... at least Alishya looks pretty nice if I may say so...

Although it's harder to mke black skin look really good in Poser for some reason...

This is a somewhat doctored version of BB's Scatter-Blinn shader where I substituted the Blinn with KS just to see what it would do...

Lovely!

Cheers,
Alisa

RETIRED HiveWire 3D QAV Director

IMO, the eye shape is really manky, same as the eye shape in Judy and, for that matter, Posette. There's not enough curve and depth to the lower lid, which seems to be a hallmark of several Poser figures.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

Mm yea the eye shape could be more .. almond-y. Still I think she's far from ugly. Or for that matter "unusable" :)

I still think she's ugly...but different strokes I guess LOL. Frankly I haven't liked a Poser standard figure since Posette and Dork, tho James and James G2 (including Kelvin and Koji) can look half decent if you work with them. Anastasia and Tyler have obviously gone a long way to make Alyson and Ryan viable (cause they sure weren't before) ;)

Laurie

Whenever I give Poser a break for a few months or more, I come back with a more discriminating eye, and wonder how it was that I ever thought this or that figure or morph or texture looked good.

I think the more time we spend staring at humanoid figures and faces, the more we learn to love them, and the less apparent or meaningful some of their more obvious flaws become.

Seems to work that way. In real life too. For some of us, anyway. :)

I still don't think the native Poser people are attractive, though recent additions do at least look human, and some of bodies are exceptional. But attractive isn't always what's called for. So there's that.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

With the notable exception of Alyson 2 in her default state, I don't really think any of the Poser people are all that ugly. No more so than some real life peole who need makeup before they venture out of the house in the morning. So I will continue in my quest to clothe the poor misunderstood Poser people. and it's great modeling experience too.

Here's a WIP that I plan to release soon. A casual outfit for G2 Sydney.

I'd never loaded up Alisha before. Think she looks quite good with a bit of Anastasia mixed in. I might start using her now.

I almost never notice things like the eye shape. Now it's been pointed out, it'll probably ruin any image I see :-) To me, she's neither ugly nor beautiful but more attractive than unattractive. Serene, elegant, dignified come to mind. Of course, it'd pretty difficult to escape the Western European standard of 'beauty' that dominates North America and Western Europe. Even in places like Mexico. Cuba etc, that tends to be the case in terms of social status. It would be interesting to have a 'beauty contest' among people who've had as little exposure to CGI as possible and see what they thought of the various default figures in terms of attractiveness. As in RL, haor and makeup can make a big difference.

TG really good job on the skin.

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

I like the low-res versions of Alyson that came with Poser 8, especially with the subdivision that PoserPro 2014 adds. After a trip to the face room and a bit of tweaking plus EZskin shaders, I managed to get Izumi to look like this:

Poser 11 Pro, Windows 10

Auxiliary Apps: Blender 2.79, Vue Complete 2016, Genetica 4 Pro, Gliftex 11 Pro, CorelDraw Suite X6, Comic Life 2, Project Dogwaffle Howler 8, Stitch Witch

I know not too many are using 2014 yet but Roxie is pretty good

Looks great, Nannette!

Nanette, she's very pretty! And - she looks like a real person, not a super model mannequin :)

Hate to have to say it but...all poser characters basically look the same as shop dummies with plasticy skin. I think most folk can easily tell a Poser figure in a picture without too much study!

The "sculpting" of eye shapes and skin colour still leaves one with a yearning for reality which Poser has still to come to terms with.

Quote - Hate to have to say it but...all poser characters basically look the same as shop dummies with plasticy skin. I think most folk can easily tell a Poser figure in a picture without too much study!

The "sculpting" of eye shapes and skin colour still leaves one with a yearning for reality which Poser has still to come to terms with.

Then don't say it. IMNSHO, all versions of vicky look like Vargas provided the base model from which they were made. I have roughly the same leg to torso lenght ratios as the daz figures, but I attribute that to being born with scoliosis. What's their excuse? Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Quote - Hate to have to say it but...all poser characters basically look the same as shop dummies with plasticy skin. I think most folk can easily tell a Poser figure in a picture without too much study!

The "sculpting" of eye shapes and skin colour still leaves one with a yearning for reality which Poser has still to come to terms with.

Well, as long as we're being open and honest about it, most of the renders of Genesis in Studio look like wax figures. Not much realism there either.

Lisa :)

Well, IMHO (and nothing more, really), I don't think that it's any kind of "ugly" factor, but rather the lack of flexibility in the figure.

For instance, Take a peek up there for a moment. I'm able to turn the lanky, scrawny, balloon-tittied, 7' 9" tall tiny-headed supermodel into, well... that. Up there. A short, squat, but still hella-pretty 4' 3" little-thing with real body propotions, that looks nothing like the default V4.

If you can put that same potential for flexibility into the Poser default figures (without undue and excessive work mind you), and still have the result usable with all the common pose/expression/morph sets? Then you'll have something.

It's sorta what I've been harping about all this time, yanno?

Frankly, I've never been too impressed with most of the Poser default figures. The notable exceptions were the P4 male and female, James and Jessi, Sydney G2 and Simon G2, and now Roxie and Rex. All of the others just looked too fake, like a kids version of what a humna being looked like.

"A short, squat, but still hella-pretty 4' 3" little-thing with real body propotions …"

Aww, and the H8ers said Snooki was just a slutty little Oompa Loompa.

Ooh, now do Smurfette!

* *

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

> Quote - Hate to have to say it but...all poser characters basically look the same as shop dummies with plasticy skin. I think most folk can easily tell a Poser figure in a picture without too much study! > > The "sculpting" of eye shapes and skin colour still leaves one with a yearning for reality which Poser has still to come to terms with.

The plastic-y skin is only if people don't know what they're doing IMO. I'm trying to get away from that and TBH I don't think my Alishiaat the first pic looks like plastic. But it's hard(er) to make dark skin look real, as I've found out.

How about this one then? Better? (it's V4 btw - NOT one of the stock Poser figures)

I dont' think she looks like plastic. She has a sheen which I personally like, but plastic? Nah.

when I work with figures, I use James.

why? I've worked with guys that look exactly like him. yes. in real life. actual human beings. same proportions and looks. so to those that claim he is an "alien" or "does not look human" I say, get of out the fucking house and meet ppl. you'll find they don't lool like vicky. no one actually does.

No argument from me about James. But Jessi - at least the original one - nobody looks like that in RL.

@ Peng - agreed and beautiful character.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

Quote - when I work with figures, I use James.

why? I've worked with guys that look exactly like him. yes. in real life. actual human beings. same proportions and looks. so to those that claim he is an "alien" or "does not look human" I say, get of out the fucking house and meet ppl. you'll find they don't lool like vicky. no one actually does.

The problem is that I have been getting out.

Back when I spent half my waking hours hunched over Poser, the figures started to look quite real and quite attractive to me.

When I finally took a break and spent a lot more time with real, live humans, it became very apparent to me just how far off the mark the available figures really are.

With a lot of work, they can be made to look pretty good. But I can't remember seeing a render of the native Poser figures that comes close to what people have accomplished with various iterations of Daz figures.

I know it's uncool to say it, and that you get way more social points for trying to be rebellious, but I won't lie. Rehashed renders of Anastasia don't convince me. She's a million times better than Alyson. But her eyes still scream "POSER FIGURE" to me.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Characters are just a base, just a chunk of virtual clay in a digital form.

What it looks like is up to you.

I don't really care what the base looks like, and rarely use any character in it's default form.

With the tools in Poser 2014 you can make any character, look like any other one.

Or any mix of as many as you want too.

You can take morphs from just about every character you have and pile them all onto one if you really wanted to.

I posted a mini tutiorial on how to do so on the RuntimeDNA Poser2014 forum, it is sticked at the top. There is far more to it when piling morphs from every character on it, but it can be done. The tutorial just shows how to transfer a single FBM from one character to another. Once you do that, it will look just like the other character.

The advantage of this revolves around the users Runtime Content. If you want to use Roxie in a scene and have tons of V4 textures you would rather use, just wrap V4 around Roxie. Now you have a V4 that looks just like Roxe, yet can still use all the texture sets you have for V4. You can do this with any 2 characters.

The limitations of doing this are rather small from what I can tell. There is an intial time investment in the creation of the conversion, but once those are saved out you just click and load like any other character in your runtimes.

Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->

This is Rex with a half-assed texture projection done in ZAppLink. Handsome? Not handsome?

I think it ultimately depends on what you find attractive, what you are trying to achieve through your art and which figure will bring you closest to that. Yes, many figures may not be ideal out of the box but some just need a different coat of paint or a morph (or both) to really shine.

Quote - Characters are just a base, just a chunk of virtual clay in a digital form.

What it looks like is up to you.

I don't really care what the base looks like, and rarely use any character in it's default form.

With the tools in Poser 2014 you can make any character, look like any other one.

Or any mix of as many as you want too.

You can take morphs from just about every character you have and pile them all onto one if you really wanted to.

I posted a mini tutiorial on how to do so on the RuntimeDNA Poser2014 forum, it is sticked at the top. There is far more to it when piling morphs from every character on it, but it can be done. The tutorial just shows how to transfer a single FBM from one character to another. Once you do that, it will look just like the other character.

The advantage of this revolves around the users Runtime Content. If you want to use Roxie in a scene and have tons of V4 textures you would rather use, just wrap V4 around Roxie. Now you have a V4 that looks just like Roxe, yet can still use all the texture sets you have for V4. You can do this with any 2 characters.

The limitations of doing this are rather small from what I can tell. There is an intial time investment in the creation of the conversion, but once those are saved out you just click and load like any other character in your runtimes.

Some bases require more work than others to get to the desired look. I don't enjoy fiddling with figures that need to have 700 morphs adjusted -- or taken to Zbrush -- before they look human to me. Some people do enjoy it. I don't. I also don't have Poser Pro 2014.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Quote - This is Rex with a half-assed texture projection done in ZAppLink. Handsome? Not handsome?

I think it ultimately depends on what you find attractive, what you are trying to achieve through your art and which figure will bring you closest to that. Yes, many figures may not be ideal out of the box but some just need a different coat of paint or a morph (or both) to really shine.

Agreed. And I say handsome (well, except for those spooky eye sockets :P)

Cheers,
Alisa

RETIRED HiveWire 3D QAV Director

Quote - This is Rex with a half-assed texture projection done in ZAppLink. Handsome? Not handsome?

I think it ultimately depends on what you find attractive, what you are trying to achieve through your art and which figure will bring you closest to that. Yes, many figures may not be ideal out of the box but some just need a different coat of paint or a morph (or both) to really shine.

I like the texture..it does make Rex look better ;). I think his mouth is on the small side - is that default? His lips look like they're in a permanent state of "pursed" LOL.

Laurie

Quote - This is Rex with a half-assed texture projection done in ZAppLink. Handsome? Not handsome?

I think it ultimately depends on what you find attractive, what you are trying to achieve through your art and which figure will bring you closest to that. Yes, many figures may not be ideal out of the box but some just need a different coat of paint or a morph (or both) to really shine.

As is, I can't give an opinion because there are, among other things, no eyes. Also, you have to see a figure in action before you can really know how good it is. A flat box with an excellent texture (photograph) will look great from some angles and lighting conditions. But how useful is it really?

I'm not always looking to render "attractive people". But when I want to render humans, I do indeed want them to look fairly convincing.

I have some basic, minimum out-of-the-box requirements for figures I use. They don't have to be pretty, but if they are supposed to be human, I want them to look human. Right away. Without a ton of work. If I have to make the morph myself to make a figure look human, then I won't use the figure.

What I think of as "looking human" changed after I took a break from Poser and spent a lot more time in the company of flesh and blood. I'm much pickier now than I was a few months ago.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Thanks Aproctor.

I may have nudged them a little in ZBrush without realizing it but for the most part that's him, Laurie.

<--- This is Rex by the way. A morph I'm working on.

I agree, believability is key to me and is what I strive for in my work. If a figure looks resonably believable and appealing in some fashion than I think I've done my job. I do think that the lighting conditions thing is a bit of a trade off you just have to accept. Even in the real world someone who looks great under certain lights will look less so under others and I don't think anyone looks great under florescents - those things are just evil.

I guess what I was getting at and maybe didn't express well is that what we find attractive in a Poser model - and that's what this thread's about at its core - is a very personal thing and can change at any given moment. Sure the ideal is a figure you don't have to morph but the reality is that it's more likely you're going to than it is that you're not. The core figures have been hit or miss at times but just like any mesh, in the right hands could be made truly great. Sadly, being included in the application seems to downgrade their value to many and so despite everyone having the figures, few develop items for them so they don't get used (except for James - that guys all over TV).

Sorry mid typing mind ramble. Anyway, you are right, believable figures are important and Trekkiegirl is right that some of the core figures really do get a bad wrap and aren't bad looking.

I think that everyone is forgetting that even the most realistic CG simulacrum is only ever going to look like a simulation of reality... i.e. a photograph or a series of sequential photographs. Maybe instead of the constant fawning over reality that Poser users seem to be afflicted with try accepting it as art and as simulation, painters and sculptors have accepted and played with these limitations for centuries. of course CG as a medium has only been around for, what, decades?

"A short, squat, but still hella-pretty 4' 3" little-thing with real body propotions …"

Aww, and the H8ers said Snooki was just a slutty little Oompa Loompa.

Ooh, now do Smurfette!"

That's f'in hilarious dude...

DeathMetalDesk - you're onto something there. But I think it's more things. Some strive to do photorealism with Poser - I do that sometimes, full knowing that it's a herculean task. But not completely impossible. I HAVE seen renders where I havent' been totally certain whether it was a render or a photo. but it takes skill and a certain degree of "cheating" (as in postwork)

Some, otoh sees Poser as just another medium. Just like a marble statue won't ever look like a real, stuffed human on a plinth, neither will Poser. And neither SHOULD Poser, in their opinion.

What annoys me is that there are those who use Poser as a sort of dirty word. Like "it's only Poser" is something derogative. Of course, if you've just spent.. what? $1000 on Max or Maya and someone with a mere $200 program can do better, I can see why people may feel a little miffed. But then again, Poser is and will enver be and have IMO no intentions to ever be Max or Maya. Poser is a program for *"ordinary" people. A program you can start making your very own p0rn in after 30 minutes ;)

(and that, in the end is probably why Poser has this .. reputation...;))

Well, I wasn't talking per se about Poser's reputation amongst the CG Elite. You'll find that kind of attitude in all facets of art amongst various factions... "well that's not really art, it's merely illustration." or "yes, but that's just craft." etc., etc.

*"Poser is a program for "ordinary" people. A program you can start making your very own p0rn in after 30 minutes ;)"

Yeah, of course. I totally get that (and, I don't), but find that kind of stuff boring after the initial biological appreciation...even if it's excellently crafted, which most isn't. I mean, unless there are some ideas or emotions happening (art)... Porn is only interesting until orgasm, otherwise, Kinda like watching people eat or some other biological function. I guess if some psychological pathology is a factor it would be different, in any case I'd rather viddy the "real thing" than (let's face it) grotesque cg dolls and their awkward mechanical squirmings... But all of this is way OT.

Don't get me wrong, I think Poser users should use this tool in any manner they find satisfying, whether art is even a consideration or not. I guess, in a way, that's the hidden subtext of my original comment. Time for bed. :)

If I wanted to create something that looked exactly like a photo I think I'd be more likely to use a camera than Poser.

Realism - as in body shape rather than wonky eyes or elbow bends - depends a lot on what you're used to. Where I'm from people are generally tall and blonde. And because a lot of the people I know are dancers most of the people I see every day also tend to be slim and have good muscle definition as well. So for me figures like V3/4, M3 and Anastasia are a very good start for me to create what to me seems "normal". And that's also what I want for fantasy and sci-fi renders, so for me the figures I use are very good.

Obviously the same isn't true for everyone and depending on what you're used to, you have a different idea of what's realistic.

When Poser couldn't come within a country mile of realism, people probably concentrated on other aspects of their art. Now many seem hot to cross the Uncanny Valley. The Little Mermaid doesn't look real though, neither did Bambi or Shrek or the Monsters Unc. crew. We won't even get into Picasso's women. If your artistic ambition goes beyond having people say; "Gee, that looks like a photo," there are other aspects of making a character that really engages people.

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

I did not read the whole thread, but I would just like to say I think the new girl in 10, Roxi, is kind of cute for a CG girl. Just to be clear I like the real thing.

"When Poser couldn't come within a country mile of realism, people probably concentrated on other aspects of their art. Now many seem hot to cross the Uncanny Valley. The Little Mermaid doesn't look real though, neither did Bambi or Shrek or the Monsters Unc. crew. We won't even get into Picasso's women. If your artistic ambition goes beyond having people say; "Gee, that looks like a photo," there are other aspects of making a character that really engages people."

Apples and Oranges.

Hyper/Photorealism isn't just by far the hardest "craft" in CGI to master, it's also long been accepted as an artform by itself:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperrealism_%28visual_arts%29

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photorealism

So, how much something engages people has nothing to do with how realistic or non-realistic it is.

Anyway, a well made Poser figure can be as realistic or as non-realistic as the user prefers.

The problem is, non-realism is easy, but to achieve realism the figure has to be constructed in a certain way, which most Poser figures aren't.

And even if the figure is capeable of realism, most users aren't.

So you have to give them exact presets they can use and build upon. Like dialing "The Girl" or "Aiko" for toon/manga styles, they need various realistic characters that let them achieve true realism with a single dial spin.

As I said, a modern Poser figure can be anything you want, provided the mesh topology is properly constructed.

But you can't just throw out a semi toon/ semi realistic vaguely humanoid shaped lump of polygons, call it a "blank canvas" and expect your average hobbyist user to turn it into something extraordinary.

Personally, out of all the native poser wmen, Sydney is my favorite. And Jessica

3D Digital Comics & Art/My homepage
http://www.edgeversemedia.com

Quote - So you have to give them exact presets they can use and build upon. Like dialing "The Girl" or "Aiko" for toon/manga styles, they need various realistic characters that let them achieve true realism with a single dial spin.

I see this, or something similar,always posted by someone that feels they're "elevated" above the rest and it's nothing but an insult to the average user, that does not fall into that category.

And those same ones, when they do post a render, it's usually someone else's morph of V4, sometimes not even dialed.

True realism in a 3d medium is only an illusion that can never be obtained. Let's quit injecting that into every discussion of the true poser figures. It has no place in poser or any other 3d approximation of reality.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

"The problem is, non-realism is easy"

Oranges, meet apples. Anyone can create a stick figure, it takes talent to make a stick figure that truly engages an audience. By the same token, a figure that meets some arbitrary standard of realism may well leave viewers cold. Of course, I'm talking about art as opposed to science or craft. It's ironic that what I presume to be your take on non-realism looks a lot like Barbie. For better or worse body image wise, I doubt that your more realistic figure would net a tiny fraction La Barb's sales. Simply put, in entertainment (as well as other areas), the appeal of realism in the real world is overrated IMO. Stylized, idealized, parodied, exaggerated, slightly off-kilter takes have a resonance that 'mere' documentary seldom matches.

I don't dismiss the pursuit of realism. Whether it is art, rather than craft, (if it is viewed as an end in itself, rather than as a constituent part of the artistic enterprise), is up to the beholder. Indeed, I find it difficult to even evaluate the value of a figure's realism in isolation, outside the context of a work that has some esthetic intention beyond documentary illustration. That's probably just my lack of imagination though. Like any good hobby, people can approach this on multiple levels and take from it what they will - as in art itself.

Architects have always been confined by technical limitations. You can't build a skyscraper until you have structural steel. No doubt artists have liberated by technology to some degree. I doubt however that we see a lot of 'better' art because of it though. OTOH, there have probably been many creative breakthroughs by artists finding ways to express their vision within the confines of their medium. CGI may well be different, I don't know. I do think it is a lot easier to trompe l'oeil than to trompe l'coeur though.

*"True realism in a 3d medium is only an illusion that can never be obtained."*Arp may have agreed :-)

"Everything is approximate, less than approximate, for when more closely and sharply examined, the most perfect picture is a warty, threadbare approximation, a dry porridge, a dismal mooncrater landscape. What arrogance is concealed in perfection. Why struggle for precision, purity, when they can never be attained. The decay that begins immediately on completion of the work was now welcome to me." - Jean Arp, On My Way. Poetry and Essays , 1912-1947.

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

Quote - But you can't just throw out a semi toon/ semi realistic vaguely humanoid shaped lump of polygons, call it a "blank canvas" and expect your average hobbyist user to turn it into something extraordinary.

Two bits:

It is indeed true that a properly made and topo'd mesh can be made into pretty much anything.However, for a hobbyist program, sufficient tools to make that easier is a must. This includes morph dials, a program that does scaling without making conforming clothes into a headache, and a whole host of other little things.

The biggest problem with an out-of-the-box mesh that looks like someone or something is that it becomes damned tough to make that mesh look like something else.

To give an example, let's bring up some that I absolutely love to use: Terai Yuki, Neftoon Gal, Kururu, and Anime Doll. Let's also bring up the most wonderful blunder DAZ ever coughed up - the original Aiko. With these characters, there are features that you can never, ever, ever iron out certain aspects of. This is usually parts of the face, but can also be part of the body as well. For instance, Aiko's angular jaw and spindly build was damned near impossible to hammer out (until some kind soul figured out a way to weld SP2 morphs to it). Terai Yuki always looks like Terai Yuki in the face. Good luck hammering Laura 3's oval face into something usable without reaching for a poly-pushing app suite...

Speakin' of which, you can make morphs that will fix up a lot of these shortcomings, but it usually involves breaking out a modelling program and beating the crap out of the mesh - ever so gently, but still... Mind you, such things are well out of the reach of the typical hobbyist; most just barely figured out how to bend body parts. The bad news is, if the body changes, your clothing will need these modifications too. Sure, there's dnamic cloth, but that's Yet Another Layer Of Complexity that most folks don't want to deal with.

For some of us, no big deal. For most of the CG hobbyist market? It is a big deal. This is why you see V4 still holding the crown after how many years now? If Chris Creek does Dawn up right, this may change, but I don;t see that change coming from Smith Micro...

...just food for thought.

First of all, the issue of hyperrealism or photorealism is a red herring. I don't think anyone suggested that the Poser figures are inferior because they don't render looking like photos of real people.

What I did say was that I wanted them to look human. Relatively well proportioned, with bends that appeared reasonable, and bones and muscle structure that matches what you'd expect on the real thing. I ain't asking for the world.

Which brings me to this...

Quote - So you have to give them exact presets they can use and build upon. Like dialing "The Girl" or "Aiko" for toon/manga styles, they need various realistic characters that let them achieve true realism with a single dial spin.

As I said, a modern Poser figure can be anything you want, provided the mesh topology is properly constructed.

But you can't just throw out a semi toon/ semi realistic vaguely humanoid shaped lump of polygons, call it a "blank canvas" and expect your average hobbyist user to turn it into something extraordinary.

Yes. This.

I don't expect to be able to get what I want with "a single dial spin" and I doubt most users do either. But I don't want to have to learn to use a modelling program to make morphs either.

I may spend days fiddling with a character and deciding on which of the several thousand morphs I have that I will combine in unique ways with it. What I will not do is spend weeks or months painstakingly morphing that character. I know my limits and they can be measured in hours.

I don't see why I should have to defend this position, especially when my particular brand of incompetence is exactly why this marketplace exists in the first bloody place. :D

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Pengy, the two ladies in my example are both V3.

PP-2014 could easily transfer their scaling and their morphs into any V3 clothing with a single click.

And you could go from preschool toddler to sexy chick to bodybuilder to whatever else you want in Poser just as easy as you can do such things with Genesis in Studio.

There are no technical limitations anymore in Poser. As long as a mesh' topology can physically hold a certain shape, you can have a completely different looking figure with a single dial spin.

If you want toon, dial toon. If you want 100% photorealism, dial 100% photorealism.

It actually could be that easy, if people only wanted.

But as long as they are happy with semi-realistic sexy chicks like V4 (or now Dawn), nothing will change and Poser will keep running around in circles chasing it's own tail.

Hobby, remember? A LOT of ppl here do this as a hobby...which means that they do it for their own satisfaction - no one elses. Maybe glarringly realistic isn't really what's required ;) Doesn't make your argument any less or more valid than theirs either. People will do what they want, with what they want, in the time that they wanna take. And they'll do what makes them happy in the end, even if it's not what makes you happy.

Laurie

Quote - > Quote - So you have to give them exact presets they can use and build upon. Like dialing "The Girl" or "Aiko" for toon/manga styles, they need various realistic characters that let them achieve true realism with a single dial spin.

I see this, or something similar,always posted by someone that feels they're "elevated" above the rest and it's nothing but an insult to the average user, that does not fall into that category.

And those same ones, when they do post a render, it's usually someone else's morph of V4, sometimes not even dialed.

True realism in a 3d medium is only an illusion that can never be obtained. Let's quit injecting that into every discussion of the true poser figures. It has no place in poser or any other 3d approximation of reality.

Doric.

You know you're over the target when they start shooting back. I have never known the writer of the original quote to insult the average user and find these comments defamous.

Klebnor

Lotus 123 ~ S-Render ~ OS/2 WARP ~ IBM 8088 / 4.77 Mhz ~ Hercules Ultima graphics, Hitachi 10 MB HDD, 64K RAM, 12 in diagonal CRT Monitor (16 colors / 60 Hz refresh rate), 240 Watt PS, Dual 1.44 MB Floppies, 2 button mouse input device. Beige horizontal case. I don't display my unit.

Klebnor, the first rule many forget is the mythical "average user" DOES NOT EXIST. Which means trying to pigeonhole people as needing a single dial spin is first, insulting. Nobody sees mine, I don't post them but I'll spend days fiddling with the dials and morph tool working on Katie, or even Alyson. The end result is what I want, and as far as what I do, I am the only one that counts. The worst critic I have on my own work is me, and I've learned over some 44 years of work that I'm never going to satisfy myself, period. Never.

However, I'm also not unique, and I prefer to think most people toying with 3d are pretty much the same.

I"ve been guilty of using the term "realistic character", when what I should have been saying is more "average character", or not to someone's imagined ideal.

Realism in a 3d mesh is not possible. A 3d mesh does not move as flesh and bone do, so any talk of realism is just so much bloat and hot air. To say this figure or that figure is more realistic, no. It may resemble some reference, but probably that one reference is not what someone else is seeing day to day. I've become quite addicted to the morph tool, and I'm not the only one, it's too easy to spend a few minutes with it and get something more to my liking than an out of the box figure. My gut feeling is I'm in the majority, or the average, in this regard. No single dial spin, I've never found a single dial spin that would do what I want. When I have as close as I know I'm going to get, I save that as a new figure.

And I'm closer to the "average user" than the single dial spinners. I'm not a professonal, I have lots of time and little money. I can't just spend for what I want, I have to work for it.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Quote - For some of us, no big deal. For most of the CG hobbyist market? It is a big deal. This is why you see V4 still holding the crown after how many years now? If Chris Creek does Dawn up right, this may change, but I don;t see that change coming from Smith Micro...

...just food for thought.

Pigeon holes again. And we don't fit. We never have. We never will. For "most of the CG hobbyist market", on what authority? "For some of us"??? I assume you mean you included. No, for most of us, whatever tool we have to use, we will. Dynamic clothes an "added level of complexity"? Hardly, one more tool that probably most will learn and use to varying degrees of accomplishment with it. Far easier than trying to transfer morphs to conforming clothing, that will now not bend right, which means going to the joint editor and trying to fix it, after which it will not fit the morph again.

I also don't see Dawn doing anything that I will have much interest in, at least not once the WIP's started coming. Interest level for me dropped with each one, the clothing available is just going to be more V4 rehashed and tie dyed. Nothing to interest me there.

But the only truth about any blanket statement is they're always totally wrong. I dropped all the daz characters and figures out of my computer, I have no trouble using the tools provided now with the Poser figures. It pleases me, and I'm the only one that counts there. Poser figures are only ugly for those that choose to not learn the tools and use them.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Attached Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BBKRAjSD-Y

Danke, Klebnor. :-)

++++

"Realism in a 3d mesh is not possible. A 3d mesh does not move as flesh and bone do, so any talk of realism is just so much bloat and hot air."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BBKRAjSD-Y

That's what a GAME-ENGINE is capeable of IN REALTIME these days.

Pretty much jumps the uncanny valley for me with both feet firmly on the other side.

PP-2014 has SSS, IDL, JCMs, animateable joint centers, single axis scaling and weightmapping, so it could easily render still pictures of comparable quality. (And with a lot of patience, even produce a similar animation)

Provided someone makes photorealistic professionally grade figures that could make full use of all that shiny new tech.

Look, to me Poser or DAZ figures are not little "works of art" with their own loveable, quirky personality.

They are first and foremost tools like a chair prop or a car prop.

And yes, the "Average Poser hobbyist" is either not interrested in or simply can't do all the work necessary to produce his/her own photorealistic figures.

And there is nothing wrong with that, because, after all, not having to do it all by yourself and being able to use pre-made content is what Poser is all about, isn't it ?

So where is the "insult" in wanting better "figure-tools" so that even those who are not gifted with the ability to sculpt or rig from scratch can achieve as much realism as they want with a single dial-spin ?

But I get it.

Criticising a Poser or DAZ figure for it's technical and artistic shortcomings in this forum is pretty much like telling a mother that her baby is ugly and not like simply suggesting a better quality brush to an artist so he can make better paintings. :-(
Way too much emotions and knee-jerk reactions.

But for better or worse, photorealism is the future of CGI. Once one game or movie fully jumps the Uncanny Valley, others will follow, because they have to.

And Poser can either be a part of that future or be left behind.

Ironically, I'm not really that keen to produce "looks like photographs" kind of renders because I hate long render times.

But I decided years ago that I want my figures to at least look more like real humans, regardless of the time and work it would cost me.

I don't regret the journey as I learned a lot, but I still would have rather used someone else's ready-made figures instead, if only that someone would have made them for me.

Quote - Realism in a 3d mesh is not possible. A 3d mesh does not move as flesh and bone do, so any talk of realism is just so much bloat and hot air.

Don't tell these people that....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piJ4Zke7EUw

Some things are easy to explain, other things are not........ <- Store -> <-Freebies->

Quote - Danke, Klebnor. :-)

Nichts zu bedanken, du bist ein Mensch bei mir.

Alles gute,

Klebnor

Lotus 123 ~ S-Render ~ OS/2 WARP ~ IBM 8088 / 4.77 Mhz ~ Hercules Ultima graphics, Hitachi 10 MB HDD, 64K RAM, 12 in diagonal CRT Monitor (16 colors / 60 Hz refresh rate), 240 Watt PS, Dual 1.44 MB Floppies, 2 button mouse input device. Beige horizontal case. I don't display my unit.

Quote - Pigeon holes again. And we don't fit.

Define "we."

Quote - For "most of the CG hobbyist market", on what authority?

Just from looking through and about the galleries here, at R'otica, at DAZ, at...

Unless you can point to stats otherwise, you'll notice that the majority of images (and therefore users) are simple affairs, involving a few dial spins, purchased characters/textures, etc. As a percentage, very, very few users (again, jusdging by the results) create their own morphs, their own textures, their own, well ...anything.

It's not a complex hypothesis and proof-set, after all. Anyone can disprove it at any time, though I do wish you luck in that endeavor.

So - will that suffice for you?

Quote - Dynamic clothes an "added level of complexity"? Hardly, one more tool that probably most will learn and use to varying degrees of accomplishment with it.

Given the lack of dynamic clothing in both markets and galleries, I'd certainly love to see your evidence for that statement.

(edited because R'osity's edit box has really crappy font-handling)

Quote - Criticising a Poser or DAZ figure for it's technical and artistic shortcomings in this forum is pretty much like telling a mother that her baby is ugly and not like simply suggesting a better quality brush to an artist so he can make better paintings. :-(
Way too much emotions and knee-jerk reactions.

Pretty much.

Amazing how what is basically a mathematical recipe can elicit so much emotion, eh?

Quote - But for better or worse, photorealism is the future of CGI. Once one game or movie fully jumps the Uncanny Valley, others will follow, because they have to.

Yes and no.

I've seen some hellishly-close photorealism, and it's getting very close. I daresay it's getting close enough that real human actors will likely become either voice-actors or simply obsolete in 30 years. Photo models will likely be useless in 10 years. So yeah - you're definitely right in that aspect.

In fairness, I can say "no" as well, because not everyone wants to shoot for that unless they want that kind of career goal. For instance, I'll likely never have the time and energy to push that particular envelope, but that's okay.

But... all that said, I suspect that at the very least a nod towards easing photorealistic renders is a must-have for future editions of any CG hobbyist program.

Quote - I don't regret the journey as I learned a lot, but I still would have rather used someone else's ready-made figures instead, if only that someone would have made them for me.

Exactly - and note that this happens all the time in the professional realm as well. It'l cost you roughly $5k-$15k for just a head, but you get it exclusively, with all the maps (texture, normals, displacement, etc), properly rigged in the app of your choice, and it's royalty-free for commercial use once your check clears.

(Now you get to animate it, but...)

Quote - And yes, the "Average Poser hobbyist" is either not interrested in or simply can't do all the work necessary to produce his/her own photorealistic figures.

And there is nothing wrong with that, because, after all, not having to do it all by yourself and being able to use pre-made content is what Poser is all about, isn't it ?

So where is the "insult" in wanting better "figure-tools" so that even those who are not gifted with the ability to sculpt or rig from scratch can achieve as much realism as they want with a single dial-spin ?

Agreed. It's not just that. It's not that the average Poser hobbyist is incapable or too lazy or not gifted enough or lacking in time to do the work, it's also, I expect, that a great many are more interested in producing actual finished RENDERS than in making the component parts. Getting some renders to their final state takes weeks in some instances. If that's the part of CGI you enjoy most, it makes sense to pay others to do what they enjoy the most, if that's creating content.

Quote - But I get it.

Criticising a Poser or DAZ figure for it's technical and artistic shortcomings in this forum is pretty much like telling a mother that her baby is ugly and not like simply suggesting a better quality brush to an artist so he can make better paintings. :-(
Way too much emotions and knee-jerk reactions.

:D

Quote - Ironically, I'm not really that keen to produce "looks like photographs" kind of renders because I hate long render times. But I decided years ago that I want my figures to at least look more like real humans, regardless of the time and work it would cost me.

I don't regret the journey as I learned a lot, but I still would have rather used someone else's ready-made figures instead, if only that someone would have made them for me.

Exactly. Except I enjoy making pictures far too much, and if I find myself becoming unhappy with Poser, I don't break out a modelling app. I just pull out my camera and play with it for a few months. I may have to do that again. If it's pics of peeps I want, models aren't that much more expensive to hire than Vicky -- and they usually bring their own clothes.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Here's a new pic I did with Tyler (Ryan enhanced)

I tried subdividing him twice. I'm not sure it looked substantially better, but it sure had an impact on render times >_<

He may not be "pretty" - but I think he looks like a real person.

Nah, I don't think so. Ignoring the weird green bits around the hair line and the "Suede shoes" hair, the first thing I see wrong with it is the lower eyelids, same as I noticed in the one you posted earlier. The lips are corpse colour and the eyes have a weird blue/green glow.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

To me 3D meshes can pass as realistic provided they are rendered with the right material configuration and lighting. Be it humans, buildings, cars or whatever.

My Renderosity Store

Quote -

Well, IMHO (and nothing more, really), I don't think that it's any kind of "ugly" factor, but rather the lack of flexibility in the figure.

For instance, Take a peek up there for a moment. I'm able to turn the lanky, scrawny, balloon-tittied, 7' 9" tall tiny-headed supermodel into, well... that. Up there. A short, squat, but still hella-pretty 4' 3" little-thing with real body propotions, that looks nothing like the default V4.

If you can put that same potential for flexibility into the Poser default figures (without undue and excessive work mind you), and still have the result usable with all the common pose/expression/morph sets? Then you'll have something.

It's sorta what I've been harping about all this time, yanno?

Cute character! I have to say I agree here with you. It is not about the default that keeps them from being supported, it is about the flexibility. If they had a really good morph pack equivalent to morphs ++, I think they would be more things to more people and therefore more "attractive" for their flexibility.

"People who attempt define what art is or is not, are not artists"---Luminescence

Quote - > Quote - Pigeon holes again. And we don't fit.

> Quote - For "most of the CG hobbyist market", on what authority?

Just from looking through and about the galleries here, at R'otica, at DAZ, at...

Given the lack of dynamic clothing in both markets and galleries, I'd certainly love to see your evidence for that statement.

(edited because R'osity's edit box has really crappy font-handling)

Which gives you at best a fraction, less than 10% of all Poser users, so you're starting with a minority and trying to make even a smaller minority.

Lack of dynamic clothing, in slutwear yeah, but who needs dynamic for three cloth triangeles and three threads. For lack of ds dynamic, blame daz for not producing the reasonably inexpensive method for the creators to create, which daz has not, and in all likelyhood will not. You have in daz, one source, and one source only.

The OP put up one picture, the intent, "Hey! This ain't as bad as the v thing fanbois try to make it sound!" The third post,nitpick the eyes, and within the first page, off on the inevitable treatices on why it's not "realistic". It never fails, and it's pretty damned sickening. Then come the inevitable treatces on why the "average poser user" won't learn to do some things, based on less than a ten percent sample of the total, and further based on the smaller percentage of that ten percent that actually post their work somewhere.

I don't even look at any galleries, simply because 99.99% of what's there is not what I want to do, therefore, is not interesting, and not important. The OP asked basically as simple question, "Is this attractive?" Not to have the same hackneyed reasons that are endlessly posted as to why it's not. The answer in my case is, yes, she's very attractive. But some won't like it because it's a poser figure, and have no other reason.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Don't know if I would ever have looked at the other Poser figures without this thread. Really liking the Alyson2 variations. I think I might get quite a bit of use out of these, 'specially with a bit of Ana mixed in. Haven't got to the male figures yet apart from Tyler.

Quote - And yes, the "Average Poser hobbyist" is either not interrested in or simply can't do all the work necessary to produce his/her own photorealistic figures.

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

and photorealistic relates to this, how?

The posted link to a youtube, place the amount of cash necessary in my hand and I might be tempted to try it. Otherwise, it relates to native poser figures, how? YEs, yes, yes, for illustrating what can be done with an unlimited amount of cash, I caught that part. I also caught in the credits something about "laser scan", which means it should be photorealistic, as in effect, it's a 3d photograph reduced to data points.

I guess the photorealists in the 3d world are the equivalent of the rivet counters in HO scale railroading. "There are only sixteen rivets in the front of the smokebox and there should be seventeen!" And the door hits them in the ass on their way out.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Quote - [
Cute character! I have to say I agree here with you. It is not about the default that keeps them from being supported, it is about the flexibility. If they had a really good morph pack equivalent to morphs ++, I think they would be more things to more people and therefore more "attractive" for their flexibility.

I beg to differ, although I do agree that lack of flexibility is a detriment. The Poser figures main drawback is the lack of support from SM/Poser/Content Paradise.

Quote - Don't know if I would ever have looked at the other Poser figures without this thread. Really liking the Alyson2 variations. I think I might get quite a bit of use out of these, 'specially with a bit of Ana mixed in. Haven't got to the male figures yet apart from Tyler.

Haven't played with Tyler much, James, to me, average working stiff, maybe "good joe". Simon, haven't been able to classify yet. Ryan, older wise ass is what immediately comes to my mind. Playing with Rex now, might be interesting after a trip to the face room. Age and build are about what I'm looking for, just face needs a little.

Katie, a couple minutes with the morph tool, not so much rounded face, she gains a couple years pretty easy. Hip/thigh joints don't bend worth a dam, thirty degrees and she's coming apart, just put clothes on her and cover it up.

Jessie is the one I have problems working with, so I just kinda ignore her. They're all usable, just have to work with them a little. If you do something with them and don't like it, that's what the "control-z" is for. But the base Alyson 2, a trip to the face room is mandatory.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Yeah, the native Poser figures just seem to lurk in the runtime like an afterthought. SM don't seem to be very enthusiastic about pushing them. Pity, 'coz they actually seem to be quite interesting and I never even noticed all the variations were there! (Agree that base Alyson2 isn't very inspiring though!)

Playing about with Izumi at the moment. I think I've just made myself a Miki4 clone! :biggrin:

Have to remember that programming is SM's core, the figures are just a freebie with it, not what we bought it for. But they're improving a lot, if the next ones are improved as much as Rex and Roxie, they'll be hard to beat. Roxie bends beautifully, you can put her in some extreme positions and she doesn't come apart or develop "crotch crinkles". Improve her elbows and knees a little, she'd be hard to beat by anyone.

I wish a few more vendors would get aboard when it comes to clothing though, that's about all any of them are really lacking. EClark1894 is doing some nice freebies, got everything he's put up recently, mostly Anastasia and Kate, both of which are still worthy of using. But one man can't fill all the needs there, a couple more would go a long way in making them more usable.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

"I guess the photorealists in the 3d world are the equivalent of the rivet counters in HO scale railroading. "There are only sixteen rivets in the front of the smokebox and there should be seventeen!" And the door hits them in the ass on their way out."

I 'm quite proud to be a rivet counter.

That's why I won contests and that's why you can still buy copys of the models that I built almost 20 years ago.

If you think ART and CRAFT are mutually exclusive, I'm afraid you have been misinformed.

Anyway, in a time when ART can be anything from sealing your own crap in a tin can to glueing your breakfast to your kitchen table and hanging that on a wall, I guess I rather be a bad artist than a bad craftsman.

:-)

Quote - Have to remember that programming is SM's core, the figures are just a freebie with it, not what we bought it for. But they're improving a lot, if the next ones are improved as much as Rex and Roxie, they'll be hard to beat. Roxie bends beautifully, you can put her in some extreme positions and she doesn't come apart or develop "crotch crinkles". Improve her elbows and knees a little, she'd be hard to beat by anyone.

I wish a few more vendors would get aboard when it comes to clothing though, that's about all any of them are really lacking. EClark1894 is doing some nice freebies, got everything he's put up recently, mostly Anastasia and Kate, both of which are still worthy of using. But one man can't fill all the needs there, a couple more would go a long way in making them more usable.

Doric.

Glad you like them Doric. Yeah, I know that Poser's main emphasis is with the software, and frankly if I had to choose either the software or the figures, I'd choose the software. That said, I still believe that if SM would do something like make Rx and Roxie availalble OUTSIDE of Poser, put them up for sale on Content Paradis and really promote them at least as hard as RDNA promotes My Michelle, their popularity would probably grow.

Quote -
I 'm quite proud to be a rivet counter.

Ah, well. If rivet counting was your thing. However, I've never claimed to be an artist. Craftsman, yes. Professional craftsman, and working at impossible tolerances for probably 9999 out of 10000 people.

BUt I never wanted to be the most hated person in the room.

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

Which also has about as much to do with the topic as any discussion of chasing the will of the wisp, or "photorealism". If there was a big clamor for it, it would probably have it's own forum. Most of us are content with what we can do, which the average user far exceeds your belief, also a unique property of the rivet counter. If you're not satisfied with what my renders, that you will never see, look like, my sympathy and kindly take the quarter you'll find on the table to call the chaplain and see if he gives a shit.

Doric

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Quote - Glad you like them Doric. Yeah, I know that Poser's main emphasis is with the software, and frankly if I had to choose either the software or the figures, I'd choose the software. That said, I still believe that if SM would do something like make Rx and Roxie availalble OUTSIDE of Poser, put them up for sale on Content Paradis and really promote them at least as hard as RDNA promotes My Michelle, their popularity would probably grow.

I haven't tried, but I don't know if they'll work outside of P10 or PP2014. I don't remember reading anything saying they wouldn't work with P9 or PP2012 but I think that's as far back as weight mapping was supported, I could be wrong. I"m not sure if the skinning method or sub division would make a difference, I think those are instructions to the programming rather than for the figure. THey'd be pretty low res though.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

In my mind, the arguments boil down to something like this:

Daz is now the enemy. But it's okay. Poser figures are just as good. Nay, they are much better for x,y,z reason, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a Daz fanboi, too lazy to model and texture, only interested in making one-click sparkly NVIAT images.

I'm quickly reminded of what I dislike the most about this attitude, so prevalent here, and its elitist objection to concentrating on improving actual renders.

And the suggestion that the reason I don't think Poser figures look realistic (realistic, dammit, not photofrickinrealistic) is that I haven't spent enough time looking at real live humans -- that suggestion really took the cake.

Okay. LMFAO. I'm done.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Quote - Which also has about as much to do with the topic as any discussion of chasing the will of the wisp, or "photorealism".

The OP made a claim about beauty, it is not unreasonable that people will comment on the beauty of their example. Photorealism may not be in the topic but it directly relates to how beautiful a Poser character looks. Humans rendered with attributes that don't match what you see through your eyes (or cameras, film, TV etc) are not human, they are aliens and zombies, which are beautiful only to other aliens and zombies, and the odd fetishist. If Poser native figures came with a better, more photoreal look, they would lend themselves to better, more beautiful renders. Seems pretty on topic to me.

Well beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that. So I dunno if she's beautiful, but I don't think she's particularly ugly. I think she's quite cute.

Izuzi (Alyson2) - masquerading as Miki4.

Alyson2 can be made to look quite attractive. I know, I've done it and with no more than her own built in morphs. Thing is, at least for me, when i buy a morph like Anastasia, then usually, that's the only face I use anyway, because that's what I bought her for. So I don't usually morph her much if at all.

Quote - > Quote - Glad you like them Doric. Yeah, I know that Poser's main emphasis is with the software, and frankly if I had to choose either the software or the figures, I'd choose the software. That said, I still believe that if SM would do something like make Rx and Roxie availalble OUTSIDE of Poser, put them up for sale on Content Paradis and really promote them at least as hard as RDNA promotes My Michelle, their popularity would probably grow.

I haven't tried, but I don't know if they'll work outside of P10 or PP2014. I don't remember reading anything saying they wouldn't work with P9 or PP2012 but I think that's as far back as weight mapping was supported, I could be wrong. I"m not sure if the skinning method or sub division would make a difference, I think those are instructions to the programming rather than for the figure. THey'd be pretty low res though.

Doric.

I say that because I'd like to start making clothing for Rex and Roxie to give away as freebies, but I don't have 2014 yet, so I can't make clothes for them yet.

It's Alyson's face that puts me off....I can barely stand to look at her for the time it takes for Anastasia to load ;).

Laurie

Load the figure, load the morph, create a folder to put it in, save it and you'll never have to load the default again.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

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

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

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

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

To me, the arguments boil down to...

I either like to use the figure or I don't. I don't care who made it, who published it, why or when. If there's a figure I can use - with or without a morph - (assuming I don't have to jump through hoops to get it working), then I will.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

Quote - To me, the arguments boil down to...

I either like to use the figure or I don't. I don't care who made it, who published it, why or when. If there's a figure I can use - with or without a morph - (assuming I don't have to jump through hoops to get it working), then I will.

^

Quote - If Poser native figures came with a better, more photoreal look, they would lend themselves to better, more beautiful renders. Seems pretty on topic to me.

That is the thought of one person, an opinion, that beyond the confines of one cranium, has no bearing on anything. More beautiful as in vicky wearing a cast iron pantie, two bronze cups on her chest, a sword in her hand and going against a batallion of orks with scifi weapons? Oh, yes. Very realistic. Manga would do it better. And while you're at it, pump her boobs out to look like watermelons, that adds to the realism, yanno.

The only thing I'm interested in is "Does this render convey what I want it t?" If yes, fine. If no, it's probably not because of some imagined lack of photorealism, it's probably because of poor composition and lighting. Which only means, "Start over."

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Quote - Nah, I don't think so. Ignoring the weird green bits around the hair line and the "Suede shoes" hair, the first thing I see wrong with it is the lower eyelids, same as I noticed in the one you posted earlier. The lips are corpse colour and the eyes have a weird blue/green glow.

I agre that the colours turned out ... less that perfect. I tried to remedy that in Photoshop but I think I madeit worse L

*I don't agre about the lowr eyelids though. I've seen people with eyelids like that.

Quote -
I guess the photorealists in the 3d world are the equivalent of the rivet counters in HO scale railroading. "There are only sixteen rivets in the front of the smokebox and there should be seventeen!" And the door hits them in the ass on their way out.

Doric.

ROFL! This is so funny because of several things :D (and funny in a good way, mind!)

First of all, I DO strive to do phtorealistic. Not always, but it's one of my goals to SOME DAY produce a Poser picture that looks like a photo. I've (IMO) come close a few times, but never quite crossed into Uncanny Valley - yet.

At the same time, I like to work with figures like Bong - a character we all can agree is nothing REAL. But still, putting him in a "real" setting may do something.

And the other reason this is funny is.. I'm married to one of the rivet-counting guys when it comes to his Model Trains :lol:

I like a certain amount of realism, but going to the "photorealistic" sometimes defeats the purpose. So wrapped up in the tiny details that the original idea is pushed into a secondary or lower place, the results are never satisfying. For those that make it their "thing", fine, just don't expect me to try to follow or seem to wish to do that.

My other pet peeve is those that try to define what the "average user" is willing or capable of. They're always wrong, and will never admit it.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Quote - If they had a really good morph pack equivalent to morphs ++, I think they would be more things to more people and therefore more "attractive" for their flexibility.

This, right here. This is what Poser needs for its default figures.

====

Quote - Which gives you at best a fraction, less than 10% of all Poser users, so you're starting with a minority and trying to make even a smaller minority.

We can only go with what we see. Now if you want to count all the crappy commercials with the uber-crappy animation featuring the default Poser 4 'toon figures, well...

Tell you what- come up with a better and verifiable metric, and we'll go with that.

Quote - Lack of dynamic clothing, in slutwear yeah, but who needs dynamic for three cloth triangeles and three threads.

Not like the marketplace is overflowing with clothing fit for a True Scotsman, either... ;)

IOW, the point still stands - big lack of dynamic clothing in the marketplace, which is QED for a general lack of usage for the stuff. Like always, if you have a better proof, then let's see it.

Quote - The OP put up one picture, the intent, "Hey! This ain't as bad as the v thing fanbois try to make it sound!" The third post,nitpick the eyes, and within the first page, off on the inevitable treatices on why it's not "realistic".

Finally - some red meat to latch onto! Thought I was going to starve for a moment there...

'k, couple o' bits:

I personally don't nitpick on others' work, unless it's a commercial product or they specifically solicit merciless criticism. Just not my thing (probably because in spite of my years around this biz, I still suck at this whole arteest thing. Now give me some code to review? Stand back, bitches... )
Like it or lump it, some folks want realistic, and view CG through that lens. BFD.

Quote - Then come the inevitable treatces on why the "average poser user" won't learn to do some things

You're welcome to propose a hypothesis as well, yanno.

Personally, I blame time constraints, coupled with a learning curve that scares most mortals. Nothing wrong with making those two bits easier, is there? Would you feel threatened by such a thing, perhaps? Lord knows I don't. I prefer eyeballing digital images without the sickening cross-eyed balloon-tittied slack-jawed semi-rigor-mortis poses, thanks much. Some personality would be nice too.

Quote - I don't even look at any galleries, simply because 99.99% of what's there is not what I want to do, therefore, is not interesting, and not important.

You should sometime... most of the time it's the equivalent of watching Sharknado 60 times in a row, but sometimes you come across some rather kick-ass stuff that makes it all worthwhile.

Quote -
Anyway, in a time when ART can be anything from sealing your own crap in a tin can...

He's not kidding about the crap-in-a-can, folks.

(marked language due to the destination)

I don't think photorealism has anything to do with it. Not a thing. For what I can see, the people who strive for that seriously are generally technically minded enough to be making textures and modelling anyway.

When I say 'realistic', I mean: Not a toon.

The native Poser figures in my runtime are basically toons. Fine for some purposes, but not for most of my renders. A couple of badly supported exceptions exist. But since I'm not skilled enough to make them look any different from the defaults which everyone is using, I'll rarely render them.

Toon isn't automatically ugly. To me, what is ugly is a half-toon with a photographic texture and lovely SSS. It just screams all sorts of wrong to me. Oh well. I guess I'm the only one.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

I don't quite see that. Aiko 3 is a toon. Terai Yuki is a toon. The Girl is a toon. The all have somewhat exxagerated features.

I don't think the native Poser figures share that characteristic.

Quote - ...Oh well. I guess I'm the only one.

No, you aren't LOL.

I didn't like the Poser 8 figures (Ryan, Alyson, etc) since the day I loaded one. Like moriador, I can see all sorts of things wrong with them and therefore, unless it's Tyler and/or Ana (thank you Blackhearted), I'll never ever use them. Yeah, it's a matter of personal taste. Some ppl like the figures. Most don't. Either way I don't really care...lol. If they make ya happy than that's more than good enough for me.

FWIW, I dont' hate ALL Poser figures. One of my all time favorites was Miki 1. If she didn't have such miserable rigging, I'd still be using her and one of these days, when I learn how to weight map, I WILL be weight mapping her so that I can use her once again ;). The same goes for James, Koji, and Kelvin who are also decent figures if it wasn't for their rigging. Was never much of a fan of Jesse, but Sydney was pretty nice :).

Laurie

Quote - > Quote - ...Oh well. I guess I'm the only one.

No, you aren't LOL.

I didn't like the Poser 8 figures (Ryan, Alyson, etc) since the day I loaded one. Like moriador, I can see all sorts of things wrong with them and therefore, unless it's Tyler and/or Ana (thank you Blackhearted), I'll never ever use them. Yeah, it's a matter of personal taste. Some ppl like the figures. Most don't. Either way I don't really care...lol. If they make ya happy than that's more than good enough for me.

FWIW, I dont' hate ALL Poser figures. One of my all time favorites was Miki 1. If she didn't have such miserable rigging, I'd still be using her and one of these days, when I learn how to weight map, I WILL be weight mapping her so that I can use her once again ;). The same goes for James, Koji, and Kelvin who are also decent figures if it wasn't for their rigging. Was never much of a fan of Jesse, but Sydney was pretty nice :).

Laurie

And thus my earlier point, about Poser not supporting it's figures. SM should weightmap them and make then available via Content Paradise. Well, maybe not Miki 1, but the G2's at least.

If they weight mapped Miki1, I'd surely be willing to throw them a few more bucks. Same goes for Sydney and the G2 males. Miki 1 especially had the most realistic and expressive faces I've ever seen - the only one since that comes close is Mankahoo's Angela. The one thing that bothered me about Miki 1 was the fact that she was asian only. Of course, there's plenty more white people to be had...lol...unfortunately, not many African. I am sorta sick to death of caucasian figures to be honest ;).

Laurie

Attached Link: http://www.toxel.com/inspiration/2010/02/26/14-fictional-characters-in-real-life/

Toon isn't automatically ugly. To me, what is ugly is a half-toon with a photographic texture and lovely SSS. It just screams all sorts of wrong to me. Oh well. I guess I'm the only one.

Nope, you're not.

http://www.toxel.com/inspiration/2010/02/26/14-fictional-characters-in-real-life/

BTW, I constantly use the term PHOTOREALISTIC only because both DAZ and SM already hijacked the term "realistic" for their advertising, so for the majority, the existing figures are "realistic style" as opposed to Aiko, Terai Yuki or The Girl which are "toon/manga style".

But actually both the DAZ and SM figures are a wild mix of deliberate toon-style to "sex them up" and anatomical/technical errors.

Quote - If they weight mapped Miki1, I'd surely be willing to throw them a few more bucks. Same goes for Sydney and the G2 males. Miki 1 especially had the most realistic and expressive faces I've ever seen - the only one since that comes close is Mankahoo's Angela. The one thing that bothered me about Miki 1 was the fact that she was asian only. Of course, there's plenty more white people to be had...lol...unfortunately, not many African. I am sorta sick to death of caucasian figures to be honest ;).

Laurie

Racist.

Quote - > Quote - If they weight mapped Miki1, I'd surely be willing to throw them a few more bucks. Same goes for Sydney and the G2 males. Miki 1 especially had the most realistic and expressive faces I've ever seen - the only one since that comes close is Mankahoo's Angela. The one thing that bothered me about Miki 1 was the fact that she was asian only. Of course, there's plenty more white people to be had...lol...unfortunately, not many African. I am sorta sick to death of caucasian figures to be honest ;).

Laurie

Racist.

Bwaaaahahaha...troublemaker :P

If I wanna see more white ppl I can just look in the mirror (yep, sick of my own reflection too. LOL). But I have yet to see a really good african or hispanic figure. For as much as it bothered me that Miki1 didn't do other races, the figures that are a dedicated race are the best looking examples of that race ;). The morphs never seem to quite make it ;). Plus, putting african features for example on a base caucasian figure look, well...wrong. LOL. There aren't huge differences, but there are differences. The one that comes to mind is the rear (not that I stand around looking at people's rear ends. LOL).

Laurie

"FWIW, I dont' hate ALL Poser figures. One of my all time favorites was Miki 1. If she didn't have such miserable rigging, I'd still be using her and one of these days, when I learn how to weight map, I WILL be weight mapping her so that I can use her once again ;). The same goes for James, Koji, and Kelvin who are also decent figures if it wasn't for their rigging"

Looking forward to someone re-rigging Miki-1 !

She was the only DAZ/Poser figure with a truly photorealistic shape out of the box. Her mesh topology was a bit dense for my low end machine back then, so I rather built my own Aneta/Miki from my DAZ hybrids.

But with proper rigging, she'll be a lovely figure.

BTW, Sydney and MIKI are the exact same mesh. Sydney is basically a "caucasian" version of MIKI with a more V3-like shape.

Sadly, to me she lost most of the qualities that made Miki, well, MIKI, but she's still better out of the box than Jessi-I. (Who actually is not that hard to rework into something more believeable.)

And James-I and Koji-I are definitely the best Poser males ever made.

Sorry, no love for the "reworked" G2 versions or the other G2 figures here.

Especially Simon looked just plain creepy to me. :-(

Actually, I thought both Sydney and Simon had rather dubious looks on their faces.

Quote - 2) Like it or lump it, some folks want realistic, and view CG through that lens. BFD.

As long as that is the standard they judge their OWN work on, and NOT anyone else. Period.

The "Purists" on anything have no idea of the damage they do, nor would they care if they did. It's okay to pursue it on your own, but to constantly push it to other people, well , the door I came in opens to let me out too. And not many will say anything, those are the ones that seldom post, but ask "What in hell am I doing this for if this is how it's going to be met?"

OH, yeah. The learning curve for the cloth room, the basics, is maybe fifteen minutes long. But, I don't do animations, so frame 30 of the sim is the only one I'm looking at. I can put a seated figure in a long dress in a chair, with the cloth between her legs and the seat of the chair a lot faster than I can with conforming and the dynamic gives ten times better results. Sorry if you find that daunting. I doubt the average user will find it even difficult. Going deeper in, yes, that may take time, but once they've tried it, it won't slow them down from going deeper in. I use mostly long skirts, therefore, dynamic is the only game in town. Morphs in the figure? NO problem, run the sim, presto, it fits. It ain't any big problem and doesn't take long to either learn or do. I'll change conforming to dynamic for just that reason, no problem.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Quote -> Quote - 2) Like it or lump it, some folks want realistic, and view CG through that lens. BFD.

As long as that is the standard they judge their OWN work on, and NOT anyone else. Period.

Sorry, but you don't get to dictate what people think, or how they critique. If it's any comfort or consolation, neither do I.

Quote - The "Purists" on anything have no idea of the damage they do, nor would they care if they did.

Same story with {insert group of artistic types here}. Shit, man - CGSociety has been around for how long now, and you still haven't figured this all out yet?

I think the only group of folks who don't bitch and moan about something not suiting their tastes is Faeriewylde, and that's mostly because it's founded on nothing more (or less) than innocent fun involving images of fairy-tale (geddit?) critters. Call it a spot of child-like shelter from a world that's gone all too adultish.

But yeah, outside of that site or one like it? Well, you either deal with the results, or go found your own website. Doubly so if you're insisting that Poser get used by the professional crowd. Those boys (and girls) can be outright motherfu- well, you get the idea. Not because they're born that bitchy, but rather because they got paychecks (as in, cash money) riding on their individual skill and reputation.

Quote - > Quote -> Quote - 2) Like it or lump it, some folks want realistic, and view CG through that lens. BFD.

As long as that is the standard they judge their OWN work on, and NOT anyone else. Period.

Sorry, but you don't get to dictate what people think, or how they critique. If it's any comfort or consolation, neither do I.

A "photorealist" has about zero knowledge of what I'm doing, and is unaware that his ideas will NOT work. He doesn't care.

Quote -> Quote - The "Purists" on anything have no idea of the damage they do, nor would they care if they did.

Same story with {insert group of artistic types here}. Shit, man - CGSociety has been around for how long now, and you still haven't figured this all out yet?

Never visited the site, probably never will. If the site is all consumed with photorealism, then that's where the conversation concerning it belongs. Not in a place where there are hobbyists that are probably having just as much fun and getting just as much satisfaction out of it as the one spending days on getting a "photorealistic" look on the figure. I know what I want in a render, if someone else thinks they know what I want more than I do, the quarter to call the chaplain is still on the table and he probably doesn't give a shit either. Just don't tell me my idea would be better done in your style. Bulls leave enough of that behind them, when it gets too deep here, I bow out and do something else.

But it don't have to be brought out every damned time someone mentions any figure. That just gets sickening. Trekkie asked if it was a nice face, I thought it was a nice face. All the "realism" talk is just bullpucky.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Well, Trekkie also mentioned she didn't think the native Poser figures were ugly. I guess some of us just begged to differ ;).

One must be careful what one says or asks on an open forum, lest ye get an answer. LOL

Laurie

"But it don't have to be brought out every damned time someone mentions any figure. "

More poly(p)tychs than DC :-)

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

Quote - Well, Trekkie also mentioned she didn't think the native Poser figures were ugly. I guess some of us just begged to differ ;).

One must be careful what one says or asks on an open forum, lest ye get an answer. LOL

Laurie

And I'm really pleased she did! I'd always assumed the native Poser figures were ugly, because that's what everyone always says - (and oh yes! I agree about default Alyson2). But without this thread I'd never have bothered to look at them any further and I'm really liking the SM variations on Alyson 2. These are going to be very useful to me.

Quote -
Looking forward to someone re-rigging Miki-1 !

She was the only DAZ/Poser figure with a truly photorealistic shape out of the box. Her mesh topology was a bit dense for my low end machine back then, so I rather built my own Aneta/Miki from my DAZ hybrids.

I recall that Miki 1 has 50,000 poly eyeballs... :biggrin:

PS I was in the woods for a week, so I'm catching up.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Wisdom of bagginsbill:

"Oh - the manual says that? I have never read the manual - this must be why."
“I could buy better software, but then I'd have to be an artist and what's the point of that?"
"The [R'osity Forum Search] 'Default' label should actually say 'Don't Find What I'm Looking For'".
bagginsbill's Free Stuff... https://web.archive.org/web/20201010171535/https://sites.google.com/site/bagginsbill/Home

Quote - Well, Trekkie also mentioned she didn't think the native Poser figures were ugly. I guess some of us just begged to differ ;).

One must be careful what one says or asks on an open forum, lest ye get an answer. LOL

Laurie

Right :)

And I do think some of them ARE ugly. Judy for one. And Don isn't exactly pretty either.

But I like that they're all Face Room compatible, it's such a nice and easy way to get some diversity and potentially a figure that doesn't look like any old Poser figure. Besides, the face room is fun to play with. It's IMO fun to hit Random Face and see what pops up :)

And as a general rule I think they look more real than the idealised Daz figures. Real people rarely have such perfect looks (and don't get me wrong, I know you can morph them "ugly" - it just generally takes more time.

I like "ugly" people because to me, they're more interesting than model material :)

Quote - But it don't have to be brought out every damned time someone mentions any figure. That just gets sickening. Trekkie asked if it was a nice face, I thought it was a nice face. All the "realism" talk is just bullpucky.

Doric.

What gives you the right to decide for me what I find attractive or useful? It's "bullpucky" to me if I say it is.

Now, the fact that you seem to be suggesting that me stating an opposing opinion means I'm invalidating yours is something that perhaps needs to be examined because in my world, it isn't the case, and there's room for lots of differing opinions. I stated mine, knowing full well that, in this forum, it's extremely unpopular. That doesn't mean I think you are required to agree with me, or that your opinions are "bullpucky" just because they differ from my own. Gosh.

ETA: I also think Trekkie's pic is a nice face. The texture is lovely. I just think it may be a little too lovely for the figure and it has an odd effect on me. If it doesn't strike you that way, well, fair enough. Can we live with that? Or must we stand ten paces apart and draw our weapons? ;)

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Just posted a new freebie for the Poser G2 females. Oddly enough the only G2 female I actually liked was Olivia. I just thought she was more authentic looking than any Black DAZ figure. Oh wait... there are no "Black" DAZ figures.

Anyway, I was never that fond of Sydney. Something about her eyes. But now she's the only G2 figure I seem to use.

Quote - A "photorealist" has about zero knowledge of what I'm doing, and is unaware that his ideas will NOT work. He doesn't care.

Umm, he doesn't have to. Nor do you have to agree with his views. Life is pretty cool like that.

Quote - If the site {CGSociety - /P } is all consumed with photorealism, then that's where the conversation concerning it belongs.

Didn't realize you were the king and arbiter of all topics discussable. My bad, but before I bow to your authority on the matter, may I see the paperwork granting you that authority?

Oh, wait - the world don't work like that. Dude, with all due kindness? Get over it already.

PS: If you want to see some kick-ass photorealism, throw your eyeballs at this. (and notice that none of it is CG...)

Quote - > Quote - But it don't have to be brought out every damned time someone mentions any figure. That just gets sickening. Trekkie asked if it was a nice face, I thought it was a nice face. All the "realism" talk is just bullpucky.

Doric.

What gives you the right to decide for me what I find attractive or useful? It's "bullpucky" to me if I say it is.

Oh, well. Let the endless, boring, quasi technical treatices on why it's not realistic continue. They only say one thing, one person's opinion, which outside of that one cranium has no bearing on anything. But it will continue to be said over and over and over and over and over and over. Almost as if someone was listening.

Doric

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

Well...

Nah. Everyone uses Poser for different reasons, uses it in different ways, uses different figures and achieves different results. Sometimes, I may want to achieve Photorealism (actually, the idea interests me but I don't have the means to get there yet). Other times, I may want to do toon stuff, or anything anywhere in between. It's all good.

Anyone who disagrees can fuck themselves with something sharp is free to do so. :)

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

I really enjoy the new poser figures (Roxie and Rex).

I am using them a lot!

STORE: https://www.renderosity.com/marketplace/vendors/3Dream

FREEBIES: https://www.renderosity.com/users/3Dream/freestuff

Actually it's interesting how heated any discussion about virtual digital people can get.

I posted this, not to provoke (honestly!) but to perhaps to encourage someone to actually TRY one of the much-despised (at least in some circles) Native Poser Figures. And at least that bit of the mission succeeded ;)

Basically, what it boils down to is that more figures adds to the diversity. And MAY, in the right hands, add to Poser breaking out of that "same old, same old" loop it sometimes feels like it's stuck in. Don't get me wrong - I HAVE done my NWIATWAS - it's almost mandatory. But if we, as Poser users, want to ... hmm.. show "The World" that Poser is more than a tool for adolescent fantasies... boobs and booties... well.. it means... for one thing.. actually trying your hand with a boob-less figure. A so-called MALE figure ;) And there's actually quite a few of them that looks pretty nice.

And now.. let the fight discussion continue :D

Quote - Actually it's interesting how heated any discussion about virtual digital people can get.

I posted this, not to provoke (honestly!) but to perhaps to encourage someone to actually TRY one of the much-despised (at least in some circles) Native Poser Figures. And at least that bit of the mission succeeded ;)

It did! It did! :biggrin:

And it also inspired me to try out Miki4 who I've hardly used since installing her.... she's lovely!

On to the Poser males next!

I agree there's some mileage in a number of the PNFs but many of 'em look like they were made by Stevie Wonder. :)

Lest ye forget, I have used Judy and Miki 1 in a pic. I don't think I'd use Jessi for anything other than target practise, though. :D

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

P5 Don vs P4 Dork

Some sculpting, scaling and modern shaders.

++++++++

Every figure with enough polygons can be made handsome or pretty. That's not the problem.

It's just so much more practical achieving variety by concentrating on a single, highly flexible mesh and turn that into the shapes you want instead of supporting a dozend completely different figures.

Quote - P5 Don vs P4 Dork

Some sculpting, scaling and modern shaders.

++++++++

Every figure with enough polygons can be made handsome or pretty. That's not the problem.

It's just so much more practical achieving variety by concentrating on a single, highly flexible mesh and turn that into the shapes you want instead of supporting a dozend completely different figures.

Nice work. Especially on Don. I never managed to make him look human ;)

And while I agree on the general statement here, I'll keep claiming that it's a shame the NPF's has such a generally bad reputation. To me, their biggest asset is that they do NOT look like their DAZ cousins. And, for the sake of diversity, it's important to me. Just the fact that they're not all at the same (monster) height as the Dazians makes them useful, since I'm NOT going to bother with neither DSON or other "migh work" scaling thingies.

This, btw, is Simon. My personal favourite among the NPFs

as a matter of fact, most of the characters on this page is Simon: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/member.php?my_gallery&page=4 (if the link works, should take you to page 4 in my gallery...)

And no, he's not "pretty" - nor is he supposed to be ;)

We have now full control over scaling and joint centers, so as long as the mesh topology is properly constructed, a figure can look any way you like and still maintain cross-compatibility.

Why waste that potential ?

Quote - Actually it's interesting how heated any discussion about virtual digital people can get.

I posted this, not to provoke (honestly!) but to perhaps to encourage someone to actually TRY one of the much-despised (at least in some circles) Native Poser Figures. And at least that bit of the mission succeeded ;)

Basically, what it boils down to is that more figures adds to the diversity. And MAY, in the right hands, add to Poser breaking out of that "same old, same old" loop it sometimes feels like it's stuck in. Don't get me wrong - I HAVE done my NWIATWAS - it's almost mandatory. But if we, as Poser users, want to ... hmm.. show "The World" that Poser is more than a tool for adolescent fantasies... boobs and booties... well.. it means... for one thing.. actually trying your hand with a boob-less figure. A so-called MALE figure ;) And there's actually quite a few of them that looks pretty nice.

And now.. let the fight discussion continue :D

I don't use the Poser figures because they are not well supported and I am most assuredly not "the right hands" to make them look the way I want. So I use what I can, which is, regrettably, the Daz figures.

I also mostly render males.

I don't think of myself as someone who is particularly interested in NVIATs or in adolescent fantasies, though I have done my share of "adult" images. However, the males in those images feature just as prominently, so it's not all boobs. Might be quite a few booties, though. Thanks to Xameva and Meipe, M4's rear end is quite respectably attractive these days. Unfortunately, there's nothing similar for the Poser figures that I know of.

Well, Tyler has a great body and bends really quite well also. But my usage of him, as usual, comes down to lack of support.... Sometimes, even in my erotic renderings, I like to have figures that aren't stark naked or aren't always using the same body/head texture.

PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.

Trekkie, yes, diversity is good.

But do we really need completely different figures for that ?

Gramps and little Maggie above are the exact same mesh. Do they look "samey" to you ?

Using the new morphbrush, it would be no technical problem to transfer your Simon/Snape face over to David3WM for example.

Then you could have the face you want AND you could use D3WM's better rigging.

If you use Simon, you'd either have to live with his rigging or weightmap him yourself.

And if you use yet another figure, same problem. A new set of problems that needs to be fixed.

But if all figures are derived from a single mesh, support gets much easier.

Anyway, nice Snape morph. :-)

(He could really need some potion to fix his shoulders, though) ;-)

Use what you want and you're happy with.

My point is:

There is only so much time and energy. I think I achieved more diversity by focussing on a single mesh than by trying to make a lot of different meshes work for me.

Quote - There is only so much time and energy. I think I achieved more diversity by focussing on a single mesh than by trying to make a lot of different meshes work for me.

I agree about only having so much time & energy, which is why I have no intention of wasting time on a single mesh. For me, the time spent isn't worth the results I get, YMMV. I have a menagerie of figures, and I use them.

If I need a normal sized figure, it is easier for me to whip out SM's Gen 1 or Gen 2 figures, or any 3rd party figure and start from there than it is to start working the Daz Figures series.

As an added bonus, they do look different.

*"But if all figures are derived from a single mesh, support gets much easier." *

Sounds familiar, Unimesh, Genesis … My personal great idea was always a set of ecto/meso/endomorph bodies and exchangeable heads, but alas the world is not ready for such genius - that's OK, you don't have to illustrate the error of my concept. I don’t know if the protean mesh would catch on in the higher end where they can and do produce distinct versions of even the same character for different uses. For the low to mid range though I think you’re probably correct and DAZ must agree.

*"But if we, as Poser users, want to ... hmm.. show "The World" that Poser is more than a tool for adolescent fantasies... boobs and booties... well.. it means... for one thing.. actually trying your hand with a boob-less figure." *

Possibly, though artists have done pretty well respect-wise over the centuries with everything from sylphs, to nymphs to, hags, to nursing Madonnas. I don't know that changing the gender mix would have much effect. Any critique based on the abundance of sexy female imagery wouild be replaced by something else. Poser = Pr0n is just an attack that doesn't require much intellect to deploy.

IMO, most of the people voicing those attitudes are uften CGI wannabes who are ignorant or insecure enough to invest ego and identity in their tools. A real professional or wise hobbyist for that matter is going to evaluate a tool based on what it can do and how well it is implemented – not on what others are using it for. You find the closed–minded snobbery in every field and it is certainly present in the Poser universe as well.

I think that technical and artistic acceptance/respect may be different things. Less emphasis on the pin-up or NVIATWAS genres might help in regard to the latter but … more imagination, more depth, more complex images, rich environments, less of the emphasis on portrait/single figure imagery etc. might have a bigger effect. That may apply to a lot of non-cinematic CG art, produced increasingly by those raised on the high contrast, bright, hyper-reality saturated look of TV and film, and more exposed to commercial, product-centric as opposed to fine art. That’s strictly my personal, decidedly untrained, geriatric laymen’s view.

The technical respect issue, is being addressed with each new version of Poser. If SM isn’t aiming at the low hanging fruit of indie and lower budget CGI, they’re doing a good imitation of it. If Blender can play there, there’s no reason why Poser can’t as well. The key is to keep the less technically demanding users on board as well. The CGSociety bashers will continue as long as it’s cool. Let a few of their idols start saying it’s OK and their tune would change. The barrier to that is likely the fact that Poser is a content-centric application. There’s a pro market there for late night infomercials, self-serve checkout videos, accident recreation etc. Those are probably the jobs some people take while waiting to get discovered by ILM. The ‘You didn’t model and rig it yourself in Maya’ critique probably just reflects the reality that the big boys do roll that way – and some of their acolytes can’t see anything else as legitimate. I doubt that Pixar is ever going to use Poser/DS or their figures, at least not for anything that gets onscreen. OTOH, the more versatile and useful they become, the more opportunity exists in markets that are still developing or haven’t even appeared yet. It just takes time.

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

"My personal great idea was always a set of ecto/meso/endomorph bodies and exchangeable heads, but alas the world is not ready for such genius"

Example 1:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/satoko/40793

Satoko was an anime head that fit on V3, V2, PTVic, Laura, etc.

Example 2:

http://www.runtimedna.com/Melody-2.0.html

"All the charm and warmth of the original Melody can be found here in her newest incarnation, with one large upgrade, she is a parented head instead of a full figure."

For strictly (more-or-less realistic) humans, a morph is simply more convenient as long as the mesh geometry is able to contain the new shape, but if you need radically different head shapes on a variety of bodys, the parented or alternate geometry head still has its advantages.

:-)

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

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

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