Fantasy 3D – Bathing in the Night

[derelict]

Hold the press and call me handsome! Now that is one luvly lass there dude!!:bounce:

that cg without them wires might mistaken fer a pic.

Cool atmosphere ther dude!

ME LIKE'EM PLENTEE!

[Flypaper]

I've seen your work before, and it is very impressive, The girl is fantastic, if that's CG tho, I'd love to see the proof... perhaps a wireframe... she looks too damn real to me...

Great Work!

[derelict]

Flypaper.... there is wires posted on this thread. Why don't you read between the lines of his post?;)

[jason-slab]

hey really good work, the only thing is i the the environment needs a little work:thumbsup:
your other work is also really good!

[facial]

Well done, can you tell which part done by 3D software? thanks,

Cool.....:thumbsup:

[Ivars]

Looks realy, realy good.
But it´s something with the perspective and the background that makes her look like a giant. looks like if she would stnd up straight she would be taller than those cliffs in the background.

I dunno.........

[eLm0]

Amazing again another fantastic work this shall be sitting on my desktop any sec :thumbsup: keep it up

[Beastie]

INSANELY Good artwork man! Until I looked at your wireframe link. i could of sworn it was a photo! :applause: :surprised :thumbsup:

[ZmoR]

BEST

otlichnaya rabota!!

Luchaya is vseh...


!!!!

MEga COOL!

[lildragon]

you people from epilogue annoy me :annoyed: always coming in here and posting your awesome art and making the rest of us mortals jealous :annoyed:

heheh kidding man :D, this is another great piece from you, your "Janna" is incredible!! I just can't put my finger on how you achieve this quality. Care to elaborate on any of it?

Very very nicely done, deserves a plug ;)

[Edge]

Wauw ! :eek:
It looks incredible. This a fine piece of art.
Love the style as well. :thumbsup: Keep it up.


:D

[Verminator]

But it´s something with the perspective and the background that makes her look like a giant. looks like if she would stnd up straight she would be taller than those cliffs in the background.

I think it's the water. There's little difference in the scale of the ripples by her feet and by the cliff that is supposed to (presumably) be much further away, making it look like it's only three or four feet away. Maybe changing the water slightly or a little bit of DOF would pull her out into the foreground more and push the scenery back a bit.

Doesn't really need it though, it looks great already.

[Norman]

Wow.. that's nice.. gonna have to make a theme out of tha tnow! :)

[Fozzie]

Damn that is one awesome image. Its always nice to see work online that inspires you to do better and this is definately one of those.

Now if you will excuse me I have to go to the doctor's office so that he can reattach my jaw since it seems to have somehow slipped out of its socket and is dragging on the floor :)

Foz

[Aura]

Wow! Pretty~~~~:love: :drool:

[Cman]

Really nice.
It's like you used a photo to texture the girl!
I even see the reddish flush on the ankle. Very nice. :)

[yellowworm]

your best piece yet!

excellent.

[TilmanW]

Awesome. the crit about the waves is right. But what the hell: it's just (a) gigantic beauty ;-)

:bounce:

[sforsyth]

Well, very, very sweet, as everyone else has already said. Love the lighting and setting. Her hands are beautiful.
:thumbsup:

If you were looking for any sort of crits, maybe the moon seems a little strange (colour-wise), and the silk around her has some slightly strange highlights in places. Who am I to crit though!

Very inspiring and beautiful work.

[impending]

This is superb Anatoliy !!!

As far as the question of scale - I like the idea of her being a giant!

What really get my attention though is your wonderful composition and the lighting is absolutely first rate.

Bravo

jd

[mok]

Wow! it's amazing, I am very impressed of your work hehe :P
I wish I can do such a good job! Anyway, nicely done!

[RobinOberg]

sodding ey thats great.
only thing bugging me is that the girl looks aboslutely photoreal but the environment is fantasy.

[BoydLake]

It looks real nice, though I have to say the lighting on the character doesn't match the environment too well. She's much too lit compared to the tree and rocks. The only thing I'd change on the figure is the shoulder mass.... it looks way too big right now. I'd like to see you do a portrait image... that's a nice face to work with.

[Phugative]

Excellent Work!!!:bounce:

A Couple crits: As it was pointed out she seems huge. She dwarfs the tree she is sitting on.
Also how is she so well lit when everything else is extremely dark(ie night time)
This is my own personal; preference, but while the envirnoment is fatastic looking, I don't know if she fits. She is s little too gentle for such a evil and moody landscape.

Just littles to think about, again amazing model!

[D. Phoenix]

Excellent- I am particularly fond of the hair and lighting.

Clever background design, mesh-wise.

-D. Phoenix

[the_real_cabal]

wow - great - a beautiful woman :D

[The Magic Pen]

The girl is fantastic !!

[HapZungLam]

woow..... is she only for set post? :eek: :eek: :eek:


i am so shock.. ... this is damn good.

[slaughters]

Great work !

Did you do the post production work with Adobe ? How much of the final image is from the initial render ?

[cdinic]

I don't like it. The girl has no sense of depth, and the background is way below par around these parts.

however it is very origonal and I am inerested in exactly how it was produced.

-chris

[anim8r2]

Fantastic models (ALL of them). Absolutely stunning. You're definately a master!

But... I have to agree with the other crits. The comp suffers. Her lighting is definately different from her surroundings. The perspective is odd. And she seems to have a hell of a rock hard butt. Even those rocks don't seem to squish her cheeks at all.

Still, It was hard for me to believe she was CG. Flawless detail!

[Matt]

I'd like to see a non-antialiased render of his works...

[banzato]

Ok Ok Ok fantastic image but i think the most impressive thing in any program of 3d is the 360 ambient. I think an expert painter culd done that in photoshop but i dont think he can animate that an make the word entire 3d. So i d like to see an animation of your work ... or go to photoshop, is more fast to do the job ... let me know too the time to done that. 1 weak? 1 month?
Greate job:thumbsup:

[Technofreak]

real beautiful work...nice touch with the rim lighting :applause:

[Edin]

It's not the ripples, their fine. Guys you're all missing the obviouse. It's the tree, if she's sitting directly infront of that thing It must be a REALLY damn tiny tree. make her a bit smaller or like she's sitting closer to the camera and all the perspective problems are fixed.

Now that the crit is over, I also am an admirer of your work, I love fantasy art, something about the atmosphere intrigues me. Good work.

IT'S THE TREE I TELL YOU, THE TREE!!!!!! :P :)

[Grey]

there's only one thing wrong with this work, and it has nothing to do with the girl.

The cliff in the back looks miniaturized to me due to the waves, which are the same scale at the girl's feet as they are where they meet the cliff base.

It's the only critique I can offer, the rest looks perfect to me.

The wireframe looks to be NURBS, is this a NURBS model or is that just the way it's displaying?

[Cadillacs57]

superb work! i like it a lot! now is time for me to start doing something :P:scream:

[wmaher2]

She is beautiful...A great work!!! :beer: ....But If I have to say anything bad about it There seems to be somthing up with the size of her shoulders...perhaps its weighting I dont know perhaps its just me.....
Anyway tell me about deep paint 3d Send me a message or somthing I am interested in seeing what its all about....Did u use it to texture her....Is it good to use for high rez facial texture painting,,,,,I said no to digi cams a while back for that...but I am just not that great at painting the colour maps... So thats why I was curious about it?

[mayabigot]

Amazing!! Simply inspiring!

I love poser!!



Check out some of these amazing works in the poser gallery!
http://www.curiouslabs.com/

[sNaP]

That was my initial response when the image popped up. It screamed poser. Poser models stick out like a sore thumb.

If this is indeed your model, then you my friend rock.

Late!

[dvornik]

Sorry guys, there's nothing in this picture that appeals to me. Really cheasy. If she's actually modelled it's a waste of time and talent.

[santiago]

It looks quite Poser-ish. Specially judging by the wireframe of her face. But the body looks like NURBS, which is quite odd coming from 3DS MAX, having far superior polygon modelling tools.

I agree that there are perspective issues in this piece. Having such a deep knowledge in 3D figure modelling, you wouldn't expect mistakes in deceptively simple tasks like layering a background.

Can we see different angles of her head wireframe?

After modelling my first human figure in 3D (in 6 months), I continued by studying Poser models to create women. Since then I decided to abandon Poser altogether because I felt I didn't need it anymore, and found more efficient methods. So I can often detect a Poser model when I see it.
(I admit I still have so much to learn about figure modelling, by the way)

[ironbearxl]

dvornik: :thumbsdow, be nice!!!

Anatoliy: With this piece, the perspective problem can be fixed by raising the water level around the cliff base to that it doesnt end so abruptly into the foreground. As a matter of fact if the cliff connects into the background the foreground won't seem so cluttered.
The modeling is really nice, but I see a few problems such as her big shoulders and the disappearance of her rear thigh. You should take a look at Stahlberg's "phone girl" piece for reference.
Otherwise, I really like the colors and textures, along with the rest of it, the face modeling is done well too. :thumbsup: !!!

[Kaiser_Sose]

Originally posted by cdinic
I don't like it. The girl has no sense of depth, and the background is way below par around these parts.

however it is very origonal and I am inerested in exactly how it was produced.

-chris

Are you on crack

You do not like it, yet you want to know how it was made:surprised

[j3st3r]

Hello, it`s fine art realy.

I suppose, that most of the look of his images are done in Photoshop, looking at his earlier works. It looks like, that MAX render is just the base for his artwork, and lighgt are refined in PS or other painting app. It`s great technique for fine art production!

Hey Anatoliy! Did I suppose well?


Jester

[dvornik]

Originally posted by ironbearxl
dvornik: :thumbsdow, be nice!!!



Oh well, I went to the dude's website and I feel more sympathetic for him. I still don't think this particular piece is art. Come on, man. Looks like these chinese cotton miniatures with birds and and all of that. Cliffs, water, moon, curly branches... You know what I'm talking about?

[killcat]

nice!!!!

:thumbsup:

[derelict]

It looks quite Poser-ish. Specially judging by the wireframe of her face. But the body looks like NURBS, which is quite odd coming from 3DS MAX, having far superior polygon modelling tools.

hi santiago,

It could be coincidence that the wires may look like your poser you are refering too and the body is nurbs as you say. I am a junior (only 6 months old) in 3D, but might it not all be poligons like his other pcs? He too may have use poser as a reference, just like you in your early days.

As for me, comparing the wires of old from this chap. It looks finda original. If i'm wrong, too bad for him.

then again, he did such a nice piece all the same. ;)

Cheers.

[Teyon]

I personally like it. I'm not quite as floored as everyone else is by it but I do think it's great. As to the Poser comments, who gives a rat's ass? I mean, the entire point is the quality of the end product, yes? So if that means there had to be more than one tool used (and Max, Maya, SI, LW, Poser are all just tools) than so be it. To heck with the software snobbery and keep them images comin' I say.:thumbsup:

[j3st3r]

I don`t think mentioning Poser is sw snobbery. I do think using Poser is lessening the value of your work. You are working from pre-made models.

Anyway if an image looks good, it looks good. And usually the result is important. The way leading to the result is important for us, 3d artists.

I really do hate those Poser, face-gen, creature creator like utils, because it takes away the MEANING of the 3d art. The CREATION.

However, I like Anatoliy`s art!

Jester

[TilmanW]

That sums it up nicely j3st3r. I agree with your definition and the distinction between art and the creation of 3d art.

:beer:

I too think it is annoying from time to time how smaller galeries get flooded with poser imagery... (doesn't really happen here because most people here don't seem to use poser)

:hmm:

[aurora]

Fozzie was that you I saw at the Doc's while they where trying to my eyes back in their sockets?
I loved looking through the gallery and seeing the progress you have made with each new image. Keep up the great work.

[slaughters]

Originally posted by j3st3r
I don`t think mentioning Poser is sw snobbery. I do think using Poser is lessening the value of your work. You are working from pre-made models.
OK. How about 3D snobbery then ? I mean this is CG Talk, not 3D Talk.

I know of artists who use poser figures to block out the lighting and then show amazing artistic talents in using 2D paint programs to finish the art work. I mean just look at some of the winning entries at Renderosity.
http://www.renderosity.com/mp/SoftgoodImage12491a.jpg
http://www.renderosity.com/photos/GAL_200204/GalleryImage168963.JPG
http://www.renderosity.com/mp/SoftgoodImage12478a.jpg

etc..

Why the need to have everything done with a 3D rendering program in order to be considered a MEANINGFUL artist ?

[j3st3r]

Hey!

Who is more valuable artist? The artist who paints everything himself(or herself), or that one who uses pre-made templates? I give more value to a fully handpainted artwork, than to a templated one.

Anyway, I didn`t say, it`s not artwork. It is, but I`m sure, it takes more work to model it myself, etc. etc., and therefore it`s value is more.

It`s not snobbery. But a way of thinking.

And since I like Anatoliy`s artwork, I don`t care how he got it, but I`m interested in his technique!

Jester

[slaughters]

Originally posted by j3st3r
Hey!

Who is more valuable artist? The artist who paints everything himself(or herself), or that one who uses pre-made templates?
The one who makes the most pleasing image is the more valuable artist. Who cares what tools were used to create it ?

I also agree with you. I too like Anatoliy`s artwork, and also am interested in his technique.

[Adam]

I'm sorry. This is a good model but I just can't stand this style of 3d. It seems like mall, or calendar "art". It is super cheesy, lacks any orginality (we have all seen these types of pictures before), and has little emotion response to me. Also she seems to lack chacrter. She just seem to be any glorified woman figure. Oh and the whole idea is just a little ridiulous; A naked woman rapped in silk sitting next to the ocean at night. When I think of fine art like you people are refering to I think of art the envokes a feeling in the veiwer not just a render of attractive lady. Don't get me wrong it is great modeling and pretty okay texturing (great on the girl) but it dosen't push any limits for me.

As far a specifics technical problems.

The water ripple ratio needs to be fixed. The lighting is very strange (she is so bright and has little shadows). The tree should be larger or she should be smaller. The water texture looks way to soft and has very uncrisp highlights as well as seeming very solid and not even slightly transpant. The water needs the most technical work. Well that is about it.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to be to mean I just can't say it is my kind of art. I hope I don't receive massive bashing for this opposing crit. You are a great technical modeler. Just give you art more substance. envoke more feeling than just the brod idea of a naked fantasy woman.

[santiago]

I think that folks here are interested in either the art or the method, or both.

Anatoliy's end product looks good, although I still think that there is lack of depth and care of detail is greater in some parts than others. You also get the feeling that although it is one scene, it doesn't look like it, it looks more like a composite.

But from an artistic point of view, you can clearly notice the artist's intention, the mood is definitely expressed, the lighting is not adequate, but still enough.
It doesn't escape cliche in a sense, I feel that the piece could even be translated to a surreal context if the incorrect perspective could be justified with proper lighting, so that even though the objects are not proportional according to perspective... the lighting makes them look like they really have a relation to one another.

Concerning the Poser-style issue. I think the main concern is that although there's no problem with using templates or pre-made models for the artistic end, you should at least avoid that the end product look like a Poser clone. But that mainly goes for the 3D artist community, because if you show this to anyone not familiar with 3D modelling, they will never notice that it came from Poser (that is.. if Poser was actually used at all). They don't even know what Poser is.

Again, other artists here are in love with 3D, specifically 3D. I am almost in that line, but not entirely. So it may even feel like an insult to those who work really hard to have a true 3D model, and see othes get away with crossover methods.
Also, this is a piece of art intended for one single render, from one single view. It probably doesn't look good from other viewpoints. So I think the artist, Anatoliy, may be helpful in describing it as such. It is not a model for animation. We should appreciate it as just that.


Also, I believe someone made a distinction between 3D and CG.
O.k., I read this from a very technical book from Siggraph press called "The Computer Image".
CG, computer graphics, is the creation of imagery from zero using a computer (this is not a quote, I don't have the book, so I'm remembering)
In real world applications, this includes 3D and vectorial design.

Image processing refers to taking an image, and altering it in some way, so that you produce another image that is different than the original. That would be most of what Photoshop does, for example. So CG and Image processing are distinct. Perhaps that is why the term CGI is used, to encapsulate all imagery produced with computers, Computer Generated Imagery.

So from a technical point of view, Anatoliy has used both CG, and image processing techniques, with several different apps, not just 3DS MAX, to produce this one image.

Am I wrong Anatoliy?

[Laa-Yosh]

Well, in my opinion, if the main focus of your image is a character, and the character model is from Poser, then the credit does not go to you but to the artist who has originally created the Poser model.
If it's not about the character then fine, use Poser - but you should mention it. But in the end I consider Poser a kind of cheating - the creator of the image can avoid to learn about anatomy and such things this way... I dunno. Maybe we could think about it as the difference between sculpting and simply photographing people?

[misterboogie]

I agree that it's good art.

Although I am convinced that Anatoliy "does" use poser in these images and denies it.

1.He never shows in-progress shots of his girls or the methods used to create them.

2.He produces a wide variety of them in a very short time. It's almost as if he had a library of them?

The subject on wether poser is art or not is debatable. Personally it makes me ill when I see someone pimping a poser model as his own. For anyone who has attempted to create an all cg female I think that this would anger them as well.

I guess what I'm saying is, "don't claim what you didn't do."

What do you think Stahlberg, Morel, or Cortina would say?

[cdinic]

why hasn't the artist responded?

[Beastie]

Yea its alittle shady that the artist hasnt replied to any of this discussion. Makes me wonder about the images validity.

By the way: Does anyone know where i can find a good tutorial on mapping with unwrap uvw onto humanoid bodies in MAX? Sorry I posted that but I cant get an answer anywhere else. :cool:

[j3st3r]

Validity is not questionable.

My opinion is:
if he did the model, the credit is his. If not, it`s no problem at all, until it`s not claimed to be his.

Currently nobody can tell for sure, whether it`s a Poser model or not. And to be honest, I don`t like poser, and those funny body-part-assembler programs at all. It`s really like shoot a pic of statue. Then who is the credit owner? Eh, shit. This image looks good, I like it.


Jester

[TilmanW]

Originally posted by j3st3r
Validity is not questionable.

My opinion is:
if he did the model, the credit is his. If not, it`s no problem at all, until it`s not claimed to be his.
...
Jester

Hm. Stating that the image was made using 3d max, photoshop,.... I would see him saying that no other software was applied and in return claiming to have made everything himself. That maybe just me but I would understand it that way...

:hmm:

[Gnolt]

Has anyone that's accusing this guy of using poser, ever actually seen a poser mesh? A poser mesh is 20 times denser than the body or the head on this wireframe he posted.
Nice picture by the way. :thumbsup:

[Anatoliy]

How many time I must talk the same thing – I DON’T USE POSER!
Look close to wireview and you will see that.
POSERS WIRES HAVE ANOTHER STRUCTIRE!
All models always I make by my hands in 3DS Max.
I hate Poser and any generator – I live make all elements by my hand and I don’t like Poser’s figures in hi resolution.
Each time when I posted here my new image – each time the same again.
OK – here close view of she face. Is it Poser?!
http://www.3dluvr.com/fantasy3d/Night_wire_Head.gif
Here I place of simple animation (MPEG4-Low Motion-395kb) – not art clip – just simple the flight around model –for showing – that it’s not Photoshop.
http://www.3dluvr.com/fantasy3d/Night_animation.avi

I don’t change anything (only shader for the hairs – because with Shag shader – whey were to bright under any angles of view) and don’t prepare this scene special. I use Photoshop only for blurring and sometimes corrected with some touches some little points that I find in high resolution (about 2480 for small size), because I’m selling my art prints.

I ALWAYS use spline modeling. Of course when I starting new scene – I don’t begin from zero each time. I’m using my own models, when it’s possible, what I made before, correct and change they, make new texture. This scene I made 6 evening. I used the same model of women with some changes, of course as you can see, with other textures, what I used in Dark Angel http://www.epilogue.net/cgi/database/art/view.pl?id=18917
This technology give opportunity make fast new images. When I made the scene – usually I work only with one (some times two) file from beginning to the end.

About this images - yes maybe, need make more depth of field and make waves around the clefs smaller. But I don’t see any problem with tree. Trees can have different altitude. About light – of course this is not “true” light – in real life we can see only contour of somebody, when he or she placed between the moon and us. But this is not photo – this is fantasy art work and I like so.

[Kaiser_Sose]

Anatoliy,

Ignore all these putzes ... I have not seen this many whinning bitches since that puppy gave birth

You know what the truth is ... that is all what counts

[Nahaz]

Wow! Very impressive.

I think some people can scarcely believe their own eyes sometimes. :)

[Roach[MXF]]

I cant tell If it is Poser or not. I know I only work from scratch or from old models on all my work. I think a lot of people here tend to hop on the bandwagon and try their hardest to sound like they know what they are talking about but usually are just making asses of themselves. If you are taking credit for work you did not do then shame on you. If you didnt then great work man and I dont think this is a bad peice at all. When I first opened the thread I remember thinking "wow she has a vibrant expression on her face."(a smile can actually show depth of character btw), and as for her being "unorigional" who cares? she is atleast covering her vitals which as I recall many of the people saying these things tend to show tits or ass on their own as well. Anyway either great work, and keep it up, or stop stealing shit!! :surprised -jeremy-

[ggg]

Nice work, the softness makes it look possibly touched in pshop but your avi shows definativley its all achieved in 3d. the suspision is probably due to another recent thread. Well done.

Another suggestion might be to push/deform parts of the arm where it seems to lie against the legs.

[webfox]

The work is professional as illustration, though I've seen you get busted in the newgroups for using other peoples' photos and claming them as your own.

I saw the Britney Spears head/Boris or Julie Bell body in your gallery at http://www.3dluvr.com/7TgF1031383393s/fantasy3d/Afrodita.avi.

The work has a lot of projection maps that don't let true lighting take place in that image. The shine from lights in this avi follow as mapped to the model.

Work is work. You get paid for an illustration, you get paid. As long as the images you use are taken by yourself, and not copied off of the net, or created by your own hand, then the work is original.

But, to show integrity as an artist, you need to use original images.

[Ckerr812]

You people should be ashamed! Fine art anywhere should be appreciated....no matter how they made it! The original idea was made, then it is GREAT art to me!

[Ckerr812]

The only comment I would have is that the shoulder blade is WAY..out of proportion.....but other then that...AWSOME!

She looks so happy to be in a place like that....The mood, the atmosphere....the water....The moonlight....Just how she is dressed...it invites you to the picture so well...that I love it!

[santiago]

The author of the artpiece has spoken.
I choose to believe Anatoliy, and give him all the credit for his artwork.

I trust that he understands the reason for the comments regarding Poser. It's natural to suspect that an artist has taken shortcuts when you haven't actually seen how he has done it.
But we must not forget what trust is all about.
If Anatoliy says that he made it all, then I believe him.

Judging by the closer wireframe image of the face, I can tell that the face structure is not that of Poser.
It definitely uses splines, like Anatoliy says. That explains the differnce of structure between the torso and head, they are just spline-generated surfaces where the face has a greater density of splines, making it look polygonal from far away.

I might recommend Anatoliy to make a webpage of his work in progress, like what I'm doing on my site, in case someone wants to know how it was actually created:
http://www.user.dccnet.com/santiago/

Look at the "Cazadora - Work in progress" pages.

This way I'll avoid any doubts of the legitimacy of my work.
Syomka's done something like that posting his model detail by detail before making a final thematic artpiece with his female model (If that's what he has planned):
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14912

It's also easy to believe that he modelled her, not only because most of us already know his high quality artwork, but because there is no way that his female model has any relation to Poser, or any other premade model generators. It has too much character and emotion to be associted with premade models.

Congratulations Anatoliy!
Keep up the good work!

[Ckerr812]

ok

[TilmanW]

To Anatoliy:

Good thing you replied to the talk that has been going on here.

I had started to get doubts myself. Now that you've explained things and given more information I believe you. Great work!

I think that some people here owe you real big appologies, I hope they'll have the guts to step up and say them out loud.

[j3st3r]

I`m glad that Anatoliy answered. There is no doubt about HIS artwork anymore.

Anyway, since I like learning from technical description, I`d like to see a detailed breakdown of your technique. I think everybody would welcome such a tutorial.

Keep on, Anatoliy!

Jester

[TilmanW]

Originally posted by j3st3r
Anyway, since I like learning from technical description, I`d like to see a detailed breakdown of your technique. I think everybody would welcome such a tutorial.


I would! :bounce:
I would! :bounce:
I would! :bounce:

[visualasylum]

Man,

it's incredible to read all those "jealous" "envious" people writing BS about an artist, Judging and talking crap!

There's a huge difference in a constructive crit and a deconstructive crit. Ask your art or sculpt teacher if you will.

What really pissed me off is that people assume things without even hearing what the artist has to say.
Shame on all of you!

Anatoli, be sure that at the end of the day, eventhough they talk trash, you come up Head high with honor, cause you proved to yourself to be a great artist, so my advice to you is " Keep it up"!!
The more they talk trash, the more it pushes you to go ahead and refine your art work.

And so what if someone uses poser? But manage to map/texture/light and rig it and animate it in less time that you can do it from scratch? Does it make you any better digital artist?

Well I tell you what, nowadays, companies are looking for allaround CG artists, so whoever who knows more tools and can produce faster CG gets the job. time is money!

Anatoli ...rock on!

cheers,

:thumbsup:

[Cman]

The little animation also explained somewhat why she looks huge. The castle appears to be maybe 6-feet away from her! That explains why the waves near the cliff are so big, becase IT IS so close!

But as he said, it's fantasy, so why not!?

[anim8r2]

Anatoliy,

I never thought it was a poser model. I actually used poser about 2 or so years ago and dropped it because the models were so sloppy (poly-wise, though I must admit, it was poser4). I wish I had seen these posts earlier and had been able to say this.

Anyway, after seeing the anim, I know why the perspective is so off. You should be able to put in some fog (even at this close of a range) and haze the objects in the background to give them some non-linear perspective. At least they will look way off in the distance. Just a suggestion.

(Hey did you notice you were put in the same class as Stephen Stahlberg--Wow!)

[j3st3r]

Hey guys, let`s think on few things.

CG is art. CG is a tool. Using Poser is no problem, I think, if credit is not taken for the character model. It`s just like using a photo as reference to make a painting.

But I`m sure, that the people who makes his model on his own is greater artist, than the one who uses pre-made model.

That one who uses pre-made models is valuable on the fileds of staging, texturing, lighting, etc. But the on who can model, is valuable as modeller as well.

And if you look carefully around the thread, you might see a lot of crap works. And you might see cheaters, who try to convince the community of their skill. I remember a guy, who posted an image of a tattooed girl. Later it was uncovered by another user, that both the model, and textures were default materials from a Poser pack.

So don`t judge the doubtful people. They are careful as well. For those, who are modellers, and like modelling, Poser is a forbidden area. As for me, also. If we are talking of ART, then time doesn`t matter. Only artistic skill counts.

Keep on Anatoliy.


Jester

[sNaP]

I only asked if it was Poser, I didn't accuse. I would really like to see some WIP shots though, or just the model of the chick herself. Not doubting, just want to get an idea of how he went about creating it. How about posting an image of the spline cage?

And, to everyone that says using Poser is ok. Using Poser is ok, if, and only if, 3D is a hobby to you. If you are truly serious about 3D, and want to make it a career, then Poser is a huge mistake.

Take this as you will, but I'm not just talking out my ass here, I do this stuff for a living :)

late!

[anim8r2]

Oh yeah, I just want to say I wasn't pointing fingers (I agree with you J3st3r, on all of your points--using templates or generating all of your own art are 2 completely different things, the guy who does it all is THE artist, the one who uses other people's work to make his comp is part of a TEAM and credits need to be given to all participants). Someone posted a poser character on another forum, and I agreed with the bashing he received (so did he after admitting it) because he emphatically claimed it as his own. So yes, I'm also a little skeptical of others' art to a point.

S'anyway, everyone should be prepared to defend their work (and at the same time enjoy the compliments) when their fellow artists request proof. There shouldn't be hang ups concerning these questions. I absolutely loved it when I received e-mails or comments on my work that were under suspect. Just meant people thought it was REALLY good.
How many times have you beamed when someone asked "Did you do that?"

Anatoliy,
You really should be proud of your modeling skills when so many thought it was good enough to be a poser model (teams of artists work on these characters).:thumbsup:

[visualasylum]

I'm not a sculpter or into area of body sculpting, but I don't find anything wrong using Poser as a tool for constructing my models.

It's about what you make it in the end. To you it may be art, but to survive in the industry you need to think as a business man.

In the reallife you need to deliver on deadlines, otherwise you will vanish. Take FinalFantasy the movie for example: the best work ever created, got many awards for pushing the envelope.
One mistake, script wasn't too bad, but got trashed by the movie critters, and ended up not gettting a big audience, and ended losing money...and soon after had to close their Hawai division.

My point Poser just like any program, is a tool. I wouldn't use a poser model to rig a animated character, but I would build my model using a posermodel t build my final model. And I would never take credit for saying I modeled it from scratch, but I would
take that modeling time and spend it in finishing and detailing. Cause in the end the client doesn't care if it was modeled from scratch or with some other help templates. For them is eyecatching and final delivery that counts.


cheers,

[khanshaw]

I am very impressed! Beautiful use of color and light. I am a traditional artist and I see a hint of traditional art in you...am i right? very well done.:buttrock:

[ggg]

so if Square used Poser, FF would have made money? ;)

[visualasylum]

no but I am.

[anim8r2]

visualasylum,

I agree with most of your arguments. I had to use poser because I needed 5 characters in a hurry. But the poser program still got credited (even though I spent almost 5 days cleaning the appalling geometry, and then had to surface everything). I don't see a problem with artists using poser as a tool. I do see a problem when people say "here's a piece of my art, what do you think?" that is VERY misleading and IS taking credit for other people's work.

The problem really is the fact that generally, the artwork is focusing on the character in the scene. So if you say this is your art, it is implied that you created the character and not just the bush in the far right corner.

Imagine if someone made a very cool car (like that awesome avatar of mine :)) and then got their hands on a Stephen Stahlberg mesh, composited the two and submitted it in his portfolio without mentioning Stephen's contribution. Would you consider this an honest piece in his portfolio, even if Stephen sold him the mesh?

On the point of using poser as a background reference for you own modeling. I really don't think that is much of an issue. Eventually, the piece will take on qualities of it's own from you the new creator. Even influential artists through the ages have used tracings, grids (wood-framed wire grids in the OLD days), lightboxes, etc. for aids and references. I use pictures, you use models, I don't see much of a difference. Still, there is no substitute for handsketching your own TNs and using these as references.

But this is just MO.

[Grey]

To ANYONE accusing anyone of using a Poser mesh:

I am the author of part of the Poser 4 manual, which I wrote in early 1999. (You'll find me credited as Ian Grey with Eric Vera right behind the Title page of the manual)

I was also one of two Beta Testers for Zygote's very famous Victoria model. It was me, Ian Grey, and Erik Van Dyke (also known as Traveller), who Zygote signed on to beta test her on my recomendation. (It's now marketted by DAZ3D, but still owned by Zygote).

I can tell you right now, I would have spotted a Poser mesh very fast.

Anatoly is not using a Poser mesh.

[santiago]

Here's a Poser mesh, presented as an original model, very sad story, this is what we were fearing. Good thing that Anatoliy defended himself well:

http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14945&perpage=15&pagenumber=5

I have nothing against Poser, sadly over a quarter of this thread has content related to authenticity of artwork. But you know, if you post CGI in other galleries like Epilogue, visitors will not be so concerned about how it was created. They just love to see fantasy and sci-fi art, which is a spirit that ocassionaly fades away here in Cg Talk, I realized that of myself, and wondered why can't I just enjoy the art.

But hey, this is a forum for CG artists and enthusiasts. Expect to see even more of this deep concern of how artwork is created. I'm pretty sure that Anatoliy wasn't expecting any of those Poser-related comments in this thread. I find it quite edifying, an experience to learn from.

This forum site seems to be maturing.

Oh, and I think I forgot to offer Anatoliy and everyone else here my appologies in case I was out of line in anything I posted... I hope I wasn't.

[Beastie]

Actually I think the ideas expressed in this thread were good. I think that an issue was brought up through in this thread that is a concern among all artist these days. The way we look at art and perceive it has changed as technology has brought about mass production. And now digital art has made this concern even greater. If its re-produced, is it good or bad? Since art itself is subjective to begin with, we are all entitled to our own opinions. I just wanted to let everyone know I enjoyed this thread. It proves once again that same point about art. It's right for the people who enjoy "the process" of art to be unsatisfied with poser-like models and its also right for someone to enjoy art merely for its asthetics. Everybody is right. The only thing that is wrong is criticizing an artist. :D

[anim8r2]

Well Big D,
I agree with most of your post. This has been interesting and informative. Too bad this discussion had to occur on a great modeler's. But, I disagree slightly with your last statement. I think you're right if someone just comes in and says "This sucks." That's as helpful as throwing a squirt gun to a guy drowning (and as insulting). But, if you're purpose is to offer legit criticism, I say go for it. I enjoy constructive critism more than praise (granted, not at first, but it is the only thing that forces me to improve my artwork). In the long run, taking criticism is what makes a good artist a great one. Anyone posting any bit of artwork on this or any other forum must be aware that someone will eventually flame him/her. But, the criticism and praise from others more than justify the willingness to post.
I usually agree with the criticism geared at others and at me.

[Lunatique]

For those of you that bashed on the subject matter of his piece:

Depicting feminine beauty, since the beginning of human civilization, has been one of the most challenging subject matters in art. Mono Lisa anyone? Look at the Pre-Raphaelites, they practically built an entire art movement around it(of course feminine beauty is only one aspect of Pre-Raphaelite, but a very dominant one). Same thing with the neo-classists like Bouguereau, Waterhouse, Dicksee, Alma-Tadema, Lord Leighton..etc.

So, what's so wrong with depicting feminine beauty with your art?

[j3st3r]

Since judging art is subjective, the way of doing art is subjective also. Therefore, I`m not interested, if an artwork is assembled from prebuilt material, or it was done from the scratch.

Since I`m more of a modeller, than a lighting specialist, I am interested in modelling part. That`s why I don`t like poser. I do like every small vertex in my models, and I love the feeling when the model takes form, and begin to resemble to the design, and so.

I`m not against recycling artwork. Sometimes the deadlines are so tight, that you need to recycle. But I would never use other`s work in my PERSONAL artwork. But it`s me, because I`m a modeller. If I would be a texturing god(des), than I would not care of this issue, but create a stunning texturing job, and take credit for texturing.

The thread became independent of Anatoliy`s artwork, although his great image was the sparkle. I`m glad, that it happened. It`s important to understand each other.

Good work to all!


Jester

[visualasylum]

Some info I posted here regarding beautifull face modeling.

http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=186262#post186262

cheers,

Greg

[tom]

very very very veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery veryvery very...nice work!
beautiful girl!!

[kryo3d]

...I fall in love with this woman....:love:

your work is amazing....

[lmc]

hmm....still have something wrong....do u feel that?!
however,good job:applause:

[Kaiser_Sose]

Originally posted by TilmanW
To Anatoliy:

Good thing you replied to the talk that has been going on here.

I had started to get doubts myself. Now that you've explained things and given more information I believe you.

And who the f_ck are you

[TilmanW]

Originally posted by Kaiser_Sose
And who the f_ck are you

I'm not going down to your level but maybe you can explain your awfully inteligent post? :shrug:

[Anatoliy]

Thanks to many people, who like my art.
The answers to many questions you can receive from my interview:
http://artworks.avalonweb.net/interviews/meymuhin.htm

[typeA]

kinda looks like a poser model to me...if its not sorry and good frickin job

[Anatoliy]

This is not Poser

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.