CGTalk > Techniques > Anatomy and Figurative Art
Login register
Thread Closed share thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-02-2009, 10:33 AM   #1
comic-craig
chud
 
comic-craig's Avatar
portfolio
Craig Dowsett
Modeler
Laika
USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 618
Neutral Eye

Recently I have heard that the human eye does not look straight forward when neutral, but is slightly at an angle (meaning looking slightly cross eyed or possibly at an obtuse angle). Does anyone know a rule of thumb on this- do the eyes look forward parallel to each other in angle, or slightly off?

thank you
Craig
 
Old 09-03-2009, 07:07 PM   #2
Chokmah
Expert
 
Chokmah's Avatar
portfolio
Florian Delarque
Freelance
Freelance Artist
NIMES, France
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 630
Send a message via MSN to Chokmah

Hello comic-craig,

Very interesting question I asked myself many time .

I think that eyes are parallel when looking at an infinite point ( if infinite means neutral you get your answer ) .

So, in other cases (looking at a specific point in space), they are no more parallel and more specificaly cross eyed .

Of course, I am not sure about my answer, the best way to be sure would ask to a human anatomy scientist
 
Old 09-04-2009, 06:38 PM   #3
Quadart
It’s the journey…
 
Quadart's Avatar
portfolio
Bill Melvin
freelance cg artist
USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,706

The Thousand Mile Stare

Out of curiosity I did a quick search that turned up no data on any average deviation angle pertaining to line-of-sight, as it relates to the Primary Position (PP) of the eyes. PP is the “neutral” position of the eyes, when not fixated on an object. Both eyes are peering straight forward with parallel sight lines. One article mentioned that PP was ideal but gave no further info. My guess is the average deviation from the ideal PP is small enough not to be of any concern to a 3d modeler/portrait artist--could be wrong.
I would also say it may be good to pull the eyes in slightly to give the impression that the portrait subject is focused on the viewer (if that's the intent) and not focused out to infinity—having that thousand mile stare.

Newborns can have wacky eyes. I read here that only 23% of babies are born with “straight eyes”, coming into alignment within a few months.

Do a search on:

Primary position+eyes
strabismus
Listing’s Law
Listing’s plane
__________________
 
Old 09-04-2009, 07:38 PM   #4
comic-craig
chud
 
comic-craig's Avatar
portfolio
Craig Dowsett
Modeler
Laika
USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 618
Thank you both- that is very helpful. By the way- I like both your portfolios- and I'm a fan of Quadart's kudo charge (I teach a class and use it as an example of excellence in 3D).
 
Old 09-04-2009, 08:26 PM   #5
Chokmah
Expert
 
Chokmah's Avatar
portfolio
Florian Delarque
Freelance
Freelance Artist
NIMES, France
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 630
Send a message via MSN to Chokmah

Quadart, it seems your search confirm what I thought about that question ^^

I was afraid to say wrong idea lol

Thank you for this quick search
 
Old 09-10-2009, 07:16 PM   #6
jfrancis
Know-it-All
portfolio
Joseph Francis
VFX Supervisor
Los Angeles, USA
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 382
If you are actually looking at something then your eyes must be converging to some degree or other, no matter how far that something is from you.

What do they do in the dark, or in a featureless environment? I don't know.
 
Old 11-21-2009, 12:15 PM   #7
zokana
Lord of the posts
 
zokana's Avatar
portfolio
Zoltan Kanabe
Zurich, Switzerland
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,613
It’s a very interesting question - i was looking for an answer myself several times, but couldn’t find anything convincing. As mentioned already, the angle is variable, depending on the distance of the focused object.

However, I tend to believe, that the difference between the viewing angles of the eyes is individual even if focusing at the same distance, depending very much on health, on state of mind and possibly also on the physiognomy.

Some people have a slight esotropia (one of the eyes points inwards), especially children - perhaps the reason why we believe it looks sweet on women. On the other hand much more adults have a very slight exotropia (one of the eyes points outwards, especially when they are tired), which we actually don’t notice while talking to them, but if you look carefully at portraits you’ll notice how many people don’t focus properly (called 'strabismus').

So the ideal angle in a portrait (the person focusing the viewer) depends certainly on the camera distance, resp. viewing angle. Theoretically the angle is never totally parallel - the most when focusing something far away.


PS: While doing some peaceful modeling i kept thinking about the subject, especially about "neutral angle". I have some doubts about having such a default state in reality (eyes move as well while sleeping - probably less coordinated), which could be taken in 3d as universally usable value.

Last edited by zokana : 11-21-2009 at 03:05 PM. Reason: PS
 
Old 12-24-2009, 05:14 AM   #8
eRKK
Remember 1337
portfolio
Erik Hallberg
Stockholm, Sweden
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 582
I must say that I've also thought about this.

When I model and position eyes in 3d I always have to point them outwards, so that the character doesn't look cross eyed. I normally put each eye of by about 2 degrees, so in total they differ 4 degrees from eachother. To clear this up, the eyes are then slightly pointed this way:

HEAD
/ \

I don't know if this is correct, it has just always been the only way to make any characters eyes look realistic.
 
Old 02-07-2010, 11:00 AM   #9
InSaneTK
New Member
portfolio
Alexander Edvard Fusdahl
Norway
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3
Send a message via MSN to InSaneTK
Thumbs up Michael Mentler's Studies

An anatomy teacher called Michael Mentler at ConceptArt have made a ton of awesome structured studies about measurements and angles of every part of the body. He touched on this subject very well some months ago. That when we look forward we do in fact look slightly downwards. The eyeball is also slightly elevated above the eyelids, not in center of both. Here are his illustrations!

 
Old 02-07-2010, 03:27 PM   #10
Stahlberg
Lord of the posts
 
Stahlberg's Avatar
CGSociety Member
portfolio
Steven Stahlberg
Lead Artist
Streamline Studios
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,601

Yes, I found the same thing about twelve years ago when I was making my first really realistic head. It's impossible to make a realistic face with eyes perfectly straight and parallell.
I have since come to believe that this is indeed how we are constructed
 
Old 02-08-2010, 09:05 AM   #11
comic-craig
chud
 
comic-craig's Avatar
portfolio
Craig Dowsett
Modeler
Laika
USA
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 618
Thank you people for all of your input- I welcome more. InsaneTK- thanks for the illustration- I appreciate it going the extra mile- any other links to Michael Mentlerare (or appropriate links) are appreciated.

Stahlberg- I'm not sure if I'm reading you right- are you saying that you agree with what was written above- or that the way eyes are constructed is parallel?
 
Old 02-09-2010, 02:13 AM   #12
Stahlberg
Lord of the posts
 
Stahlberg's Avatar
CGSociety Member
portfolio
Steven Stahlberg
Lead Artist
Streamline Studios
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,601

NOT parallell
 
Old 12-13-2010, 08:01 PM   #13
HariEdo
New Member
portfolio
Ed Halley
Manchester, USA
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by eRKK
When I model and position eyes in 3d I always have to point them outwards, so that the character doesn't look cross eyed. I normally put each eye of by about 2 degrees, so in total they differ 4 degrees from eachother. I don't know if this is correct, it has just always been the only way to make any characters eyes look realistic.


I recently built on someone else's head model, as they had a good topology, but I wanted to see what it would take to convert it from a western to an asian face (lose the epicanthic fold, among other details). They modeled like you describe. I think it's easier to do it the way you say, but it's not accurate physically. Their eyeballs were too large, and I think that's part of the problem. For an earlier anatomy study, I found it really helped to try to marry two unrelated mesh models: a skull and a head. I had to tweak both to fit each other, as skulls really define the face, but it also gave great insight to the proper positioning of ear canal, nostril and eyeball.



(This was from a couple years ago, and not meant to be high-poly artistic. Be gentle.)

This debate reminds me of the old Renaissance Masters' paintings, with lions and other animals that have front-facing eyes.

Last edited by HariEdo : 12-13-2010 at 08:04 PM.
 
Old 02-06-2011, 01:07 AM   #14
Quadart
It’s the journey…
 
Quadart's Avatar
portfolio
Bill Melvin
freelance cg artist
USA
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,706

More factoid diggings about that neutral eye thing.

Awake, alert subjects do not seem to have a neutral eye position as the eyes are constantly fusing binocular images, fixating on objects at different distances while undergoing constant saccadic movements. *BTW, you are blind during those saccadic movements, otherwise vision would be a continuous blur.
There is an actual neutral eye position, occurring in the Physiological Rest Position and the Anatomical Rest Position , and it’s not very flattering. This position occurs during deep sleep, general anesthesia or death (prior to rigor mortis). Anatomical (at death) and physiological rest positions both involve some degree or total absence of eye muscle innervation. The eyes, under both conditions, are diverged (opposed to crossed) and rotated upward (more pronounced in death). You can also see this in blind people as well.



http://www.corbisimages.com/images/...6E1C/GH1018.jpg
http://www.bioconsulting.com/pupil&iris.jpg
http://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wiki...s/109/10965.jpg


Another interesting and overlooked nuance is the fact that the pupil is not positioned in the center of the iris, as it seems to always be
depicted in 3d realistic human character work. You can look at an iris/pupil and immediately tell which eye it is and whether the head is right-side up or not, without seeing any other part of the eye. The pupil is always (statistically) located off-center, slightly toward the nose and slightly upward. If you see someone with a centered pupil, you are seeing an anomaly, or you are looking at an android!
It’s a subtle nuance, but if beating the Uncanny Valley is to be achieved, all anatomical subtleties should be taken into serious consideration.

And relating directly to the offset pupil is the fact that when gazing (fixating) on a distant object, lets say the moon, the eyes are diverged, not parallel. This is due to the fact that the visual axis (line from fixation object to fovea) is not in line with the optical axis, which is the line passing through the centers of the two lenses (cornea and crystalline lens). The visual axis is rotated outward (temporally) from the optical axis by about 5° and down about 1°, ending at the location of the fovea, that tiny pit located on the retina where all of our sharp vision takes place (within about a 2° cone of view). The visual axes of both eyes are parallel when looking at, say a star, moon or mountain peak. This diverges the optic axes and therefore the eyeballs. If the eye were a perfect optical system, the fovea would lay on the optical axis, in line with the lenses. I read somewhere that if the fovea were on the optic axis, visual acuity would be 2.5 times greater (less aberration to deal with). The pupil compensates for the odd fovea position (only partially) by being offset toward the nose and upward. The pupil has it’s own axis called the Pupillary Axis.
--Thought someone might be interested, beside me.

**I am not an ophthalmologist, so do your own fact checking.
__________________

Last edited by Quadart : 02-09-2011 at 01:40 PM.
 
Old 06-30-2011, 03:07 AM   #15
kelgy
Stranger in Town
 
kelgy's Avatar
portfolio
Kel G
Professionally unemployed
Surrey, Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,406
Hey that's cool to know I may have been right all these years about the divergence.
I used fashion magazines when learning to sculpt and noticed the eyes did not seem parallel but diverged(you can notice this well when looking at someone staring straight forward from below).
Also I tended to make the pupil inward slightly because it never looked center to me.
lol
 
Thread Closed share thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 05:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.