Hey Vintorix,  check out this painting.  She is beautiful!

Portrait of a young woman

If anybody would like to talk about Poser, I'll be in another thread. grin

This one was borked from the outset.

Quote - If anybody would like to talk about Poser, I'll be in another thread. grin

This one was borked from the outset.

I second that motion, BB! I was hoping for a discussion of techniques and lighting for Poser, however this thread did not go that direction.

Hey BB,  do you play pool?

"I second that motion, BB! I was hoping for a discussion of techniques and lighting for Poser, however this thread did not go that direction."

But there are already one million threads about Poser lighting!

Not that it has helped any..  :))) Why don't you go back to the beginning of the thread and check out the links I gave with examples of renderings in Maya and 3ds max? Never mind I can post them agin,

http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/imagePage?iid=6019
http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/imagePage?iid=6433
http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/imagePage?iid=6518
http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/imagePage?iid=6637
http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/imagePage?iid=6618
http://www.raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/imagePage?iid=6578

No amount of discussion will ever help Poser lighting.

...and we're back to apples and oranges.  If we're gonna compare Poser to the big boys apps or the Masters of fine arts then yes, Poser will lose.  But what's the point?  Surely no one expects that kind of quality from a low budget app like Poser. 

I think it's time to call out the General to declare this thread silly! (Python reference)

Attached Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu7vySQbgXI

Haha thank you Kaibach!  That's the one :)

I now declare this thread silly!

No, seriously.  If someone can tell me the point of this argument of "but it's not photorealistic", you will win...well, it's a no-prize, but really.

It's a non-starter.

Photorealism doesn't mean "Indistinguishable from a photograph". 

Photorealism initially was a PAINTING movement.  Yes.  Painting.  With oils.  And Acrylics.  It is a style of art that has the look of being realistic, but is still obviously in the medium in which it is created.  So, the argument that "It doesn't look real" doesn't mean "it's not photorealistic".

So, unless something that is actually going to move this conversation forward is added, I'm going to lock this in the morning.  I'm probably naive in showing my trust that things like that will happen, but, well, I'm tired, and I assume everyone here are grown ups.

Well it's been a fairly interesting discussion, although it's gone to silly places at times and I think the TOS has been respected but I'll leave it to your discretion if you want to lock it or not.  The OP didn't really mean photo realism and he has understandably fled the scene.  It would propably be better for him to start a new thread to help him out with realistic animation in Poser (god help him).

I was going to describe my point of view regarding what apps to use when doing still images but I don't see the point.  Maybe this thread is dead...

I'm not afraid of talking about photo realistic renders.  Just PM me if you'd like to talk more on the subject or need help.

In every Poser Manual including the Poser Pro Reference Manual 2010, "A Message from Larry Weinberg" has been the same, his ambition was "to draw like the great old masters". And many Poser artists come close.

My aim with participating in this thread was not to bash Poser, but to make people do more postrender work and not only dress up a figure and publish as it is. That is a pretty silly procedure, if you ask me.

But Vestmann if this thread is dead it is according to you, - you called the moderator. You know there are nothing they like more than close threads.

Quote - In every Poser Manual including the Poser Pro Reference Manual 2010, "A Message from Larry Weinberg" has been the same, his ambition was "to draw like the great old masters". And many Poser artists come close.

My aim with participating in this thread was not to bash Poser, but to make people do more postrender work and not only dress up a figure and publish as it is. That is a pretty silly procedure, if you ask me.

I think we agree on the workflow.  Poser is a tool with limitations.  When it comes to still images, Photoshop is a tool without limitations.  There is nothing you can't do with digital images in Photoshop.  If you can't do something it's because you don't know how to yet.  If you bring a Poser render into Photoshop and it doesn't look real, don't blame Poser, blame yourself.  You can paint hair, paint skin, correct bad bending, add to or create a background etc. etc.  You just need to know how to (and I'm not talking about you personally).   When Larry Weinberg talks about drawing like the masters I doubt he was talking about drawing in Poser.  Poser is great for reference when painting humanoids.  It's just a tool.

Quote - But Vestmann if this thread is dead it is according to you, - you called the moderator. You know there are nothing they like more than close threads.

I wasn't calling for the moderators.  It just seemed like the perfect time for the general from Monty Python.  He popped into my head and I commented on it.  I don't want to see this thread locked but I feel like we've been talking in circles.  I suppose we could start a new thread about workflow or whatever but it would propably go the same way.  There will always be someone who advocates Poser with Vue or Poser with Carrara or Poser with 3DSMax and Vray or Cinema4D with InterPoser or Poser with Photoshop or just plain Poser with no GC, IDL or anything.  That's just how it is and it's not likely to change until we get Poser 9 and everyone will see the light ;)

"I think we agree on the workflow. Poser is a tool with limitations. When it comes to still images, Photoshop is a tool without limitations."

Everything you say in this post I agree to 100%. But to cater to both camps it would be neccessary to publish both. FIRST your plain render THEN the postwork enhancements. In this way they who are most interested in the fine points of rendering can have their fill and then the others. Also, to accuratly judge a picture I need to know the size of the original. It is much easier to do a small picture than a big but a small picture is pretty useles, ie can't be used for printing. (I am talking about the resolution of course)

That's not a bad idea at all.  I love seeing original renders to compare them to the postworked ones like this one by isikol:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=2200054&user_id=603751&member&np

He gives a link to the original but you could just as easily post it to the WIP gallery.

"All of my images are created first in 3D programs and then I manipulate the image further in a 100% digital manner. My tools of trade are my hardcore (eight core actually) personal computer, my Wacom Intuos 4 tablet, Poser Pro 2010 and Photoshop!"

So refreshing to meet a true professional.

Check out what this artist has to say about his meeting with Larry Weinberg:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=2012520&user_id=29002&page=4&member&np

Very interesting I must try that. I happened to visit "art charts" today and saw that 'Gentle Winds' by pixeluna was 1st on the list. A beautiful image with just the right kind of handson post worked softness that I (and other sensible persons I might add) prefer, that not  even 3ds max or Maya can achieve by itself. That means that there are nothing wrong with  Renderosity's rank and file members taste and style if anyone ever thought that! :)

Hey, you sure are! Getting realism in 3D is a combination of your lighting, your models (their quality), the textures, surface settings (like specular, bump and so on), natural posing, the camera (its framing and its settings like DOF), using realistic colors and in some cases using a realistic render engine and postwork. 

Quote - I think I am getting close...

It's been a long time for me...Posering, I mean. Years since I opened the program. And yet, as bagginsbill points out, the arguments, errrr, I mean discussions, haven't changed much. LOL

I can't remember her name, but there was a young energetic young lady from (I'll guess at Ukraine), maybe. I've forgotten her handle. And, obviously English was a second language for her but she always pushed the limits of Poser striving for a render that approached the realism of a photo (hehe, stepping over that "photorealism landmine"). I'd probably never find it if Ilooked but was hoping maybe LaurieA would remember. Caterina? Katerina? (age can be horrible).

At any rate, I would agree the OP seemed to be interested in getting tips to help gain a realistic-looking render and probably doesn't need the side discussion of "is realism art" sort ot replies.

Just my two cents worth.

(and hopefully, if my memory serves me well enough, this thread won't segue into the other repeating discussion--"should one use post processing on a render or not?"...LOL)

You mean Catharina Harders, AKA Mec4D.

i think Carodan is a good artist that makes also renders that come close to reality.

Quote - You mean Catharina Harders, AKA Mec4D.

Matter of fact, you nailed it ! She, as I recall, had done some very realistic renders with Poser.

Catharina Harders (Mec4D) use photographs for texture, can't you see it? Of course the easiest way to achieve photorealism is just to use a photograph.. ;)

Quote - Of course the easiest way to achieve photorealism is just to use a photograph.. ;)

For texture maps.

Exactly so.

Darn, I thought this was going to be a thread on "HOW TO" use the tools in poser to get great realistic renders... you know, I use this on the lights, here is a screen shot of my shader tree and the settings... etc...

Settings, screenshots, how to, tweek this and that, here's how, camera settings, post work.............renders... I admit I skipped pages 5-7, maybe i missed it?

Can anyone direct me to a discussion on trying to achive realistic renders in poser? Minus the "I saw this guys work and it's good" and the "you've offended me with you're opinion of art" statements.

"No, I will not kiss you...I'm here to learn" -Happy Gilmore

Quote - Catharina Harders (Mec4D) use photographs for texture, can't you see it? Of course the easiest way to achieve photorealism is just to use a photograph.. ;)

Actually I don't think that's the case, because the lighting won't be quite right, and properly made bump/displacement maps will still be needed to make a rendered image look right. It's also quite likely that unless the rest of the image is well matched, a part with a real photo is going to stand out and/or highlight the lack of realism in the remaining image.

nruddock, I agree fully with the second part of your post.  "a part with a real photo is going to stand out and/or highlight the lack of realism in the remaining image" This is the reason 100% perfect Poser photorealism is not a goal worth striving for as it doesn't go well with the rest of the render anyway.

Quote - nruddock, I agree fully with the second part of your post.  "a part with a real photo is going to stand out and/or highlight the lack of realism in the remaining image" This is the reason 100% perfect Poser photorealism is not a goal worth striving for as it doesn't go well with the rest of the render anyway.

Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien -- the perfect is the enemy of the good. I think it's attributed to Voltaire?

Anyway, of course it's a goal worth striving for. It's just a goal that people sometimes prematurely declare to have been achieved.

Almost every prop/figure uses a photographic texture. Some truly brilliant minds can conjure up procedurals that are rather amazing, but let's get real. Suggesting that people shouldn't use photographic textures in renders is akin to saying that artists shouldn't use photographic references for their paintings. It's just some arbitrary standard and no one is obliged to accept it.

MysticDaniel

I joined this thread because I was tired over this overemphasis on shaders. Hi-res photos is usually the best texture, I always use them. That said, photo realistic renders (with hi-res photos) still need postwork if they shall fit into a Vue or Poser picture precisely as a photograph need to be. And what about the hair? Shall all females be rendered with a hair cap?

?

Quote - how about this? Photo-real?

No, the hair is obviously 'shopped, and the eye's & eyelashes don't look natural.

And I left the thread because you cannot discuss realism in this thread anymore.

I don't see what all the fuss is about.

ok thanks for the feedback. But I don't see how the eyelashes look unnatural. That is a winged makeup effect with charcoal. They are not  eyelashes.... Also the hair is just a quick w.i.p. part of a hi res texture. The eyes are about 95% as the photos and to me look very natural. Maybe abit too beautiful for human but photorealism is subjective. Not a defined term. I would like other people make a real stab at it eh nruddock? lol

I sound so bitchy don't I haha Don't take offense, I just worked so hard on that skin shader :)

If we want to discuss techniques for achieving better realism in POSER, we would have to start a new thread. I am all for that!

Quote - ok thanks for the feedback. But I don't see how the eyelashes look unnatural. That is a winged makeup effect with charcoal. They are not  eyelashes.... Also the hair is just a quick w.i.p. part of a hi res texture. The eyes are about 95% as the photos and to me look very natural. Maybe abit too beautiful for human but photorealism is subjective. Not a defined term. I would like other people make a real stab at it eh nruddock? lol

I sound so bitchy don't I haha Don't take offense, I just worked so hard on that skin shader :)

I think the problems are, the make-up doesn't look like it's "blending" with the skin, but has a somehow pasted on look.

The eyes themselves have maybe to much specular / highlights.
Somehow, they leave the impression, that there is a massive light-source in front, but the skin looks like there is a soft, diffuse light all around.

Quote - If we want to discuss techniques for achieving better realism in POSER, we would have to start a new thread. I am all for that!

pointless. those that have argued it's not a goal will just follow and disrupt it. thats the trend these days it seems.

thinking and experimenting is bad and should be discouraged. there is no point to you attempting these things. stop now.

to this attitude I say, rubbish!

Well, personally, I think the shader skin work looks pretty darn good. While it tends to favor the Photoshopping ("airbrushing") that one finds of the cover photos of many magazines, let's remember those ARE photographs have have be retouched and that kind of retouching is standard on model photos. Therefore, the skin shaders do a good job of representing industry standard photos that have been retouched. IMO, of course.

Quote - Some years ago a CG-artist made a render that looked like a crappy foto of his girlsfriend...

I remember that one. She was leaning against a door in a room I think. It looked like a scanned old photo, so real to look at. I wish I could find that picture again, at the time I didn't appreciate the work that he had to put into it.

I don't have anything against realism or attempting it. I find the whole "Arguing against it" to be tiresome and annoying though. Nobody's forcing anyone to attempt it and those who want to should be able to try and discuss their efforts without being hounded to death by those who don't wish to. I reserve the right to make cooing noises at the efforts of those doing a good job of it.

Quote - > Quote - Some years ago a CG-artist made a render that looked like a crappy foto of his girlsfriend...

I remember that one. She was leaning against a door in a room I think. It looked like a scanned old photo, so real to look at. I wish I could find that picture again, at the time I didn't appreciate the work that he had to put into it.

This one by Lee Pery-Smith came to mind... 

http://www.smartphone-daily.de/aid,743530/Galerie-Maennerphantasien-aus-der-Render-Werkstatt/Fun/News/bildergalerie/?iid=755129&vollbild

Here's an interview where the composition is discussed...(nudity in link)  http://www.3dtotal.com/interviews/lee_perry_smith/

And I remember the discussion in a community forum about it being scanned photo verus 3D render verus real time photo... Good tips in the interview. Thanks for the reminder. Don't think Poser has that capability, maybe patience, 3D Max or Zbrush would get it.

Some people here remind me so much of the 12-year-old kids in the RPG Maker forum I used to help administer years ago. Or those folks who go around on Youtube calling names at everyone who likes said video or said band or said movie shown in the video they're commenting on.

Simple rules? If you don't like Poser, don't come to the Poser forum.

If you don't like realism in Poser, don't come to a Poser forum thread talking about realism.

People are allowed to like what you don't like. You're just one in nearly 7 billion human beings which are just one in 3 million species in this tiny planet of ours that is one in 9 (8?) planets that spins around one tiny star among other 100 billion stars that form this galaxy that is one among other 200 billion galaxies in one of the possible universes that someday will disappear.

Nobody can seriously hope to be, in our insignificance, the only one who is right, the only one who has a good taste.

You don't need to be afraid I will start my own thread about using Poser and Daz Studio as a tool for artistic purposes.

Even that was an insult - implying that understanding reality and being able to reproduce its effects is not part of being artistic.

Depends on what being artistic means to you.