John Locke - LOST, Eduardo Oliden (3D)

[knekker]

I would tune down the bump map on his skin, just slightly. A very minor issue is that, you can see the Vray area light quadangel reflecting in his eyes.

Otherwise very nice modelling and rendering I love the various colors, you given to his skin. Did you use SSS for the eyes?

[Fox]

I like modeling, look like him. just shading could be improved.
***** from me

[Eclectic]

Very good! It definitely looks like John Locke.:thumbsup:
Textures are strangely streched at the nose and DOF is a bit strong, but everything else is fine. Nice and realistic work!

[Jaimote]

Hi "sir"3dmind:

Amazing piece of work as always, he really looks like Locke, what can I say. :)


Un abrazo gordo tío, cinco estrellas como la mahou nen.

Jaime

[ArneK]

Great likeness! No problem seeing who it is.

As mentioned, the bump and DOF is a little too much and could be toned down a little.

Also the highlight reflection in the eye is a little bit off. The background is a forest and his eye reflects more a square studio light setup. If you had a forest type of HDR image reflect in his eyes as well, it would integrate the character more with the background.

Overall top notch work! Keep it up! :)

[turx]

wow, i like it! very accurate modeling!

[Rlloret]

Hi!

Superb work, men! I love the modeling and texturing.

Do you think in an animation?

[darkviews]

Great work on this. Looks almost like real. One other thing that you might want to look at is the reflection in the eyes... if your outside your not going to get a box reflection. ^^

Keep up the great work.

[whoknows]

Good work!! 4****'s the only element missing from locke is a bit of
AA (I would recommend at least 4X4)

[islaSyr]

nice model

A new great image added to the photographs world..

[CBillustration]

Very good likeness :thumbsup:, the lighting and the facial features give an ominous feel, fits the show/character well. NICE ONE!

[mattia242]

It looks like John Locke but too much DOF and bump. And you have to change the reflections in the eyes. but great works!:thumbsup:

[irananimator]

hey Eduardo!
Frontpage!
Great Work!

Hamed katebi

[BlockMind]

Looks great! 4 stars.

[THE-SAMURAI-LEADER]

Woooooooow. you have done a fantastic work. But i Don't know why I feel there is something missing. But you know what, you desserve five stars.
and Jhon Lock i think he is the best character in this TV show. You chose the right character.


GoooooD Luck and keep it Forward.

[niksoftarg]

Very well done, I agree with the guys about the shader, but the expresion, the look, the eyes, is simply perfect, you really got it....congrats....5 stars from me....

[Klicek]

hi there :)

great modeling and rendering ! i think you should add an extra oiliness on skin :)
5*

ps. next time make mr eko :D

[PMD]

I'm all for constructive criticism, but there's some serious nit-picking going in this thread. This is absolutely breathtaking modelling - the likeness you've captured is uncanny. It's one thing to create a realistic human head, but to create one of a character most of us would recognise from 100 yards, and have it hold up to such close scrutiny - incredible. Truly remarkable.

[Robbiestyle]

actually the only thing i can say is, doesn't locke have a very noticable scar under his right eye? It always sticks out to me because the actual actor doesn't have this scar and i'm always amazed how real it looks on the show. great work man. I would have been freaked to attempt such a recognizable character but you did an amazing job. congrats!

r

[OSBOURNE]

wonderful Modelling and Texturing

[logante]

Great job Edu, no doubt.

Five Stars,

L.:bounce:

[Karkadan]

Hi...
Nice Job

But it looks like you have attached the head to this image!!! how did you do it? can you show us some wire to help understad witch part is 3D and whats not, is it a projection?

thank you

http://www.derok.net/derok/images/entertainment/lost%20terry%20o'quinn.jpg

[Sir3DMIND]

Thank you for all your comments.

Robbiestyle: You are right abour the scar. I´m planing to animate him so I´m on time to include that detail. Thank you

mattia242, darkviews: Maybe you are right about the bump and it´s a little bit exagerated. Nice detail the thing about the reflection in the eye, Thank you ;)

Rlloret: Yes, I´m planing to animate it. Now I´m working in the facial setup, so I´ll post the animation asap. Gracias por tu ayuda!

Here you have a wire of the model.

http://www.3dmind.org/Foros/Locke_Wire.jpg

Thank you again!

[living_for_cg]

its fantastic jooOOooob:scream:...
congratulations!!!

[Johnnybiped]

Muy bueno tío. 5 stars. ;)

Un saludo.

[guillom]

really nice man !

it's him for sure

a bit of work on the shader can stille be done but that's already very good

take care my friend

[FabioMSilva]

really nice! His eyes are so expressive. And i love the lighting too.

[renaissance01]

I am a big fan of lost and this piece is spot on. I love the eyes and skin textures although the bump map could be reduced a little. ***** from me :)

[MatteoM]

wow... it's fantastik work...

great :thumbsup:


mat

[ap3pilot]

Terrific work mate:buttrock: , seems a tad too bright and should add John's scar down his right eye

[Josemaya]

Very good work Edu. I like the modeling and the textures

Saludos y 5 estrellas para el Edu

[PERSIAN-ART]

very very nice job:thumbsup: _________3star

[Lman]

Good work a 5 star image to be sure, cant wait for more, :)

-Liam

[jojo1975]

Locke is my favorite :) Cool hope to see an animation soon ;)

[Edji]

*is falling down of the chair*

Impressive !! really ! Like a photo ! very very impressive.

Five stars for me.

How did you make him so real ?? textures ? lights ? How many path of texture did you use ?
An how many times did it take you for all the work ?

[gtbannas]

Gread work, I had a double take.

Actually to me the bump looks like real skin.. DOF might need a little tweaking

[KrakenCMT]

Good likeness and fairly accurate model, but how much of the "realness" is from the texture and shading already present in the original photo? Your lighting scheme is almost identical to the photo. And the texture map looks like it was added straight on from the photo with front projection mapping. It's even the same angle. I'd be much more impressed if you could do a render from another angle and the model was just as good. Still, well done.

[Elinewton]

Great face modeling!!
Congratulations!!

[patrickmiller]

looks awesome, I dont think the bump map needs tuning down at all, The quadrangle in the eye reflection is noticeable, but so what, the render is freaking awesome. great stuff!

[jgriffin]

Great work Eduardo!

[comic-craig]

Now it may sound like I'm a hater- but the truth is I am really amazed by this piece of art. What strikes me funny is that I keep seeing images of Locke in digital art- seems like everybody wants to do a recreation. maybe its the whole bald thing- I know I would prefer not having to worry about hair. Anyways- this image is amazing- nothing but love.

Actually one more question- how do you do it? I mean- it amazes me how some works like this are so much like the real person- what kind of things are you looking for when you try to capture thier character.... I assume its a lot more then just tracing. Why does your image look so right... but other works, even so called pro works (the Rock in the Mummy returns comes to mind) look so wrong?

Congrats on the top shelf. 5 stars
Craig

[Dekus]

Oh my.... That is Soo realistic! simply amazing...

[Sir3DMIND]

Thank you for all your commets.

The picture don´t have any special secret. I´ve used part of the photograph I´ve use as reference for the texture and complete it with others. I need him to look ok all sides because now I´m working on the facial setup to make a small animation with him (maybe someone call him and he turns the head and do some gestures, I don´t know). That means that I still can add or change some of the things all you comment me: turn down a little bit the bump, the reflection of the eye, too much light in the head,........and of course add the scar in the right eye, jajajaja.

Now I´m finishing a proyect were I work so I don´t have much time to do things at home, but I´ll finish asap.

Thank you again

[Trinnity]

WOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWW!!:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Absolutely beautiful work...the textures are impressive

Congrats..Well done my friend!!:thumbsup:



Niñoooooooooooooo....que ya sabes que esta de la leche...OLE!!:eek: :eek: :eek:

Felicidades por ese peazo frontpage ahora a por la galeria!!!:buttrock:

Besazos!!

Rebe

[manum]

ey Edu nice model and render :D
Felicidades por el frontpage :D


Un saludo tio

[BUDATHOME]

Hey, dude..congrats!!! it´s amazing ..maybe a little critic:The diference between sharpen areas and blur areas...it´s look strange.

Pero vamos, por decir algo porque está muy bien.Especialmente en cuanto al parecido porque está clavao.

Felicidades,macho,eres un maquina.

[Guanny]

Hey!

Great work mate, I can´t wait to see the facial animation.:thumbsup:
¡Congrats for this front page!

Que pacha tron, ¿como molas no?. Esta muy guapo tio, se parece mogollon.
Le falta el toquecillo del skin shader:) ,ya sabes... yo siempre con el tema shaders, je, je.

Un abrazo

[SafeZone]

I may be new here, but that render is so realistic it blows my mind,
only thing is the extreme similarity it has to that photograph karkadan posted it makes me wonder how difficult it would be to photoshop that photograph and make the same image...

then again maybe i dont know what im talking about...I'm only a recent (2 yrs) hobbyist, not a professional

[dickma]

Sorry if I am wrong.

Compare to your existing render and the wire mesh provided, I think the wire mesh is too simplified, I notice there is no hard edge creases between the cheeks and the mouth area, or the lips are too flat in your wire mesh. I can expect the Turbosmooth or Meshsmooth result will not be too detail like the one in render. Unless you have Zbrush used to enhance the details or the texture is just a projection.

Still I have doubts about it and I need more evidence to prove that you create this image, like a displacement map. Otherwise I think it is a fraud.

[MarcGoecke]

Wow! That's great! I did recognize him even on the thumbnail.

:thumbsup:

[Karkadan]

Good likeness and fairly accurate model, but how much of the "realness" is from the texture and shading already present in the original photo? Your lighting scheme is almost identical to the photo. And the texture map looks like it was added straight on from the photo with front projection mapping. It's even the same angle. I'd be much more impressed if you could do a render from another angle and the model was just as good. Still, well done.

Again good technical efforts...

But I agree with what you are saying totally, if you have done a projection, it will be difficult to move the camera...!!! and thats not a good way to re create a portrait, u are really just using the original image, it is just a technical solution when you need to have a quick look to match up with an original seen.


also I can see clearly where you have attached Bump textures... Sharp image verses the base image or the original photo. So I would say, not artistically impressive, Just a Quick old technical way to have an images created using the original as a foundation to build on ... so this is NOT an impression or anything creatively new, also the fact that LOST is a Big show, that I love.... and the actor in the image is one of the Key people on the show, I think your not allowed to use such a high profiled image and say it is a creation... I would say, Change the lights, change the angle , and really let it look different from the original image on the net, unless you have taken that shot your self and have full rights to use it.

Good luck!!

[dickma]

Again good technical efforts...

But I agree with what you are saying totally, if you have done a projection, it will be difficult to move the camera...!!! and thats not a good way to re create a portrait, u are really just using the original image, it is just a technical solution when you need to have a quick look to match up with an original seen.


also I can see clearly where you have attached Bump textures... Sharp image verses the base image or the original photo. So I would say, not artistically impressive, Just a Quick old technical way to have an images created using the original as a foundation to build on ... so this is NOT an impression or anything creatively new, also the fact that LOST is a Big show, that I love.... and the actor in the image is one of the Key people on the show, I think your not allowed to use such a high profiled image and say it is a creation... I would say, Change the lights, change the angle , and really let it look different from the original image on the net, unless you have taken that shot your self and have full rights to use it.

Good luck!!

You have a better eyesight than me, Karkadan.

Yes, it is meaningless to use a projection by creating this image, and not by starting it from nothing. I think it is violated the CGS rules.

Can a moderator help us to prove it is an original creation?

[brro]

wonderful manimages/icons/icon13.gifimages/icons/icon13.gifimages/icons/icon13.gif....i think the t-shirt is too thick...the bump is high too..may be you should give the bump map a little bit of blur....i think the white light is high ( give it some color like some yellow )....in the end you have talents my friendimages/icons/icon10.gifimages/icons/icon13.gif.

[Arrrgh4life]

Wow! Looks really good, especialy the hair. Just whats up with all the John Lockes we have been seing latley. He seems to be a pretty popular character to model or paint.

[thedoc]

very nice... the likeness is excellent. you get five stars from me... he looks a little pale though.

[JurajMolcak]

You have a better eyesight than me, Karkadan.

Yes, it is meaningless to use a projection by creating this image, and not by starting it from nothing. I think it is violated the CGS rules.

Can a moderator help us to prove it is an original creation?

Well, maybe moderators wanted to focus on this, that´s why this one is plugged. But there is one bigger issue with all your doubts - you can see what I mean in new ZBrush 3 video... Very soon, there will be tons of such a "highly" created images. That is the way our tools are developing. Cheers :thumbsup:

Edit: And, to be honest, I don´t want to jump on that train. Better to use my canvas, acrylic and brushes than...

[dickma]

Well I disagree with you, Oweron.

It is not about the modern technology can do such work. Yes the technology help us a lot to create more realism. The problem is: should we appreciate that if a guy use a projection-mapping method on this and without paying efforts on techniques?

Everyone can do this to replicate that, projection mapping on a basic model, without using shaders, or drawing texture. Just use the original high-rez image and push the illumination to 100% and render without lights and shadows... and it is done. But what does it mean? How much effort is put in the work?

OK, I just feel very disappointed about some people still act as fan boys, when I raised a doubt. Where's your brain and judgement ability?

[AJ]

I agree with others here - there's simply no way (other than with additional displacement) that your model has enough detail around the mouth or lips to hold the detail you show in your finished render.

Overlaying your render with your 'source' shows that it matches almost perfectly - just with stronger lighting.

http://www.cgdo.com/Found.gif

[drummer]

amazing rendering!
keep it up bro!

Marco

[R-K]

cool render, but John Locke was an english philosopher ishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke :twisted:

[KHALID]

Well I disagree with you, Oweron.

It is not about the modern technology can do such work. Yes the technology help us a lot to create more realism. The problem is: should we appreciate that if a guy use a projection-mapping method on this and without paying efforts on techniques?

Everyone can do this to replicate that, projection mapping on a basic model, without using shaders, or drawing texture. Just use the original high-rez image and push the illumination to 100% and render without lights and shadows... and it is done. But what does it mean? How much effort is put in the work?

OK, I just feel very disappointed about some people still act as fan boys, when I raised a doubt. Where's your brain and judgement ability?



I couldn't agree with you more... nicely said... all points are important and well made.



I agree with others here - there's simply no way (other than with additional displacement) that your model has enough detail around the mouth or lips to hold the detail you show in your finished render.

Overlaying your render with your 'source' shows that it matches almost perfectly - just with stronger lighting.

http://www.cgdo.com/Found.gif


WOW!! that matches up... Identically!!! not sure if this is good or bad Thou;)

Love the Show!! Love the actor.. ;)

[JurajMolcak]

Well I disagree with you, Oweron.

It is not about the modern technology can do such work. Yes the technology help us a lot to create more realism. The problem is: should we appreciate that if a guy use a projection-mapping method on this and without paying efforts on techniques?

Everyone can do this to replicate that, projection mapping on a basic model, without using shaders, or drawing texture. Just use the original high-rez image and push the illumination to 100% and render without lights and shadows... and it is done. But what does it mean? How much effort is put in the work?

OK, I just feel very disappointed about some people still act as fan boys, when I raised a doubt. Where's your brain and judgement ability?

Hm, I understand and agreed that. I just thought, if the guy wants to make some animation on this face (as he mentioned), it also could be just very stright texture position ( and such a "fake it" stuff is going to be very popular thanx to new crazy clone tools ). That´s it. But morph provided by AJ_23 looks really scary :deal:

[SergioSantos]

Sorry man, but if I look at the original and the mesh that you provide I think you made a "nice" photo fake.

I agree with other people here, you should post the model without the texture and in different angles and lightings.

...no photo fakes allowed in CGTalk...

[KrakenCMT]

Yeah, I'm all for using good reference, but the reference shouldn't become 90% of the final piece.

[Rebeccak]

I plugged the image, but have removed the plug since there is a bit of questioning going on about the image's authenticity. I'll give the artist the benefit of the doubt and have emailed him to post here if he has used a projection map. Please do not attack this artist as it was my choice to plug his image. The artist is free to post other views to demonstrate that the image was not achieved through projection mapping.

-Rebeccak

[dickma]

Hm, I understand and agreed that. I just thought, if the guy wants to make some animation on this face (as he mentioned), it also could be just very stright texture position ( and such a "fake it" stuff is going to be very popular thanx to new crazy clone tools ). That´s it. But morph provided by AJ_23 looks really scary :deal:

I think you didn't learn from my writing, Oweron. AJ_23 has prove that it is a replicate and I don't understand why you didn't treat it as fraud.

Despite from Mr Eduardo replicating problem, his original mesh may be too simple to work on animation. I wonder if Mr John Locke is able to brink his eyes with his simple mesh.

Why I am angry about this because I don't understand why he was "frontpaged" I am also working on Hugh Laurie, "HOUSE"

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=43&t=430445&page=4

And I am really working from nothing to something and should CGTalk preserve a frontpage for me? because at least I work harder and smarter than Mr Eduardo.

[PMD]

Please do not attack this artist as it was my choice to plug his image.
-Rebeccak

Thanks for posting that, Rebeccak - the guy has done nothing to deserve the gleeful baying of the wolves in this thread. Jesus, folks. Waaaay over the top by some of you.

[Rebeccak]

dickma,

Your points have been made, thank you, there's no need to continue the argument.

PMD,

No problem, I'll accept the mistake as mine if the image was created using projection mapping. Again, there's no fundamental sin in using a tool, its use just doesn't meet the criteria for a front page image, and that choice was mine and not the artist's, so there is no need for further bashing or of saying the image is fake. Let's let the artist respond.

Cheers,

-Rebeccak

[KrakenCMT]

Thanks for posting that, Rebeccak - the guy has done nothing to deserve the gleeful baying of the wolves in this thread. Jesus, folks. Waaaay over the top by some of you.

I haven't seen any real "gleefull baying attacks" made. Just honest curiosity about the authenticity of the image.

No problem, I'll accept the mistake as mine if the image was created using projection mapping. Again, there's no fundamental sin in using a tool, its use just doesn't meet the criteria for a front page image, and that choice was mine and not the artist's, so there is no need for further bashing or of saying the image is fake.

Actually, I wasn't initially going to bring this up, because I hate making waves, but it may not be a sin to use just a tool. But there's more going on here. A rule of thumb in copyright law is holding the derivitive piece up next to the original. And if you can say it was undoubtably derived from the original, then there's an issue. Then on top of that add that if there's no mention that an artist used said reference, then there's another issue.

These could all be honest mistakes and new posts would clarify this, but there's nothing wrong with questioning it. It helps keep the forum free from infringers.

Edit: Given the guy posted images here before without incident, I'm inclined to believe this really is an honest mistake, and should be treated as such. But this is a public forum where people place their art and advertise it as their own, so these issues need to be kept in mind.

[Rebeccak]

Actually, I wasn't initially going to bring this up, because I hate making waves, but it may not be a sin to use just a tool. But there's more going on here. A rule of thumb in copyright law is holding the derivitive piece up next to the original. And if you can say it was undoubtably derived from the original, then there's an issue. Then on top of that add that if there's no mention that an artist used said reference, then there's another issue.

These could all be honest mistakes and new posts would clarify this, but there's nothing wrong with questioning it. It helps keep the forum free from infringers.
No I agree with you. I think that your points are good ones, and artists need definitely to bear them in mind.

[Sir3DMIND]

Hi everybody.

I see there are a lot of polemic about my picture. I´ll try to explain.

The front part of the texture is based on the picture everybody is talking about, I can´t say nothing to that, but this is not enough for me, because I´m planing to do an animation (working now on the facial setup) with him and in that case it´s not enough use this picture as a texture. I think that my mistake is to put the picture before finishing the animation and complete the texture so everybody can see him from more sides and with different gestures.

I understand if CGTalk has to take out the picture from the front page, If I have to be honest I didn´t thought this picture was going to be there.

I´ll keep working on the animation and post it when I finished it, so everyboy can see that the model is complete and has more work that only project a photograph on it.

Thank you

[Rebeccak]

Sir3DMIND,

No problem, thank you for that clarification. :)

Cheers,

-Rebeccak

[IkerCLoN]

I don't understand some opinions in here. I respect them, of course, but some other talented and very-known artists, such Antropus, have done the same technique you're complaining on now: using a front texture map and some others to build the displacement and shader of one head model. And you all were very impressed of their skills!!! So what's the point in here? Everyone is guilty until he/she proves they are not?

In the other hand, Dickma, I think it's not professional to say this...

Why I am angry about this because I don't understand why he was "frontpaged" I am also working on Hugh Laurie, "HOUSE"

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthr...t=430445&page=4 (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=43&t=430445&page=4)

And I am really working from nothing to something and should CGTalk preserve a frontpage for me? because at least I work harder and smarter than Mr Eduardo.

I'm not going to start a flame wars here, because it's not worth. But dude, seriously this is not the way to promote yourself: trying to destroy other people's work because your is not as recognized as theirs.

Next time you post a message, I suggest you to read the four points above the posting box. Specially number four :) Everything will work better, dude.

Salut!

[valeoart]

Great portrait! The skin shader looks a bit strange but overall is amazing! You can share some details about skin shader? :) ****

[dickma]

I don't understand some opinions in here. I respect them, of course, but some other talented and very-known artists, such Antropus, have done the same technique you're complaining on now: using a front texture map and some others to build the displacement and shader of one head model. And you all were very impressed of their skills!!! So what's the point in here? Everyone is guilty until he/she proves they are not?

In the other hand, Dickma, I think it's not professional to say this...



I'm not going to start a flame wars here, because it's not worth. But dude, seriously this is not the way to promote yourself: trying to destroy other people's work because your is not as recognized as theirs.

Next time you post a message, I suggest you to read the four points above the posting box. Specially number four :) Everything will work better, dude.

Salut!

IkerCLoN,

I'll more cautious about that next time. as I don't want to start a flame too. However, I do not want to change anything that I've said before, just Rebeccak didn't fast enough to end it up.

I don't think my aim is to destroy other people's work and promote myself. He destroy himself on his own. If it is a WIP, post in WIP session please. I don't want to guess his intentions about why he post it in the Finish Work gallery, whatever he had a good or bad reason to that. What if I didn't discover the fraud (I can't get full credit from this), and he keeps receiving apprauds from the other's, will he learn a lesson from that and improve himself?

(Somehow after AJ show us the comparison of the works to us, I wondered, is it just a Photoshop manipulated image?)

My POV is: he cheat on us.

[KrakenCMT]

I don't understand some opinions in here. I respect them, of course, but some other talented and very-known artists, such Antropus, have done the same technique you're complaining on now: using a front texture map and some others to build the displacement and shader of one head model. And you all were very impressed of their skills!!! So what's the point in here? Everyone is guilty until he/she proves they are not?

There's a difference there. Everyone uses photo reference to a degree for their models. 99.9% of the time it is a combination of several different photos photoshopped together to create the color texture - usually with considerable changes made to the photos. Or even created from scratch. Most take their own reference photos.

Let me ask. What if I took someone elses head model then applied my own texture to it, used my own lighting/materials. Threw in a few supporting models. Would it be OK if I advertised it as my own? It's pretty much the same as taking some elses photo directly and using it on your own model. But I would hope that the artists here wouldn't do that either. I dunno. And maybe a lot of people do this without anyone's knowledge.... but, does that make it OK?

Bottom line is, use of other people's work without their permission is a no-no. That goes for using photos as your texture maps too. And even with their permission, credit should be given. That's the ethical thing to do.

My POV is: he cheat on us.
Well, it remains to be seen if it was intentional or just nievity on his part. From his gallery work, he looks like he doesn't need to "cheat". His alien was pretty good. Let's wait and see.

[Diabolos]

...but what is the difference with this image:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=121&t=472843


Those photos match up exactly as well, but nobody has made the same comment (no disrespect to Piotr, but this was the first example I could find on the fly). I am just a beginner and I do not have these techniques yet, so I am having a difficult time keeping them apart. I guess in the end it is personal opinions and how the viewer accepts the piece of artwork.

D,

[KrakenCMT]

...but what is the difference with this image:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=121&t=472843


Those photos match up exactly as well, but nobody has made the same comment (no disrespect to Piotr, but this was the first example I could find on the fly). I am just a beginner and I do not have these techniques yet, so I am having a difficult time keeping them apart. I guess in the end it is personal opinions and how the viewer accepts the piece of artwork.

D,

The difference here, is that it is a self portrait. Any reference photos he used were most likely taken by himself, and therefore, his property. That's a big difference.

Being a beginner does not exclude oneself from the ethic boundary of posting something that is not theirs. Anyone who is capable of creating a 3d model with proper UVs to add a texture to can certainly create their own texture maps without infringing copyrights.

There may be other examples of this you can find, and we way come to find out they did just that and got away with it. But again, I say that doesn't make it right.

[AJ]

...but what is the difference with this image:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=121&t=472843
Those photos match up exactly as well

They don't actually match up exactly - and you can see that the details in Piotr's image are evident in his model.

I wasn't pointing the finger & screaming 'liar!' at Eduardo, just showing that a lot of his 'texturing' and 'modeling' were details from a photograph & simply wouldn't work at any other angle.

[Rebeccak]

Guys, enough please - the artist has already stated his intentions with this project, there's really no need to debate anything anymore.

Thanks,

-Rebeccak

[IkerCLoN]

Rebeccak, since the things seem to calm down here, I hope you let me continue discussing about this. I think there are some points that I need to understand from other users. By the way, I don't know Eduardo, but I know and I like his work...

KrakenCMT, I don't understand your point of view, dude. With this words do you want to mean that if you use references that you didn't create by yourself (like Piotr's photos) -directly or indirectly- in your final image , the job is invalid? What copyright are you talking about? The same that is applied to every car that people have modelled in 3D for many years? As same as landscapes and characters? Since we are not talking about overpainting or stealing jobs, what's the point for introducing ethics in here?

By the way, I was thinking in ZBrush works. They kind of developed a technique (or used) with this program consisting in modelling and texturing from direct photos. Also they have some videos covering these techniques in their web. I'm sure all of you use textures directly taken from photos. Metals, plastic, rust, fabrics... Sure I'm missing something here, because rally I don't understand what you guys want to show here...

Dickma, Eduardo as you are both professionals. My congratulations to you if you painted ALL by hand the textures in your House character, but seriously, there are A LOT of ways to build a character. Edu used one. You used another. Don't treat other people as liars. The best thing you can do is to wait until Edu releases his animation. Then there might be front page for him and shame to the people who 'have discovered the fraud', because there's no fraud here. Remember, check Pixologic website if you still think of this as a fraud;)

Cheers!

[KrakenCMT]

Rebecca, it seems there is confusion in regards to ethical guidelines here and why it's important. So I must answer this one.

Copyright infringement law isn't very solid. But people still sue on the grounds that they had their works used for something they had not given permission for. We aren't talking about just using a metal, rock or wallpaper texture for the background. We are talking about using the original recognizable image as the main focal point of the image. That's what I mean when I'm talking about the original image is 90% of the new work.

If the derivitive artwork (the new artwork created using the original source) is substantially similar to the original work which was not their property (in this case, the photo of John Locke) then copyright infringement has occurred. It's that simple. Even if just on a forum where no money has been made because you are advertising it as your own work. Isn't that a slight bit deceptive?

I doubt anyone would actually sue over it here on the forums, but I think you would agree that you should give credit to where credit is due, mainly when the new image is so close to the original. And I don't believe practicing good ethical behaviour should be limited to just the paying jobs.

Do I think that Eduardo did it on purpose? Of course not. Obviously there are plenty of people who don't realize it's wrong. We give them the benefit of the doubt until it is proven otherwise. Innocent until proven guilty, right? :)

I hope this makes it a little clearer. I am sorry I am a bit opinionated about this issue as my work has been stolen before by someone claiming that it was theirs. It's not fun.

[IkerCLoN]

Thanks for your words, mate. I do not share your opinion, but I respect it :) And sorry your work had been stolen in the past. I hope it's not happening again ;)

[THE-SAMURAI-LEADER]

I was shoked when I saw that Eduardo's work has been removed from the front page.
We shouldn't atack his work until we see his Animation. We should give a recpect to Eduardo. And DickMa watch your comments. You show in your comments you are so mad at him. Change way of your comments.

I hope and wish all the best to Eduardo. Hope to see your Animation soon.

[joserod]

joder la que se ha montado.ya te dije edu que la imagen estaba molona, y creo que si hubieras puesto en el primer post el proceso o el metodo de como lo has hecho nadie habria dicho nada respecto al tema.
Es un proceso mas como otro cualquiera, como en superman returns, que tambien se usa.
Paso de traducir a ingles que es tarde.
Animalo y que se muerdan las lenguas.
Hay una cosilla que he visto, pero te la dire por messen.
Saludos tiu

[mxyzptlk]

even with all the controversy over how the image was made, it's still a Stunning likeness of Locke. Congrats mate excellent work:thumbsup:

BTW can anyone tell me what you mean by Projection mapping the texture?
Is it like what rhythm and hue did when recreating Marlin Brando for Superman?

[iSOBigD]

BTW can anyone tell me what you mean by Projection mapping the texture?

All textures using UVs are 2D images "projected" onto the UV map (polygons layed out in 2D). Now if you make proper UVs, you can texture over them and have your model look nice from any angle.

What these guys mean by "projection mapping" is that he made a plain 3D model using the same angle as his reference image and used a Linear Projection (projected plane) over the entire thing then slapped on an entire image as a texture...with little to no manipulation or actual editing, apart from the bump map, which looks like it was basically the same image used in the "bump" slot of the material. :P That's what everyone's going on about.

Doing this makes his model useless from any other angle since the back of the head and any parts that don't show in this image are probably not textured or textured and mapped badly. Also, the wrinkles and facial expression are also in the texture, not modeled...which means the model can't have a different expression on its face without keeping the same wrinkles and so on.

Overall basically it's just a quickly slapped together image and not a full fledge Locke head model is what we're saying.

Anyway, I realize most people can't make proper UV maps or realistic textures, but slapping on an image with no editing and calling it your texture just isn't right. Usually people will use generic skin images, beard images, etc. and edit them together to make a final texture of a face, so that's what they mean by "using reference images for textures", but using a whole picture as the texture with just a linear projection is a little frowned upon.

[captainpopo]

looks amazing

[dickma]

Can I say disappointed? Being pulled off from frontpage but plugged into the CG Choice Gallery?

[denizengt]

Oh my God, wish I could do this :scream:


Amazing, I think it's perfect myself 5* material! Keep up the awesome work.

[Magius]

Oh my God!! :eek:

I have ... no... words ... to.. wow!!

[MrJames]

Dude, its great, gotta love John Locke :) I would of maybe dirtied up his shirt a bit more, but really thats minor. The likeness is spot on..

[Metal-Mirror]

This model is very good.. Thanx.. :)

[dickma]

OK, I would like to make my last reply here.

I will think about what's happened about the world, I have private messages contact with Rebeccak to talk about what I feel. That is about CGtalk is protecting Mr Eduardo from critism, or attack, and I was become a man that was being blame or hatred by the others. She admitted she made a mistake about make the work to the frontpage, so she pulled the work off.

I admitted that I have an attitude problem, may be too harsh to Mr Eduardo, or other "Fan Boys" that is stupid or lack of judgement. Still I am not going to apologize.

For the critism thing, well what I am talking about is my knowledge to 3D modeling, that I have my analysis about comparing the existing render with the base mesh and I have a conclusion about that they are not match. I had requested more prove from Mr Eduardo or seeking help from the moderator for that. I had give Mr Eduardo a chance to prove he did this, or prove that it is a real 3D creation that go under from nothing to something. Unfortunately, I think he didn't use the opportunity. All you must know that, the proves or evidences should be provided by the defendant (something like laws, or court order). I am just using technical terms to explain why the pics don't match.

However, since that, Mr Eduardo is failed to provide more soild proves.

And I don't understand or, feel discontent about why the work is still plugged into the CG Choice gallery. Rebeccak admit that she made a mistake and the work was pulled of from the frontpage. I cannot see the logic about it was a mistake but why it is still plugged into the CG Gallery. And now I have a conspiracy about CGTalk is protecting him. I will have doubt about how CGTalk work strike hard to avoid plargarism, or infringement thing. Because I have more than one time experience on the above situation and CGTalk took a conservative move on reporting. And there is no active channel for me or other user to REPORT plargarism or infringerment to the moderators, I did it really hard to send private messages to the moderator one by one, still I don't have a reply from them and there's no button on the thread about reporting to the moderator.

What's wrong? Well I am only a member of CGTalk, I have no control on the moderator thing. (May be something like because you are beautiful in appearance so you can offend any crime without being punished, or whatever you do something good, but you are ugly so...)

[AbstractSIMmer187]

5*, it looks like a replics dude, superb!

[digitalinkmind]

Great modeling skills , Eduardo. The skin shader is awesome... 5 stars from me.:thumbsup:

[tide78]

Hey man, great work! I think it's already been said, but just to reiterate, I think the eyeball needs some reflection from the environment, rather than just a highlight, and the DOF is a bit extreme for how in focus the background is. Other than that, it's looking fantastic. Keep up the good work.

-Z

[Radiation]

Gahhh I was planning on doing a Locke myself. Excellent job!

[unlocoturco]

it looks so amazing, it looks like him just in first sight, very good :)

[Androodle]

Very lifelike. Great job - skin textures and all!

I would only comment that shading around certain areas of the shirt collar and ear standout when compared to the rest of the image.

I also agree with the box reflection in the eyes even though I like the effect nonetheless.

[ZHTheForce]

At first, I even didn't recognize - either it was a 3D model or a real photo. Nice stuff man!

[KicoTheMan]

Amazing

How did you make the eyes?Are they textured or you used some shader?

Where did you get the skin reference?It is so cool... How big textures? 4k?

Cheers

[lostsoulx]

i like this img

he's film i like too:buttrock:

★x5

[akin]

the eyes are talking .very nice

[lvbuwei]

Nice Work I Like It What You Do Not Baril Render？

[Cassandra]

Madre mía! :eek:

I didn't see this before, it's a masterpiece! Keep on the good work!

[Vboyz]

can i ask some question?iam an amature 3d sclupter...and i use zbrush and 3dsmax8..the main big thing in my mind is: witch one is the best tile in zbrush for render in vray?is GUV tile or AUV tile or mybe normal tile..?i need to know .and thnx for help..

[fahadkhan]

you done a superb job ....

[SJM]

Big fan of lost and i think you pulled this off, only crit i have is that he is abit pale and needs abit more tan i reckon ... keep up the good work

[javi1024]

looks great! how did you get reference shots to build him?

[angel]

looks great! how did you get reference shots to build him?

Read the whole thread. :sad:

[arabtut]

wow:eek::applause:....
It's one of the most realistic faces I've seen so far.

[michaeljxy]

I like Jone, I like Lost~

Good work!

[LuckyBug]

Marvelous,can't wait for another lost character from you.

[qcmxx120]

Very eyes of God

[AndroidMonkey4001]

Read the whole thread. :sad:
Well, actually if you go to his site you can see the animation he was talking about in his demo reel. So yeah it's legit and great work I might add. :cool:

[Rockersound]

Is an awesome work!!! I see "Lost" and he looks equal than Terry O'Quinn.


John Locke is the best!

[Comar93]

Very good work he is definetly John Locks mirror image, completely the same! 10/5 for likeness 4,99* for everything else.

[ly3450706]

!I'm the 'Lost' fan too!!It seems that you realllllllllllllllly like jonh and soooooo did i,u got a good expressive force to show him! "u are one of them" wow

[ClericZA]

The lighting is a bit sharp, but over all it's incredible. Depth of field, and attention to detail is tops. Well done!

[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.