This is a box model done in Maya with reference !
and the other is a zb sculpt without any reference so there might be big differences from the origianal!:)! I will be putting up another sculpt which I will be doing with reference from the drawing for details…
Frejasphere thank you so much for the encouragement and dropping by! Cheers 
Glenn ! Thanks ! I hope you like my new one!
Shyam buddy take up sculpture dude youll excel in it Im sure!:)( my answer to your painting question lol)
Hi Siju!
Great sculpts!
I am glad you made this transition from 2D to 3D… it was so evident from your drawings that you would excel in 3D too… keep rocking!!:applause:
Thanks Anand! I’ve been in 3d for a long time, even though I like the sculpting part of 3d softwares not the vertex pushing!! ,And sculpture a very long time practically since I was a boy, so I guess I never looked at it as 2d and 3d.Its all the same to me:thumbsup:,Anatomy is anatomy proportion is proportion,And I feel its easier to sculpt in 3d than to draw because In 3d I dont have to worry about foreshortening .
cheers
Siju
ps.there is a vitruvian man of mine in the previous page in case u are interested…
Hi…Siju…
AMAZEING WORK AS ALWAYS :applause:
I really like the way you are creating a version of the figure from imagination and memory, and also a version from the refferance also…best way to really learn, and get the most from the exercise I think…
Was thinking that, that method of two versions as you are demonstrating, should be a requirement in further workshop studies…will keep those who like to trace, learn nothing, cheat themselves, and everyone else,… and claim success…at bay for sure…LOL…
.Just thinking out loud again…LOL…
ALSO really wanted to say THANK YOU… For all of the help you have given me with Z BRUSH,
and now this new BOX thing…:eek:
THANK YOU …Siju…KEEP INSPIRERING…
TAKE CARE
Glenn
I should do the same kind of exercises really with my drawings.
Something I had in mind to do but had not done yet… so good that I’ve read this… now I know what exercises to do tonight 
(sorry Siju for spamming your thread)
Glenn! I am waitin for u to buy Maya:)!My pleasure regarding zb.
Johan your welcome my friend:thumbsup:
Heres the W.I.P sculpt with reference
Hi Siju…
Sorry, I didnt know you were into 3D before now… hadnt seen any of your models… Anyway, I am glad your are a sculptor too…! Looking forward to more of your amazing stuff. Btw, did you watch the Gnomon video by Zack Petroc about ZBrush sculpting? Here is the link if you are planning to buy it:
Np Anand , … I got Zack’s Video a couple of days after it was released !:), The model he made is available for download in zbrush central …He is really awesome isnt it!
here are the slightly more finished versions of the libyan sibyl
Aaah, that’s the second amazing Libyan Sibyl study I see! Great sculpt, Siju. That’s enough for me to be inspired, I’m gonna try making my own one
Damned fine torsos, Siju. It’s amazing to me the different approaches everyone is taking. And then to those of you doing it in 3D…really wonderful and inspiring.
Cris
excellent job there!!! :bounce: Must do something like that some day - I really do not like zbrush workflow 
grrr… THanks for the dvd tips guys!
Hmmm, I think it needs quite a bit of work, Apart from the deltoids, none of the muscles read very well at all, and some of them are plain wrong. Also, the mesh itself is very soft and smooth, like an ice sculpture that’s meletd a bit - you really need to fight against that, and try to sharpen things up a bit - that really is the secret to getting good zbrush sculpts.
Hi…Siju…
NOT TOO BAD… …JUST KIDDING…FANTASTIC…:bounce:
I like the bottom lighting best…Muscles look fine to me…romboids are pinched properly on right
side, adding strength to the twist…
I remember Burne Hogarth telling me somthing that always stuck in my mind over the years.
He said that Michelangelo’s works were full of errors regarding the muscles, proportions ect.
I think that is the case regarding this sybil…only a fanatic would care…BEAUTY TRUMPS ACCURACY EVERY TIME, …I THINK YOUR PIECE IS BEAUTIFUL…:bounce:
TAKE CARE
Glenn
Oddity, I appreciate your comments but I beg to differ, The anatomy is wrong in the original reference by Michelangelo and SpiritDreamer has put that point across nicely and please look at my drawings ,I think u will see that I do know my anatomy rather well!
As far as sharpness goes I hate the sharp alpha loaded stuff that gets shown around and appreciated in Zbrush central!I personally will not like to do such stuff!
I saw your centaurette , nice render, great subsurface scatter , but I would think lots of anatomical errors on that one , too many to name , I can do a draw over if you are interested!
Glenn thank you for your support
Intervain thanks for droppin by:)
Cris thanks for the kind comments
razz bro how u been
Hi…Siju…
WOW…That lighting made all the difference in the world…really feels like it is in deep space now…I was about to suggest that you put the far side into shadow, but you beat me to it…
FANTASTIC WORK …AS ALWAYS…Siju…
TAKE CARE
Glenn
I agree the original is somewhat inaccurate, but what exactly is the purpose in copying the inaccuracies from the original? Wouldn’t it be a better exercise to keep the spirit of the orignal, but with accurate anatomy?
I can still see a lot of differences between the model and the drawing, so it’s not as if you were totally concerned with cloning it, and as such, I think it would have been better to only copy the accurate parts, and add to that your own knowledge of anatomy to complete the whole.
As it is, your model has taken the wrongness of the drawing and exacerbated it.
Forgive me for being a neanderthal, but I’m not sure what the purpose of a completely inaccurate anatomy study is.
As far as sharpness goes I hate the sharp alpha loaded stuff that gets shown around and appreciated in Zbrush central!I personally will not like to do such stuff!
It’s not about that sort of sharpness, its about defining muscle shapes accurately with clean, concise, readable lines. It’s a technique failure on your part, so I don’t see the point in tryng to mask it by saying ‘I meant to do that’.
The first step to improving is admitting you’re wrong.
I saw your centaurette , nice render, great subsurface scatter , but I would think lots of anatomical errors on that one , too many to name , I can do a draw over if you are interested!
Yes, I am interested, please point out my errors, that’s why I post my work here, and I assume is the actual point of the forum, to learn and improve, not to boost egos by getting hollow praise, though to see the way some people go crazy when recieving criticism, you’d be forgiven for thinking otherwise.
Hi guys,
Before this turns into a flame war, let's remember a few things.
Originally posted by oDDity: It’s not about that sort of sharpness, its about defining muscle shapes accurately with clean, concise, readable lines. It’s a technique failure on your part, so I don’t see the point in tryng to mask it by saying ‘I meant to do that’.
The first step to improving is admitting you’re wrong.
oDDity, here's another way of stating the same thing without closing the ears of the person you're critiquing:
"I understand what you are saying, but I think that you could more clearly define muscle shapes and more accurately so with clean, concise, readable lines. This is my opinion, and everyone approaches modelling differently."
Originally posted by oDDity: Yes, I am interested, please point out my errors, that’s why I post my work here, and I assume is the actual point of the forum, to learn and improve, not to boost egos by getting hollow praise, though to see the way some people go crazy when recieving criticism, you’d be forgiven for thinking otherwise.
I actually don't disagree with the substance of this statement. The purpose of the forum is to learn and to improve. Being able to accept and incorporate constructive critique is an essential and important part of growing as an artist.
That being said, I sense that you, ODDity, are being intentionally dense in not listening to what I requested of you in terms of modifying your tone. As I said by pm, I think that as much as you are asking others to listen to critique of your work, you need to listen to critique of your tone on public forums. You have stated yourself that you have heard this critique before. If you expect others to accept your critique of their work, then you need to be equally receptive and positively responsive in terms of the way you state things on public forums. It is not about the substance of your comments, which I think is quite useful - as I have stated now three times, it is about the tone.
I value everyone's contributions here.
[b] SpiritDreamer / Glenn,[/b] there is no need for you to jump in here. Nor is there need to further discuss this publicly. Nor is there need for[b] Thomasphoenix / Siju[/b] to jump in here to further discuss this issue.
Let's talk about the work in a reasonable way. I think that ODDity's contributions in terms of the substance of his critique are refreshingly useful, but intentional further antagonism of artists on this forum will not be greeted with enthusiasm. Giving constructive criticism is one thing; doing so in order to pick a fight is quite another.
If an artist whose work you critique cannot accept constructive criticism, then you must accept that as a failure on their part, or possibly as a failure on your part to communicate effectively, or both - and move on.
That is hopefully the end of the need for this discussion, on this, or on any other thread. Let’s please get back to work.
-Rebecca