantasy modelers could have their optimized meshes.

Now, having said that, I believe there are areas where both sides can agree, such as head size.  All of my figures have their head scaled up to 105 percent or so, but I think that creates some unfortunate distortion in the mesh at the joint between the head and the upper neck.  So more polys there please!

..............well, every update they add two golden rings..........

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

@ Bopper
:lol:  Dude--that is so wrong on so many levels.  Funny as hell, just wrong,IMO. Nyahahahahh!

I cannot save the world. Only my little piece of it. If we all act together, we can save the world.--Nelson Mandela
An  inconsistent hobgoblin is the fool of little minds
Taking "Just do it" to a whole new level!   

Quote - I do not think Stahlratte proposed any body shape as "ideal", that term came from the drawing reference he used.

Of course education has a purpose. But education is not brain washing.

If you like the DAZ meshes, fine. I seriously doubt that DAZ will start all over with it's models simply based on this thread. I'm sure DAZ knows exactly where they differ from reality. So probably, they will not change that.

Just my few cents.

And a very reasonable few cents, in my opinion.  But perhaps the tone for all this was set early in the thread with Stahlratte's rather harsh denunciations of V3; to wit:
**
" Sorry, but that statement is nonsense.  Yes, sounds harsh, sorry, but I´m soo fed up with these cop outs to justify that "everthing goes".

A 6' 3" Vicky monster doesn´t become "average" when you use the wrong camera settings.

If you WANT to picture a 6'3" tall Amazon, no problem with using Vicky as is.
But if you can´t be bothered creating correct replicas of reality first, don´t pretend that your renders are "realistic" in any shape or form.

You have the artistic freedom to do what you want in your renders, so feel free to create your own Bizarro world populated with unmodified V3´s and M3´s.**

The use of such pejorative language as "bizarro world populated with unmodified V3s" could be reasonably taken as harassment of those poor Daz modelers some of us hold in high esteem, even as we hope for ever-better meshes (with "better" in the eyes of the beholder).

@joelglaine:
Yes I know it's wrong, is  a cheap 5-minutes work, but I couldn't resisit it...

-How can you improve things when you don't make mistakes?

Well the final threads hit on what I was going to suggest. If you have to have the perfect proportion model, Make it. You said you make models to perfection. I'm sure from this thead you have your followers that will buy your product. DAZ and Efrontier, like everything else follows the money, They are not going to change their main mesh to make her more Ideal to the people who desire that look. They might sometime branch off and do that when the rigging can move the body parts more correctly  without distortions. but what's the use going that direction when their customers demand the Idealistic at this time and point. 

Until then, If you have to have everything  to your perfect porportions, your just going to have to do it yourself. There are programs out there that can make you happy and do it the way you like. Of course theres a much more complex learning curve and a lot more money to be spent. But hey!  go for it. If you look at the artwork that is done with the Mil figures, the largest percentage of the renders are fantasy based. They are not going away from there bread and butter. This is a buisness not a debate for them. I always say don't talk about it. Do it. 

I'm sure you have a good start with your followers. There is room for the perfect perportion girl. But number of sales is a whole new reality.  But if you make her the way she should be you will have her to work with for However you want to render her. And as a bonus, you can then sell her.

Looks like my sarcasm was unfortunately wasted, Tguyus.

As I already said, I won´t let one of my threads being hijacked by self important trolls.

Absolutely noone is interrested in your leg fetish, and your other remarks unfortunately show that despite the six years you are already here you don´t have the slightest clue about mesh geometry and rigging.

Rooting for "more polygons" because you are unable to edit a joint or learn to use a magnet while V3 already IS way heavier than necesary is laughable.
Yeah, right, I´m sure the modellers at DAZ will be more than happy to hear your advice.

"Umm, yeah, well, how about more polys in the legs, so I can make them, Umm, longer you know, yeah. That would be really, like, cool, you know."

ROTFLMAO.

You DO know that V3 has a default "stretch legs" morph, do you ?

For the record, I run a lot of my characters through Polytrans to bring their mesh density down to more reasonable sizes, or use low rez heads combined with high rez bodys.
That way my characters are between 20 000 and 40 000 polys instead of V3´s bloated 72 000 or MIKI´s ridiculous 115 000.

Fortunately DAZ finally had an epiphanie so V4 will obviously be availabe in HiRez, LoRez, and Super LoRez versions.
(To give credit where credit is due, V2LO, V3RR and M3RR are some of the best meshes around, even despite their flawed proportions)

Sorry folks, I posted two pages ago " .... you haven´t seen me rude yet."

NOW YOU HAVE, because STEELRAT is PISSED AND HE GIVES A  RATS ASS !

When I work for hours in Poser to share knowledge with others,  noone will waltz in my thread and throw his weight around just to add to his post count.

The scientifical facts given by me in this thread are not up for debate, and noone is interrested in anyone elses sexual preferences.

Oh, and Slowhand, your post shows me that you haven´t the slightest clue what this thread was about.
Not everybody here constantly has $$$ blinking in from of his head.

I´m fully aware that DAZ, like any good "buisiness" is just catering to the lowest common denominator.

Having said that, I may or may not start a new thread where I repost my work that hopefully will be less troll infested.

Have a nice day everybody.

Stahlratte

Quote -

The use of such pejorative language as "bizarro world populated with unmodified V3s" could be reasonably taken as harassment of those poor Daz modelers some of us hold in high esteem, even as we hope for ever-better meshes (with "better" in the eyes of the beholder).

It is certainly true that Stahlratte uses a direct language, too drastic for my taste too. I hope the DAZ modelers take it as his point of view. Free speech should cover that.

On the other hand, imagine yourself between some real live Vickys. I am a big guy myself. A while ago we had a guy at work who is half a head larger than I am, that was a strange feeling. Now, running between a couple of gigantesses would be kind of bizarre for me.

A ship in port is safe; but that is not what ships are built for.
Sail out to sea and do new things.
-"Amazing Grace" Hopper

Avatar image of me done by Chidori. 

I have to agree with most of what stahlratte said but the initial post of V3 has her scaling off. If you compare the heads they aren't the same size. She is supposed to be tall though. I think she was generally figured out to be 5'11" and that is what she was intended to be. Even though that isn't the average female height but more of a model/amazon proportion.

Q:'it's very simple you decide what you read and don't read.' to know what is in a thread Tguyus has to read it. reading it affects him. there is no undo for that. he can decide whether to react or not and this decision is his alone. Q:'@Tguyus : I kindly ask you to troll another thread with your unfounded drivel. The charts and information offered here are based on centuries of scientific research. I will not waste my time trying to teach the willfully ignorant. Nor will I give you a platform for self-expression. I started this thread to educate. If you feel the need to make DAZ aware of something, feel free to start your own thread. If the trolling and underhanded personal attacks dont stop, Ill alert a mod and complain about you. Thanks. Stahlratte' your comments t'wards those who oppose, doubt or simply do not understand you are impolite and imply insults. a kind of behaviour one would expect on some arrogant, self-complacent rich-kid, but not on a well-educated civilized adult - and definitely not on an 'Educator'. the tolerance you ask for is the very same you should be ready - and able! - to give. to be both rude and touchy is no good cocktail..... mamaderhaaaat.....plr!

I stand with Stahlratte.
David P. Hoadley

  STOP PALESTINIAN CHILD ABUSE!!!! ISLAMIC HATRED OF JEWS

Well, well, well, look who had to show up again for some new snide remarks.

Hmm, when I was in school we were taught not to  talk back to the teacher and to ask politely when we didn´t understant something.
And if we were rude and disrupted the lesson we were simply thrown out of the room or worse.

:-)

Und Tschüß...

Stahlratte

Please, everybody, stop making that ugly. Rude remarks do neither help in explaining something nor do they help in denying something.

Ich geh mal in den Keller und schaue, ob ich das Niveau wieder hochlocken kann.....

A ship in port is safe; but that is not what ships are built for.
Sail out to sea and do new things.
-"Amazing Grace" Hopper

Avatar image of me done by Chidori. 

Quote - Well, well, well, look who had to show up again for some new snide remarks.

Hmm, when I was in school we were taught not to  talk back to the teacher and to ask politely when we didn´t understant something.
And if we were rude and disrupted the lesson we were simply thrown out of the room or worse.

:-)

Und Tschüß...

Stahlratte

LOL!  Oh no, you did NOT really just say that did you?  Ha ha!  You are "the teacher" and those of us who raise concerns about the real world implications your "teachings" are simply "talking back" and deserve to be "thrown out of the room or worse"?  LOL

Quote - Well, well, well, look who had to show up again for some new snide remarks.

Hmm, when I was in school we were taught not to  talk back to the teacher and to ask politely when we didn´t understant something.
And if we were rude and disrupted the lesson we were simply thrown out of the room or worse.

:-)

Und Tschüß...

Stahlratte

BTW, if this thread gets locked now, it won't be because of anything besides your arrogance and hostile demeanor.  But I'll make a deal with you:  if you do start another thread, or do a replacement thread, which just focuses on the technical issues of body proportions --and you can do it without undue disparagement of people or their modeling work-- I'll stay out of "your" thread.

Funny, after more than 5 years and hundreds of posts here, I don't think I've ever gotten into an argument or exchanged unkind words with anyone else here.  But then, I guess I hadn't "met" Stahlratte until today.  My bad luck.

Never once did I smart mouth you, I disagree with the absoluteness of your openion. Not that you don't know what you are talking about. "Not having a clue."  Do you always through out your thoughts like that with people who have a different opinon with insults as you teach.

While dealing in the real world. Daz will not make a model perfect perportioned unless the public demands it. That is Reality. There is a reasons why  V3 is not the way you want her to be. As I said that doesn't make you wrong. It makes them cash because of public demand, and that you seem to want to bypass. There are more people here that use these figures for there purpose than just you. Unfortunalty you are unwilding for anything else to be discussed as to why that is. Because they are the lowest common denominator. Your words not mine.

Quote - You DO know that V3 has a default "stretch legs" morph, do you ?

Yes I did, but did YOU know the stretch legs morph lengthens BOTH the shin and the thigh?  So thanks for the hot tip, "Teacher", but some of us are already ahead of you on that part of the Poser learning curve.

Quote - Rooting for "more polygons" because you are unable to edit a joint or learn to use a magnet while V3 already IS way heavier than necesary is laughable.
Yeah, right, I´m sure the modellers at DAZ will be more than happy to hear your advice.

No, I am hoping for more polygons in certain body zones because the mesh density of existing figures is too low for MY modified V2 and V3 figures in those zones.  And unless you've morphed, posed, and rendered MY V2 and V3 figures, then you don't really have the foggiest idea whether the poly count is adequate in particular body zones or not.  The fact is that some of my figures end up requiring postwork to smooth out the edges on some renders because of noticable kinks caused by insufficient polygons.  In your arrogance, you simply ASSUMED I did not know how to use magnets or use the joint editor.  You seem to fancy yourself some kind of brahmin or teacher or guru, and yet you leap to conclusions without a scintilla of evidence.  That is demagoguery at its basest.

And no, the issue here is that I don't want the Daz modelers to be influenced by YOUR advice.  As an earlier poster suggested, why don't you just go build your own mesh?  If you're so skilled and knowledgable about body proportions, meshes, and rigging, I'm sure you could make a nice, realistically proportioned, well-rigged figure.  I'm wondering how many people would buy it though.  I know I wouldn't.

ok thats ENOUGH.

calling a Mod in to edit non relevant posts out and lock this as it was meant.

to teach.

take the flamewar outside.

Quote - ok thats ENOUGH.

calling a Mod in to edit non relevant posts out and lock this as it was meant.

to teach.

take the flamewar outside.

That's your opinion on whether this thread was about "teaching" or about advocating for changes to base figures in the marketplace.

Go ahead and call a Mod.  I'm not the one who needs adult supervision here.  All I've done is respond, primarily in a substantive manner, to the baseless insults levelled by Stahlratte.

At this point, I agree this thread should be locked due to lack of civility.  And my earlier offer stands: if Stahlratte wants to do a thread where he treats others and their work with appropriate respect and doesn't simply pretend his "teachings" have no real world implications which might affect others, I'll support it all the way.  I actually think the discussion about the technical aspects of body proportion is useful.  I simply object to you or him or anyone else saying discussion of what it might mean for mesh design in the real world is out of bounds.

stop it.

you are the one now provoking things. I suggest you just leave it alone.

Dear god, I can't believe that in the 8 hours I've been at work this has degenerated into name-calling, finger-waving macho chest-wrestling.

Before I lock this thread, let me leave you all with a thought: This is meant to be a discussion forum. Argument, dissension and disagreement are going to happen. Starting a thread doesn't mean that everyone who replies has to bow to your opinion; nor does posting to a thread mean an attempt to convert fellow readers (at swordpoint if necessary) to your counter-argument.

It's fine to disagree, but for goodness sake, express that disagreement in a mature and reasonable way!

---

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire