Female game character (nudity), Steven Stahlberg (3D)

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  10 October 2006
I can't put my finger on it, but lately I find your paintings/work to have a lush and beautiful blended quality to them. I would like to comment again, superb color work you did with Road Trip.
With this one, I admire all the color harmony around her head, including the hair, and with the gloves. Don't really like tattoos, but this one works quite nicely with the figure. Beautiful skin. Great looking girl, great body. Just a lovely overall quality. In my opinion, I can't say their are many people that match your quality of modeling, with the rigging setup for animation.
 
  10 October 2006
Thumbs up Very good

Very good work!!!
 
  10 October 2006
:edit: ? There seems to be a forum bug making my post appear before the one it quotes.

Last edited by oDDity : 10 October 2006 at 09:22 AM.
 
  10 October 2006
excellent work Steven! (as always)

from looking at the other models on the site....personally i think your's is the only one that has some life in this still image. great depth in the eyes. pose. anatomy. perfect!!

 
  10 October 2006
Originally Posted by Stefan-Morrell: http://www.playboy.com/magazine/fea...-photos-02.html

<< just in case anyone else is finding it hard to see the image

nice work Steven

Yeah the image is not showing up for me either, not even in the cgportfolio . Great job as always!
 
  10 October 2006
Quote: The version up on playboy, is that a much older version? cause it doesnt have nearly the level of detail

Oh yeah, the one they're showing in that kind of 'behind the scenes' thing, is an earlier WIP of the project. The final one they used was without any background.

edit:

forgot to add that this image has been accepted into Exotique 2
and is actually one of the posters that come with the book!

.

Last edited by Stahlberg : 10 October 2006 at 07:39 AM.
 
  10 October 2006
Thank you for your comments. Yes the tattoo looks a bit sharp I see now, it was provided as a perfect logo and I neglected to soften it up enough.
I only painted light retouching everywhere, except the hair, which is quite heavily painted as you can probably see.

Quote: I realise some people will do anything for a quick buck, but I'd be interested to know where you'd draw the line.

Well not at Hugh Hefner's legendary publication, that's for sure. It's totally an honor to be in it. So sad when people get abusive over a tiny spot of flesh too much. But ok, just for the nipple-impaired, the covered version:



For everyone else, a fullbody version with a different light and a slighlty different angle, showing more of the alien gore she's been wading through all day, and some closeups:









edit:
the gun was provided by NCSoft, I shaded it.
edit again:
Not sure why the image isn't showing up in my portfolio, have to investigate.

Last edited by Stahlberg : 10 October 2006 at 03:19 AM.
 
  10 October 2006
that high-res shot looks fantastic!..I think I prefer the covered up version,if only for the added detail of the shadow play under the bra,really nice use of light & materials.
Cheers!
 
  10 October 2006
great job.
 
  10 October 2006
Wow Great work Stahlberg! very impressive, a very unique style!

oDDity: Relax! Dont do it!
 
  10 October 2006
Originally Posted by Stefan-Morrell: that high-res shot looks fantastic!..I think I prefer the covered up version,if only for the added detail of the shadow play under the bra,really nice use of light & materials.
Cheers!


I agree 100%. The version up on playboy, is that a much older version? cause it doesnt have nearly the level of detail as the version posted above which is just amazing.
 
  10 October 2006
Great work Stahlberg.

I agree with jramauri.

I think the breasts should be bigger.

5stars mate.
__________________
BLOG
 
  10 October 2006
wooooow...great work!!
 
  10 October 2006
Originally Posted by Stahlberg:
Well not at Hugh Hefner's legendary publication, that's for sure. It's totally an honor to be in it. So sad when people get abusive over a tiny spot of flesh too much. But ok, just for the nipple-impaired, the covered version:

It's the fundamental purpose of the image that's at fault, not the naked body. Nakedness is irrelevant. Don't pretend you can't recognise the difference between seeing a mother's breast as she feeds her baby, and seeing a topless model displaying her wares for your viewing pleasure. Your image (a lot of your images) are erotica dressed up as art, the purpose of which is to squeeze them into an area where they don't belong. It's sole intention is to sexually titillate the viewer, and portray the subject as a sex object to be drooled over by horny viewers.
It's the lowest possible form of art, and anyone who produces it has no integrity whatsoever, pandering as it does to the most basic and easy to find instinct of any animal.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.