How can i see if an image can be used for exemple in the forum for critics ? Not to send the user 6 feets under just for explain ?
 

Hah. Anthanasius, you are fascinating. Are you motivated to beat back the mediocrity with me? Heheheh.

Quote - Hah. Anthanasius, you are fascinating. Are you motivated to beat back the mediocrity with me? Heheheh.

Masochist, just sit around and shove splinters under your fingernails instead.....it's more productive and less painful.

I'm starting to think one of those biblical quotes, "The meek shall inherit the earth.", has come true.....and they are effing it up with mediocrity as the new standard of achievement and the "it's somebody else's responsibility to take care of me." mentality.

BB only if the mediocrity is me :-) I'm jus a simple user who learn each day, i just want to help many people to realise what is realims with poser, not C4D or 3DSMax cf : http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?section_id=1&genre_id=25

great gallery Lori.. ...

Hi well IMHO many poser users have their own Myopic Definition of "realism"
that is far from what MAX/Maya/ C4d Users or even most non CG /3D lay people have.

Whenever I see these poser  threads/Galleries here and over at DAZ3D, Claiming "realism" I am Flabberghasted at what  people are praising as: OOHH!!! looks so real!!!"

Real Compared to what??
the Flintstones cartoon??

The truly realistic thing is to acknowledge that getting anything close to physically correct photographic simulation is just NOT possible in a $130 program
like poser or even "DAZ studio Advanced"
one really needs to be prepared to $$Spend $$Some  Real money$$

And to huddle together in a fever swamp of  like minded users
in poser /DAZ  web communities
and reassure each other that those renders are "photorealistic"
only perpetuates the Delusion.

Cheers

You're wrong ... Even with a 130$ software you can have something realistic, the only thing is the time ... All the render need to be done in one second ...

I like you wolf359 but sometime you think like a spaghetti ...

Quote - You're wrong ... Even with a 130$ software you can have something realistic,

Realistic Compared to what??
other bad poser renders
or actual photographs.

Define please.

Cheers

Definitively you dont want understand ... pissing in a violin ...

I dont talk about me i have many thing to learn, so i take some exemple may be im' banned cause this ...

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1972897&section_id=1&genre_id=25&np

This is what i tell no realism ... hairs dont cast shadows ... is there a bush on the two windows but nothing cast shadows ...

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1969521&section_id=1&genre_id=25&page=2&np

Hairs are postworked teeth look real like a faery story ... the highlight come from the front down cause the specularity of the face but if you see the eyes the light come from left and right ...

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1971862&section_id=1&genre_id=25&page=2&np

The last posted ... The hairs look flat teeth are bright even in non illuminated area ... collar of the pull dont cast shadow ...

All that is what i call non realistic ... I dont talk about scifi render who they canot be realistic

When all peoples understant who all the lights emit light and shadows we take a great point !

I forgot this one ... http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1976227&section_id=1&genre_id=25&np

It's not a poser render ... and it's not alone like this ...

With all that sur i dont have only friends ...

Anthanasius, those are good examples and good explanations. Could you possibly show some examples of Poser work you do think is very successful? I am sorry but I do not have patience to look in the galleries myself but in fact I am more curious about what your eye sees then mine anyway.

Myself I wish sometimes we had all stayed at Poser 4 and pushed that to the limit artisticaly as a distinctive style rather than advance to compete with other CGI. For many years I stuck to Poser 4 and free content and I think my productivity and artistry is diminishing now with the fancy shaders and fancy Poser content. I used to fake everything with primitives and post-work. I wish I could use nested libraries in P4 PoserProPack. I swear I would go back. I try for discipline sometimes to work with the old content and texture maps in the ambient instead of using lights.

Anyway, have you seen any Poser renders you think are excellent, Anthanasius? Please show :)

really ? I dont remember ... All the poser render was made with c4d or max ... Nothing more to say ...

My last render take me more than 5 hour ... For what ? Just to have something who look realistic and not plastic ...

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1976401

Look and say me what is wrong !

Sure the most easy was render this with vray, but where is the challenge ?

No... sorry I was not clear. Could you show some examples of what you think are optimal renders possible with Poser please? Renders by other people than you and explain what you think ir right about them. Not from that set of images but from anywhere you have seen them. Examples of what you think Poser is now capable of by the best artists but without too much post-work I maybe? I am sincerely interested to see which work with Poser has most impressed you. Maybe you also could show any examples of art you like very much that despite heavy post-work you still consider "Poser" created. Thank you.

BTW this render of yours is too hard for me to analyze because I have never seen such a thing in real life with my own eyes... also I am not educated about CGI issues. It is a nice crisp render but my eye sticks on the following things:

• Maybe the figure lacks some rim light from those light sources behind the figure?
• Also I am not confident concerning the specular on the face or perfection of that surface... scale of brushed metal also seems a bit fine needing maybe some small displacement and fresnel to refract light. The upper arm looks better to me.
• The glow on the eyes and chest lamp seem maybe to be a photographic convention as opposed to an optical mater... my eyes see "halo" light effects only in certain fine misty rain environments. If there was atmosphere to diffuse the glow it would also maybe diffuse the reflections and incident speculars on the body as well. Glow on figure does not feature same lens artifac as emmited light in background.
• Focal seems very photographic also. Like a long lens... eye is less then 55mm in my experience but I do have astigmatism.
• Depth of field on background but not on figure... is to be visual-real or photo-real? If this is photo-real maybe some chromatic aberation would help.
• Also light seems all same temperature despite multiple sources maybe.
• Edge from figure to background very sharp... usually the edge is lost to oblique angle of surface in normal vision... eye does not detect such sharp transitions in part due to lighting effects and in part do to retina resolution.
• Seems maybe light is cast on background from right aside from light sources in background... figure is raked from left.
• I get a feeling of "uncanny valley" for optical effects despite non-realworld subject.
• Last nit-pick is embossed signature with arbitrary lighting detracts from image... better a flat screen overlay perhaps.

Maybe these comments are very stupid... I do not know. I only say what comes in my head at first look.

Quote :-  " ... pissing in a violin ..."    Quote...

Can You please explain this phrase to Me / Us  ..?
Personally,  I find it Very insulting..

You must have very good aim to get the urine in the violin as opposed to on the violin. This expression of respect attributes a sharp eye and solid motor control skills as well as a nimble mind able to adjust for the ballistics of the urine stream and fluctuations in urine stream pressure.

Quote - Quote :-  " ... pissing in a violin ..."    Quote...

Can You please explain this phrase to Me / Us  ..?
Personally,  I find it Very insulting..

It's a french expression like "talking in the empty" ...

I'm ok with you momodot it's what i call realism, it's not only plug a reflect node in the alt_diffuse  :-)

Really though... can you point to the Poser work you find most superb? Do you like work such as this by ExprssnImg? He lists most work as mixed-medium but the rendered aspect are done in Poser 6 I believe.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1955504&user_id=309619&member&np

ADP did great work with just a three light set-up... infinite and spots I think but he doesn't post in the galleries here I don't think.

momodot you're pointing a picture who is not in the realism category :-)
Noelclan look at the shadow on the water under the left wing ... but it's not the realism category :-)

there's a context for realism with nude girl in bathroom, as we can look at one in real life, so we know what it should look like.  we can't look at a robot firing a plasma rifle, but we can see if the render incorporates as many optical/physical properties as we know about.  maybe what athan is saying is in re: the fact that FFRender currrently lacks the ability to do a number of well-known optical effects.  maybe athan has noticed, in the "realism" gallery here, the tendency of users to post poser renders with nostril glow, no shadows, blank background, no expression - basically poser 4 renders.  the only context for realism there is that the renders are more realistic than what the users usually create.

p.s. some of these parisian idioms don't translate well.  :lol:
same with english: try translating "grab yer egg-n-fours" or "bob's yer uncle" into french :lol:

At least one person understand me !!!

I did not realized at all your issue was that these renders were posted in the Realism gallery. But then I am confused as to what the image "Watching you ..." linked above has to do with realism.

OT This interesting English we are reading really has me flumoxed... I grew up in the East End of Montreal and went to primary school entirely in French and knew only French speaking people (which is to some degree why my English speech pattern is a bit off and my spelling atrocious although my mom was an American) but I have never before heard or read English used in this way by a French speaker. I had assumed our friend was an Eastern European living in France or something like that because the pattern is so unusual and not remotely like any French gramaticly as I have ever encountered it. My minor in university was French Literature and French Experimental writing and I can read Old French but I find this English completely novel. Not at all typical of a French speaker's English as is say LukeA's.

In French we called the use of English idiom, grammar and speech patterns when speaking or writing in French "Anglicism". This particular "Françaisism" is quite new to me and very amusing... I really thought at first it was the result of a Greek person translating from French to English or something like that. I am also familiar with German, Spanish, Italian, Latin and Arabic although I can not speak them and this really is an interesting manner of speech which is why I thought it might be Eastern European or Baltic. The grammar is very non-romance language seeming to me so I thought it might be based in Hungarian or some other distinctive language. It is delightful.

Could it be based in a French web dialect? There was an English speaking poster here who typed in such heavy chat idiom I could not understand a word of it. What is that idiom called? The one that uses contractions and sometimes numerals for their phonetic value? This person would send me full e-mails in this "Chat English" that was completely opaque to me. It wasn't just the contractions and letter substitutions, the whole structure of her phrases (she did not write in sentences) was completely alien to me, similar only to ASL grammar perhaps.

3l33t

"Leet"... that is what it is called!*

"SMS language or Textese also known as chatspeak, txt, txtspk, txtk, texting language or txt talk"

*I p0wnit now. *I B in ur lxicon 8tn ur b3rg3rs!

The galleries here on Rendo serve one purpose, and it's NOT personal art development. Even the Realism category contains images that leave a lot to be desired from a "realism" standpoint.

And is Realism really what we're after, anyway?

On other GC forums, where the process of creating this form of artwork is -- by nature of the tools involved - far more sophisticated and infinitely more laborious, we see samples of artwork that leave 90% of what is in our galleries in the dust. Is it the tool? No, it's the mindset that adopts this tool. The majority of people who purchase Poser / Daz Studio DON'T want to learn complex things. They want to fiddle around and then miraculously render a stunning picture.

One has to keep in mind the "isn't my baby gorgeous!!" syndrome. I look at what I used to make and sheesh, I'm so embarrassed that it's still on my gallery pages, but I'm leaving it there, not because it's awesome but because it isn't. At the time though, I thought: "Wow, I did that!" I think we all do that.

I've spent all week reading and reading and copying and pasting into folders and text files any threads with info on how to improve your outcomes (you should see your folder, BagginsBill!). What we have on this forum (and in a hobbled way, on RDNA - hate not having links to stuff!!!) is absolute gold. When I go to YOUR art pages, my friends, I can see a difference from the MakeArt crowd... or from those who run away screaming "my brain hurts" and go and render nostril glow.

People ask me why I haven't posed any renders recently. I've been rendering heaps... but then I read and I see where I could do it a bit better and so I do another render and then read some more.

So, where is all this drivel going?

I would like to propose a Forum Gallery / Focus on Critical Thinking, where artists and geniuses can have sequential WIP images of a scene they are working on describing what they are doing in exhaustive detail, all with the intent of inviting remark and critique and for the emulation of those with a burning desire to learn this process and tool properly.

What do YOU think??

LOL Robyn, I think it would be about like the existing critique forum based on the accurate observations you've already made about the general Poser/DS user.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showforum.php?forum_id=12474

Bravo

Quote - LOL Robyn, I think it would be about like the existing critique forum based on the accurate observations you've already made about the general Poser/DS user.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showforum.php?forum_id=12474

Sheesh, two pages (after I un-archived to 1995).

I suppose that's the purpose of this forum, for those who take the trouble to actually read the threads.

Here are some of my favorite recent realistic or almost realistic renders from the galleries using Poser, DAZ Studio and Carrara... talented artists at work in these...

Poser

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1969886

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1395594

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1477818

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1512245

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1822641     Nudity

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1573201

DAZ

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1975123

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1971551

Carrara

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1951787

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1946795

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1884866

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1860235

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1733895

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1683708     Nudity

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1530010

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1799807     Nudity

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1900687

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1913698

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1647531

I'm puzzled. Can't you post realistic renders anywhere in the "realism" category for them to count, Anathasius? I post in the realism category if it's the PRIMARY goal of the image - to be "real" - but more ofthen I post in People or other suitable categories.

If I rendered a violin filled with piss it would go in the surreal category - if such a thing exists - regardless of how realistic it looked.

Here's one I made some years ago. It's posted in the realism category. It's a Poser render. With Mike 2 no less (although with the Boris morph expansion) http://market.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=999755 

And a very old attempt - yes it has the Glowing Nostril Syndrome™ - but then it was rendered in Poser 4 back when that was all the hype. Apart from the nostrils I think it's fairly "realistic" http://market.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=243386

But again, no rendering engine will make anything look real if the model rendered doesn't LOOK right. If the character for instance has too large hands or too short over arms, you can render it in Max and still won't be able to make it look right. On the other hand, I could model a..  match for instance.Texture it and render it and make it look real even in Poser 4.

The more complex the model is, the harder it is to make EVERYTHING look right. A model of an ipod on a white background can look fantastic - but try putting a model of a hand in to grab that ipod... See what I mean?

I think what is being discussed here in this thread is the level of effort, not the actual results, TrekkieGrrrl. I personally have an issue with people when, faced with new information (like the importance of GCing material or techniques to eliminate nostril-glow) prefer to continue on doing things the way they are used to doing it because "it's too hard to learn" that other stuff. That "my-brain-hurts" clause as a reason for abandoning a new technique is ever so lame.

The galleries should have the original efforts: then the spectator can see the progress the artist has made. But for many, their images have a sameness, no signs of improvement, and certainly no discussion on how things were done.

Perhaps that's what irks me the most - and I'm as guilty of this as anyone else - the details such as lights, camera settings, render settings and all those details are usually missing. I suppose for people like Fygomatic those might be secrets of the trade he might not be willing to share, but wouldn't it be awesome if we all started posting those details and we could learn from one another?

I'm totally prepared to be shot down, but... anyway, here's a list:
Program... version
Render engine... settings
Lights... how many, what settings, shadow / AO / / etc
Character(s)... was a skin shader used, setting changes if any
Props... material gamma correction, anything that the artist changed from the original download, including morphs, different material settings, etc
Post work if any

...and anything else your bright minds could come up with. This would be qualified artwork, and then that "critical or non-critical" remarks tag could be used to good advantage:
"You might consider checking lighting levels: they seem a bit hot based on your entries. Here's a link to BB's excellent LightMeter" etc...

What do you think? An idea? Or have I chosen a violin as a urinal again?

Okay, starting the ball rolling:
www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php

Gotta start somewhere, so we'll start near the bottom.

How does one learn to do the photo realistic style in Poser?

Are there tutorials or general names for the techniques?

I have a vague idea how to go about this in Vue, but that product seems much more geared to producing the photo real render.

Anyway, I sure would like to learn how to do this.

I'd understand the argument more if the 'Realism' gallery category was titled 'Photo-Realism'.
For me 'realism' is far more ambiguous. I've seen cartoon renders displaying more realism in terms of pose and expressiveness than many attempts at CG photo-realism.

Its easy to  make shiny metal  and shiny plastic look  real -

esp.  when your background  items  are  out of the DOF and the only thing in your frame is  shiny plastic/ shiny metal.

lets see Anthanasius make a portrait  of a human look real .

not doubting you, Anath. -  I just want to  see it.

Personally, I'm not shooting for realism at all. I don't want materials to look wrong (glass should look like glass and hair like hair and so on) but that's not my primary objective.

I want to create a sense of "cool, I like the feeling-tones in this" or "wow, what a sensual model" where the mechanism of how I did it doesn't really matter to the viewer: the subject matter, the art, does.

What's more impressive?
"Wow, she looks so real"...
"I'm getting strong feelings from this picture - wish I were there"

Poser art distracts because of its Poser-ism. So much of it looks like Poser art. I'm focusing on materials because the less it looks like a 3D plastic model, the less attention it draws to itself as a 3D model and the more the picture has a cohesive focus on what the artist was trying to say.

I'm never going to  be able to  make surfaces,  especially humans,  look  REAL  with Poser lights  - and I agree to  a large extent with RV -
if you  can  make  object surfaces look COOL and FULL OF LIFE ,  make them have some POP  and " 3 dimensionality"  as oppsed to  being flat and washed out -  (like most of the works in  the gallery)  ...then i think it is a nice accomplishment

Primarily My current  reason for using Poser is for FUN..  However I still want to LEARN.!
I enjoy creating in Poser and I enjoy getting comments..  Even a "Wow" gives Me a good feeling because someone has taken time to say they like what I like..

" I like this image BECAUSE........." does not happen very often.  But when it does it makes My day..

Sometimes I try to do something different, just because I CAN.!   But I am always trying to learn something NEW..

I am not seeking immortality by creating the "Perfect" Poser image..
But I Do want to live forever.....  Or die trying..

I only coment if I really like the image far and above most images -  and i always
  put   " i like it  because ....."