[lowpoly]

A couple of pics from a recent (commercial) project.

Completely 3D with some post processing and corrections in Photoshop.

The body is supposed to be enhanced reality.

Whole series is 20 pics.

Not much inspiration with the prop, it has been used countless times in photography.

[Vesuvius]

wow, poser porn. you should post this at renderosity, they love posting poser whores with inhuman proportions.....

[lowpoly]

It's not Poser. This model has been built from scratch. You have to sharpen your skills wrt spotting Poser models. And at least where I live it is also not porn.

[Thanatos]

Even if it isn't Poser you should take another look at a human anatomy book. The poses look very stiff and unbelievable. (in the literal sense)

Also I think that her breasts are a tad too large. The whole large breast fetish thing really is dumb... IMHO she would me much sexier if she had smaller breasts.

[The Magic Pen]

That is awesome man ..wow !!! Very good work ...

edit * Thanatos the anatomy looks fine he knows what he is doing , and he said that it was enhanced reality thus the large breasts..also that is personal taste on your part about the small breasts they look awesome to me...sorry about your prefrence for the little girl look ..

[ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: The Magic Pen ]

[lowpoly]

Thanatos:

> you should take another look at a human anatomy book

Where exactly? This is the reason why I posted it. Please explain.

> The poses look very stiff and unbelievable

I'd (maybe) agree for the first pic and the last. Please explain at least for pic 2 + 3.

> Also I think that her breasts are a tad too large.

It's about shape not size. There's nothing wrong about size if the shape is good. If your personal taste is different then it's still your personal taste. It's not constructive though.

The Magic Pen: Thanks.

[ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: lowpoly ]

[Thanatos]

Little girl or believable... better yet tastefull... But yeah, it's all in my preference. Besides, I said smaller... Not tiny.

Your anatomy isn't bad exactly... But the last picture really bothered me. Can't exaclty explain it.

And when you say shape the breasts really look too far apart to me.

Then again I don't think any woman has natural breasts that size so there's really nothing to compare it to.

Maybe I shouldn't have commented... I don't like this form of art.

[lowpoly]

> Your anatomy isn't bad exactly... But the last picture really bothered me. Can't exaclty explain it.

If it's only one pic out of four then it's highly likely that the pose is off, which is possible because I invented it. Not useful to suggest anatomy books then.

> And when you say shape the breasts really look too far apart to me.

Yes, but if, then only in the first pic. It's different with bra and without. So they could be a bit closer in the first one. Angle is between 70 and 90 if I remember correctly which is OK for pics 2-4.

> Then again I don't think any woman has natural breasts that size so there's really nothing to compare it to.

No. 'natural breasts that size and shape' would be correct. And intended.

[dontfallin]

god damn. if you don't like a particular art style, DON'T comment on it; your opinion will be biased. the pics are fine. oo, large unbelievable breasts. damn. the worlds coming to an end.

[Matt Ryan]

nice renders, did you make the light setup from scratch or use GI? anyways on the poses..

the first one seems kinda odd to me, i dont think she would be able to sit like that cause the pad slopes down and she would slip off. the thin chain also supports my reasoning. i believe that the chair would be rotated in a downwards position to compensate for her wieght. have her grip the edges, it looks fake the way she is 'holding on'

the second pose is much better. it looks more natural, although i think it looks like she isnt applying weight to the chair again, if you take my meaning. nice tho

i think you should get rid of the third one. honestly i think its ridiculous. it appears as if holding that pose is no strain for her. she has no mass. maybe if you moved her closer, had her wrap her hand around the chain and look like she is using muscle you could salvage it. also i dont think her feet would stay there, they would slip out.

the 4th pose might work well in an animation but it looks kinda funky as a still. she looks kinda far from the chair, but maybe it swung back. dunno. id say do some tumbnail sketches to nail this one down (all of em should be sketched first really) they pose/animate her.

nnice bod/breasts. id say shrink them abit. you might like it better actually. keep up the good work!

[[666]Flat]

It looks kinda nice and you tried to bring teh "funney" into play in yer last pic, which iz alwayz a good idea. Her nipples are pretty dang big, tho. Take a look at her breasts in pic #1 - the shading around her right nippel looks pretty odd, I mean, it makes the whole thing look like it was waaay too big, bigger than in the other pics. Other than that, a cutie model you got there.

[[666]Flat]

Hey, I have an idea - we could turn this thread into a "post crazy posed models" fest, folks!!1 Gather all the useless models on your hd and celebrate teh funney! OK I'll second lowpoly:



g0 g0 g0!

[lowpoly]

dontfallin: Thanks.

Matt Ryan: It's GI with Photoshop post processing. You're right about #1. But with a realistic position she'd sit much more inside, something I didn't wan't with this image. I thought I'd get away with it. Well, I didn't.

Second pose should work, you can hold it even without support. Third pose, I agree about the strain. I wondered if she could hold herself like that, then decided she couldn't which led to pose #4. Which is not that realistic. I wanted to have the flying shoes and the anticipation - both wouldn't happen in reality, she'd fall down vertically in no time.

Great critique, thank you.

Flat: Nipple shape is intentional. Regarding your second post: Why don't you make your own thread? Please go away.

[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: lowpoly ]

[Ranuzan]

In the first one, I think it does feel like her torso may be too wide... perhaps bringing her breasts a little closer together would help? As far as my experience has led me to believe (heh heh..) that bras and corsets and their ilk tend to pull breasts together and up, rather than just decorating them

But otherwise... wow, I'm impressed. Makes me wish I knew more about 3d rendering.

[Nicklas]

I don't know what your intensions was while creating the image.
If it was to create a realistic woman, I think you failed, but if you wanted it to look like a 60's style pin-up, with todays pretty f***ed up barbie ideals, you have done a great job
The only thing I feel I can critizize is the clothes in the first image, and the poses (that already have been talked about)
I think the clothing looks to "flat" and follows the shape of the body to much, if it is'nt a body painting I think there should be more wrinkles, and the whole cloth should look a little more relaxed. The material looks a little to shiny IMO. maybe add a specular map with more variation
What kind of 3D software did you use?
Could we see a wireframe?

[[666]Flat]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lowpoly:
Regarding your second post: Why don't you make your own thread? Please go away.

---

Because it would probably get faster deleted than you could say "PLAYA HATA", bro. BTW, I knew nobody would join in, it's not like I'd really care, just doing it for kicks and fun. Keep yo barbie doll shakin' it, rite? Peace.

[lowpoly]

Ranuzan: You're right they should be closer together. Thanks.

Nicklas: Not realistic, so more the latter. Wrt to the cloth it was supposed to be stretchy and shiny/metalized. Hard to describe. But maybe a few more foldes at the side, yes. Software is Max 4. Animated wireframe is here (DivX, 2MB).

Flat: What an explanation.

[ September 24, 2002: Message edited by: lowpoly ]