View Full Version : Character: Robotox
10 October 2002, 08:51 AM
use PHOTOSHOP & POSER
10 October 2002, 09:04 AM
Wow, this is great work.
It is just too bad that the jpeg compression ripped your detailing.
Try use the "save for web" function for jpeg exporting, that might help.
10 October 2002, 09:52 AM
Yup this is most def awespiring work, you should take up edin on his free hosting services, http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23809 and host upload a higher res pic.
10 October 2002, 09:57 AM
hey great concept.:thumbsup:
some blurring issues though. i can't get where the focus is.
maybe you can just blur everything and focus on something to cover up for the photoshop edits?
10 October 2002, 10:14 AM
Heavy weight ASS KICKING stuff!
Like the chick's brests! :D
10 October 2002, 10:22 AM
Sort of brings to mind the WW2 era art that was common place on allied bombers
10 October 2002, 10:29 AM
wow!! kix ass man! i luv the chick. shes hot.
10 October 2002, 10:32 AM
the BEAUTY and the BEAST...*LOL*
10 October 2002, 10:42 AM
Reminds me of a drawing in one of my Heavy Gear RPG books combined with Masamune Shirow. Personally I don't like the cyborg parts of her showing, they don't look real in the sense that they could fit there.
10 October 2002, 11:02 AM
Cool pic man. Reminds me of Steven Stahlsberg's CG work. That's definitley a compliment.:thumbsup:
10 October 2002, 12:10 PM
Nice piece, but personally I think that those elctronic parts on the chick just aren't any good there, it takes the beauty from her. I would go for Robot & Human chick concept, she should be all flesh and bones instead of the a cyborg :shrug: But IMHO a great piece :beer:
10 October 2002, 12:14 PM
her electronic parts are ok, but you need to have a better melding between the skin and the electrics. It looks like you just cut the skin off and ploped some parts in.
You can also upload a higher-res version using my forums, which allow 15MB attachments:
10 October 2002, 12:39 PM
Nice man :) but if you need to upload images :) go here
there will be a lists of text boxes.. what you do is click browse, pick your picture, then hit your upload butten there.. then it will then show u your URL, copy that url then come back here re-post your image.. like this
remenber though dont forget to type in the tages at the begining and at the end :) like what I just typed on top :)
Good works ;)
10 October 2002, 01:05 PM
For free hosting you might try this:
10 October 2002, 01:41 PM
Awesome work. Is there some Masamune Shirow influence going on? Kinda reminds me of Deunan and Briorios from Appleseed. Great work.
10 October 2002, 02:10 PM
Not to be a buttface or anything but the metal parts on the woman (the thigh in particular) looks an awful lot like the lower part of this robotic chair (http://raph.com/3dartists/artgallery/rioux2.jpg) . (sorry Raph for direct linking to the pic)
I'm probably way off with this but if not, you may want to edit that out or something. Otherwise, great work.
10 October 2002, 02:45 PM
shouldnt she be paying attention to what she's doing?
10 October 2002, 03:05 PM
I like it but the focus and shadow work is really out of whack. I agree the mech parts of the woman's body aren't fitting in very well either.
Why not post some shots of the wireframe elements?
It's a bit unclear which elements are created using 3D geometry and which are wholly 2D created.
10 October 2002, 03:30 PM
Yup, get rid of the copied engine parts and you have there an original pc.
Nice compo you have there. Is it airbrush work?
10 October 2002, 04:23 PM
I love pictures like this. Good job dude. :)
Know what I want? I want somebody to record a time-lapse video of the creation of a pic like this. That'd be seriously cool. I really wanna know what all they do in Photoshop (or even out of it) to make these wonderful pics.
10 October 2002, 04:25 PM
This is some prettu heavy @#~!. Great work. The only comment I have was previously mentioned. The areas where the skin breaks and the robotic construct shows through just does not look right. If the skin is a polymer or biopolymer then there could be areas where the edges just need more edge depth. There might also be areas where they pucker up or even lift off just abit.
10 October 2002, 05:20 PM
Sorry man. I'm not very impressed. It looks like a collage of a lot of different images pasted together. Not bad though.
10 October 2002, 05:55 PM
Yeh. I'm sorry... It's POSER. IT'S POSER!!! To me that just kind of invalidates the whole thing. That's like tracing your artwork. Where did you get the rest of those 3d parts? Did you model them or did you ripp em off from somewhere else? It doesn't look like you modelled it your self because nothing in this piece is consistent. Not only that but you stated "Photoshop and Poser" and no other 3d app. YOU are a fraud my friend. I'm ashamed at all you other people for going along with this. If anyone has a problem with my post so be it. I can be pretty opinionated at times, and plagarism gets my blood boiling.
What's the old skate term for someone who sucks and pretends they can do it.. ohhh yes A POSER.:annoyed:
10 October 2002, 06:02 PM
I didn't realize that Poser had a Photoshop Airbrush rendering plugin.
10 October 2002, 06:09 PM
Ripped off or not, did anyone notice that the right leg is smaller than the left one? Is that by design? or flaw?
10 October 2002, 06:13 PM
Painting on top of a poser image is not a rip off, and it's not tracing. It's a reference image.
10 October 2002, 06:27 PM
wowww amazing work :drool: , please more images :buttrock:
10 October 2002, 06:28 PM
aww man. Poser? I haven't seen or heard anything about that program for quite some time. I'd have to agree that if it was used...well......I'd be disappointed. I have no idea what Poser models look like nowadays ( I only remember Poser from like 4 or 5 years ago, when I was using 3DS v.4 and a friend showed me Poser. Never got into it.)
10 October 2002, 06:43 PM
Well, I like the image and the original post says he used poser and photoshop, so I'm not sure why anyone is slamming that part of the image. He's not pretending to have created the model.
I also think there should be more work on focus/blur.It's a bit awkward right now. There is an area just underneath the girl that is the most "in focus" part of the image that kinds of fights against the figure above. That needs to be dealt with.
10 October 2002, 06:58 PM
Look, I don't mean to sound uber-crabby about this, but I am sick to death of the empty poser debate on this forum. It's pointless and wastes time. That being said, this is the first and last time you will hear me discuss it.
In critiquing a work, where the artist expressly mentioned he used Poser and how he used it, the final product is all that should be of any concern to anyone. How does this enter the realm of plagiarism and fraud?-very serious words, especially in this arena.
Poser is a tool, nothing more nothing less-it can be abused, over used, and used poorly, or alternatively with skill and subtlety. Why is what he did any more damaging to the arts than the use of a photo as a base for painting, for example? It would be plagiarism if he passed off a bare poser model to demonstrate his modeling skills, but that is not the case here.
Moreover, repeated accusations, degradations, and even analogizing "poser" to "poseurs" is wholly unproductive and in my opinion demonstrates a markedly unprofessional attitude. This is an illustration that did not magically "pop" out of Poser with the non-existent "Render sci-fi robotic/cyborg anime influenced pin-up wizard." Assuming there wasn't any true plagiarism, there was talent, agency, discretion, and labor involved, none of which came from Poser (ironically those who expressed dismay, entirely dismissed the fairly well rendered robot as if it suddenly had no merit).
This is not to say that portions of this work were not plagiarized, which may or may not be true. However, simply because Poser was involved, we as a constructive community should not automatically lash out with accusations of fraud and the like; it destroys our credibility.
10 October 2002, 07:08 PM
Well said DJ. :)
I wanna make a point along the same lines. Check out this drawing I did:
I've been asked to design a humanoid alien. I did this drawing first:
Not a bad drawing. It started off as a doodle and I ended up finishing it off. First I draw the outline, then I scanned it, then I printed it very lightly, then I went over it again and shaded the image. Basically, I wanted to not only ensure that I didn't ruin the wonderful outline, but I also wanted to go back and rework parts of it if my client didn't like pieces of the alien.
That drawing was alright, but really didn't fit the proportions of a humanoid. So I did this drawing here:
Let's pause here for a sec: The requirement was that it be humanoid. It needed to look as human as possible, but still alienesque. Human proportions are very specific. I wasn't going to risk this design on my own memory of how a human is shaped, so I found a wonderful picture of a skull. I took that picture, printed it really likely with a laser printer, then drew the above drawing on top of it.
You can call me a tracer or a poser if you like, but what I did was I made double sure that the requirements of the design were fully met. I'm not any less of an artist for it. Despite having the proportions defined for me, I still managed to create a unique image. That still makes me an artist. You can either think less of me for not doing the drawing blind-folded, or you could think highly of me for making sure the drawing was a success.
10 October 2002, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by NanoGator
I'm not any less of an artist for it. Despite having the proportions defined for me, I still managed to create a unique image. That still makes me an artist. You can either think less of me for not doing the drawing blind-folded, or you could think highly of me for making sure the drawing was a success.
Ok, I'm sorry but i will think less of you. You see regardless of your 'origional' work, you still created over a template; I would have utmost respect for you had you not. Because, when you devote countless hours of yourself to life drawing and figurative work these simple proportions become second nature (Hence, needing to trace off of an image or somebody else's work isn't an issue.) It allows you to be more creative and let your creativity flow. Your not stuck within the confines of some other image. Someone who has trained themselves and has a grasp of these FUNDAMENTAL drawing skills will always. ALWAYS. out do one who needs *ahem* training wheels.:arteest:
10 October 2002, 07:56 PM
regardless of the methods used. A fair bit of work seems to have gone into that image and that should be commended.....I think the image is good. Sure there may be work done to improve it but overall .....great work Casper.
I don't care to use Poser but that is my choice. If someone else likes to use the program, that is there choice. It doesen't mean that their art is any less valuable.
10 October 2002, 07:59 PM
Welp, you're gonna have to wait a while to gain 'utmost respect' for me. My journey into drawing only recently started. I may get there one day, but right now I'm still in a learning phase.
Even if I knew all about anatomy and figure drawing etc, I would still have used that template. Fortunately, I'm not doing this for popularity.
Frankly, I don't know why you're worried more about what I can do instead of what I have done. I mean, think about it: I'm always learning. Okay, maybe today I can't draw a human properly from memory. Yet, I still got the design done. In the not too distant future, I could find myself drawing without guides.
I feel like I'm not getting credited for doing good work, but rather debited for work I didn't do. Bit backwards, dontcha think?
10 October 2002, 08:41 PM
Teyon is right
He not only used the leg he posted
as a reference, but if you look at the following image you can see he just cut and pasted it on
10 October 2002, 08:47 PM
Just to be clear: I'm not defending the use of the leg there. :wip:
10 October 2002, 08:48 PM
Ok, right. So the leg has now been proven. I ask where the rest of the elements come from then.
THIS SHOULD INVALIDATE THE REST OF THE PIECE.
ADMINISTRATORS REMOVE THIS CRAP FROM THE FORUM FRONT PAGE BEFORE IT BESEECHES THE WHOLE SITE.
Casper can't be trusted.
Casper. Why don't you come defend your work?
Who is casper everybody? Casper is someone with one single post, with no profile and no forwarding address. There's obviously a reason and that is that he's a plagarist liar and a hack.
Observe the rest of the image. I find it hard to believe that anyone who could paint that robot in photoshop would render welding sparks and smoke like that.
10 October 2002, 09:19 PM
I was ready to give you the benifit of the doubt Casper.....but I must say things are stacking up against you.
If you are just patchworking other peoples hard work.....well... that is low dude.
10 October 2002, 09:38 PM
Well, I don't think I have ever posted anything bad about anyone's work before. But that is usually because it "was" the person's work. This one seems to be more and more a cut and paste with is the biggest taboo to an artist. As far as the Poser issue, I don't have a problem with it being used for say...personal projects. But I have seen at least twice now, where somebody was hired over other very talented 3d artists i know, because they had Poser images in their portfolio and the employer didn't know any better. That really chaps me.
10 October 2002, 10:27 PM
Cutting and pasting other's work is lame and low, but let Casper defend the piece before yelling about the site being besieged. As for Poser taking jobs from true modellers, well that suks and the people who claim they can model a human form by using Poser to get them into a paid gig is equally lame and low.
I will admit that the image seems inconsistent all around, which usually is the sign of a collage job, but it's not my place to say that it is simply becuase I suspect it. If this is a hack, then it's a blow to us, but using Poser or reference for fundamental dimensions or other things to get the job done right makes no one less an artist (as many masters used reference throughout their careers)...stealing outright does.
10 October 2002, 10:36 PM
I did all the story boards, pre-production,character animation, lighting
,camera work,render setups, video post production and sound. in this clip.
using Cinema4DXl Apple final cut pro3 ,Adobe Efter Effects
,sound studio, Lipsynch's "MIMIC"......
BUT.... the pre built characters were animated in POSER Propack4
and imported into the highend invironment of C4DXl to render with a free plugin
To all who build/rig their Cg humans from scratch ..Congratulations!!
Keep pulling this "nurbs cages"
but some of us are too busy making films on the desktop
to build EVERY polygon From Scratch
(windows 5 megs)
(mac 8 megs)
10 October 2002, 10:41 PM
BTW as you can see by the robots and soldiers
that poser is for more than just nudie chicks
10 October 2002, 10:44 PM
It's a cool concept and image. Too bad about the chair plagiarism. There are probably others. There are many areas that look pasted in.
My main issue with it is that the perspective has a lot of problems. If the hand of the robot is stretched so far in front that the palm's distorted and blurry, then her leg couldn't reach the hand at all. In fact, the heel of the plam would have to be right against the robot's chest for her foot to set down where it's pictured as being. This is incongruous with the angle of the upper arm and forearm.
As far as using Poser to establish a pose from which the person draws over it in Photoshop... there's nothing wrong with that. Great artists have been using photographs and art-o-graph or slide projectors for years. Boris Vallejo, Frank Frazetta, Michael Whelan, Norman Rockwell, The Hildebrandt brothers... the list goes on and on. It's part of doing what it takes to produce commercially successful art on a deadline. If you never use a model (human or generated) your work can become overly stylized in time. Using a model and pose source for reference keeps your work accurate and fresh.
As long as a person never claims to have built the model, then using Poser isn't against the rules.
10 October 2002, 11:33 PM
I did not really want to jump into this but oh well... It's a hack job. And my feeling is that probably half the digital art out there is. That's what I love about this site, there are so many talented artists in here, posting their work and providing critique for others. But then this happens...
But computers did for art what the modern art movement did before it. It allowed everyone EVERYONE whether they were a good draughtman or not to call themselves an artist. There are some amazing Modellers in these forums who's 2d artwork makes me wonder how they manage. But this isn't the renaissance and so we don't have to be strong at everything.
Anyways where is casper and why haven't they defended their work? I will change my tone and they can tell it different.
10 October 2002, 02:11 AM
I am not to speak english, but i thanks all the help me!
Steven Stahlsberg is my idol,i like Steven Stahlsberg's CG work,
and 空山 基 .
my work is reference Dave Wilson`s work & 空山 基 ，加藤直之works,thanks!
我上面曾提到的Steven Stahlsberg ，空山 基. 加藤直之
Email to: email@example.com
10 October 2002, 02:15 AM
10 October 2002, 02:20 AM
10 October 2002, 02:24 AM
huh, what the hell is going on there, a translator, plEASE ?!
10 October 2002, 02:26 AM
poser render pic in photoshop
10 October 2002, 02:29 AM
Dave Wilson`s work
10 October 2002, 02:30 AM
10 October 2002, 02:34 AM
cinema 4d render
10 October 2002, 02:35 AM
Hmmmm. Well, all I can say is.....that last post says all there is to say. I don't know why you'd start a piece with that poser render since the lighting, face, skin tones and everything else are not even close to the final image.
Come to think of it....nothing matches in the image at all really...ooof! I mean the same person did not paint that face and gloved left hand. I'm sorry, I aint buying it.
10 October 2002, 02:38 AM
10 October 2002, 02:47 AM
10 October 2002, 02:57 AM
10 October 2002, 03:04 AM
10 October 2002, 11:27 PM
You guys sicken me. He's trying to learn. He's even trying to show how he did it. No no no, tar and feather him.
I won't defend the copy/pasting of the leg, the rest of the accusations are borderline absurd.
Oh well, I doubt I'm in the popular view here, so I'll move on. Cya all after I've had a little break.
10 October 2002, 01:47 AM
Let me translate for you. He says he love the work by all the idols above and wish to be as good. He is good at photoshop and have model the bot while the image of poser was photoshop to push the quality towards his idols work quality and style.
So, come to think of it. It is one heck of a work ( no joke intended). Good first try!
A personal note to the thread starter: Don't be put out with the response which hurts. Use it to push yourself to the next level! All i can say is your photoshop work is gooood which will make you a pretty good texture artist.
All the best.
Ps: Keep posting and keep improving!:)
10 October 2002, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Grooveholmes
Ok, I'm sorry but i will think less of you... But, in the end, you still sound like an elitest snob, insisting that everyone create "art" the way you tell them to.
Art is art, no matter how it is made. Pay no attention to the elitest bastards who want to tell you the "proper" way to make it.
10 October 2002, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Grooveholmes
ADMINISTRATORS REMOVE THIS CRAP FROM THE FORUM FRONT PAGE BEFORE IT BESEECHES THE WHOLE SITE. I agree, if by "THIS CRAP" you mean the ravings of an offensive poster called Grooveholmes. He "BESEECHES" the whole artistic community here with his continual angry whines.
10 October 2002, 08:02 PM
Be careful when you say "Art is Art" because "Plagiarism is Plagiarism" also.:shame:
10 October 2002, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by JohnD
Be careful when you say "Art is Art" because "Plagiarism is Plagiarism" also.:shame:
10 October 2002, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by JohnD
Be careful when you say "Art is Art" because "Plagiarism is Plagiarism" also.:shame: I agree.
Quick question. Is Andy Warhols work Plagiarism ?
10 October 2002, 09:56 PM
I take it you are referring to the soup can art. And yes to a certain extent it is plagiarism because he did not design the Campbell Soup logo. He modified it. It depends on how far you want to take it. If you want to compare Michaelangelo with Warhol...well...the difference is obvious. I'm just not one of these people who thinks that if u scribble on a piece of paper and frame it...it's considered art....considering how many years and backbreaking effort certain artists have commmited to their work. Sorry, but that's how I've always felt. :beer:
10 October 2002, 10:10 PM
Ok Slaughters, yeah. Yer cool.:cool:Obviously you are a professional in this field. And you must know how a court of law sees fit to deal with such things. Everyone's got an opinion. I've contributed quite a bit to this community and remain an upstanding member. Besides, that's off topic anyway. Second, What's with the name calling? How old are you? I'm not telling ANYONE how to make thier art, if you're going to make your art MAKE IT, not S-T-E-A-L IT. Very simple.
Doesn't mean that I don't appreciate it for what it is.
*I just don't like it.*
Casper: Thanks for finally chiming in and shedding a little light on the situation. That's not a bad technique your building on. In the future please just be mindful of not blatantly using other peoples work. I particularly DO like the work you did on her hair and clothing, that's why i don't see the need to go out bite someone elses blood and sweat when you're capable of creating your own.
10 October 2002, 01:43 AM
Originally posted by JohnD
And yes to a certain extent it is plagiarism because he did not design the Campbell Soup logo.
Anybody who paints my portrait is plagarizing.
10 October 2002, 02:59 AM
:rolleyes:Thanks Grooveholmes.Down once, I can use the better and original works and thank everybody
10 October 2002, 03:05 AM
Im not even going to try and argue weather its art or not, that argument is destined to go nowhere. Who realy cares...
And theres been countless arguments about whats technically copyright and plagerism and everything in other threads, theres a lot of grey areas.
But come on! Casper just copied and pasted those mechanical bits straight from someone elses work into his girls leg. And hes still neglected to give the original artist credit for it. Hes conveniently avoided those areas in his "sketch maps". Maybe if he give some credit.
And Im sure Im not the only one who has doubts about weather he painted the girl. Its not really anything like the poser object. they dont match up. He wouldve had to repaint the lighting, which is really good, but doesnt have any correspondance to the rest of the image. Im pretty sure ive seen her somewhere before too.
10 October 2002, 04:37 AM
Anybody who paints my portrait is plagarizing.
Uh...I guess I don't understand your statement there Gator. Painting a portrait isn't plagarizism. According to the dictionary, Plagarizism is: To use another person's words or ideas as if they were his own. Your not a word or an idea. According to your statement, then you'd have to say plagarizism is also, for example, photography.
Either that, or your saying "You" are a work of art.:rolleyes:
10 October 2002, 04:42 AM
Here goes the thread, down the merry go round...
10 October 2002, 04:49 AM
I was being silly really. I think it's funny that you call that plagarism though. I mean I''d agree if the guy painted a label. But he didn't, he painted a picture of a can of soup as he saw it. If I paint a still life with a Diet Coke can in the shot, do I blur out the logo?
Sorry, but I think calling the soup can plagarism is extremist.
10 October 2002, 06:21 AM
You call my comment extreme because u didn't read my post carefully. I said to a certain extent it was plagiarizism...as in the entire piece of art did not come fully from his own ideas.
Yawwwnnnn...okay. That's enough for me. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who just want this thread to die now.:wip:
10 October 2002, 06:23 AM
Agreed, dead horse sufficiently beatin.
Good night. :)
01 January 2006, 07:00 PM
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.