Most Important: the Method or the Result?
nelsonsmith
Posts: 1,337
I noticed this even before I finally took the plunge and decided to give Daz a try, but this seems to be a common thing that separates both the people who use Daz to create art, and people who simply look at the works of people who use Daz and other similar software.
What is more important -- my final piece as close to how I envisioned it, or the means I used to realize it? I see some people bash the use of photoshop for instance as a post production tool, some others bash the use of unalterated figures or poses, or light set ups. Because of this even I will sometimes look at a finished render and debate did I tweak it enough to consider myself an actually artist even though the concept behind the scene is entirely mine.
The way I look at it is the same as I do with my photographic or film work. I don't always build sets or props, sometimes I look for an existing location or buy something that is exactly what I need, and I find people who come as close to the appearance of my characters as possible. On a film set, I don't always set my own lights, or even get behind the camera, sometimes I simply direct the chaos. This doesn't change because I'm working in a 3D environment, though a lot of people look at it as if the two are completely different. To me every Daz figure is a character in their own right (an actor so to speak) a set like StoneMason's Urban Sprawl is simply a location, if I had to develop the skills to build such a set or charaters, it would be literally years for me to realize some scenes. In the end it's the final product that is the goal, but that's my opinion.
Am I wrong in this, and is there a difference when we talk about computer graphics as opposed to other disciplines like painting, or old school photography (which is also undergoing a similar debate)?
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Stephen King when writing the Dark Tower book series was asked by readers left on a cliff-hanger ending of book 3 what would happen in book 4. Some readers had stated they had been diagnosed with terminal diseases and were told by medical professionals they didn't have long to live.
Kings responded he had no way of knowing what' was going to happen to them, because the characters took on a life of their own as he wrote.
What I see in my mind and what my final product shows or attempts to is almost never close to what I had originally thought or intended to make. The only exception I can think of is when I work from an existing piece with intentions of slight modifications and even then my final product can go wildly into another direction. Art sometimes has a life of it's own, I used to think I was undisciplined and that was why it never matched my intentions, but I'm more inclined to think of my finished product of more of an attempt to recording something I witnessed, and less of a composition I tried to duplicate from my imagination. This has actually worsened as I've learned some modeling skills because I have the ability to change things more than ever.
I make no difference to 3D work than I do to painting, knitting, sculpting, carpentry, composing music, designing a flyer with an offer to mow lawns, writing the next great zombie/vampire/circus clown defining pulp or literary masterpiece depending on ones point of view. All art has an energy all it's own, we express it because we can not contain it for very long. It's a crazy badger that becomes lodged in ones slacks, which I think McGuyver had a word for this ther other day and I'm at a loss wat it was, but either way; it must get out of ones slacks! Boy howdy!
Photography was not considered an artform, initially, because non-photographers considered that the photographer created nothing. Digital tools, in visual arts and music, lower the bar for entry. But they do not cannot and will not substitute for a lack of artistic vision and craft. It took years to learn how to play an instrument or use paint and a paintbrush, and the discipline and character inculcated through that process would eventually blossom (for some) into unbridled emotional expression or consistent, controlled craft, or both. The proof of the art was that it caught and held the eye or ear.
This is still the proof of art. Film directors do not have to train actors or point the camera or write scripts to be considered competent. But that thing that they do, if they do it well and long enough, is lauded for its power to move the human heart. Sometimes its enough to make a pretty picture. The artist seeks an upheaval, no less. Every great visual or musical artist that we have witnessed has achieved just that. And we love them for it. We can leave the critics on the sideline where they belong. And the purists must find contentment living under their own self-created laws. Move the viewers' hearts, and it will not matter how you did it.
The same arguments exist in traditional art mediums as well and if you've heard enough of them you know they often arise because the target audience knows some artists are purposely trying to emotionally provoke the audience in a negative way. I avoid the cutting edge of some artistic movements because of that dynamic. It's not really interesting to me to upset people to gain an audience.
And you don't sound like a computer programmer but even they nag each other of the way each other formats their written source code. Lucky computer source code editor let's one make sort work of reformatting code to make it easily readable by human beings.
So all the matters is that the piece looks like the creator of it intended. The most realiable thing you can do is try to make art that you like and know that you are similar enough to everybody else other people might like it. If not, at least you'll like it if no one else does.
For me it's the method. I grew up on traditional art forms, sketching, sculpture, pastels, ink wash, painting, etc. I was good at what i did, but could never really capture what I envisioned in my mind accurately enough. With 3D, it's pretty easy to get close and even surpass what I am thinking, so I get more satisfaction out of the setup phase and letting the renderer do the image for me. I feel it takes just as much skill in setting up materials and surfaces as it does doing postwork in photoshop. Since I tend to rework or even create new textures most of the time I still have a postwork aspect to the image even though the renderer creates the final image. I also strive to be unique when I can,
it's way to easy to load premade presets and addons from the marketplaces and hit render, so I always strive to kitbash as much as possible, create my own models when i can and create/tweak textures to make them unique. There is something very satisfying for me to know that what I created is of my own doing as much as possible and not someone elses work.
I find that the more I try to push an image where I envision it, the more it pushes back and becomes harder and harder to work with. I'm trying to learn to let the image go where it wants to, despite where I want it.
It doesn't matter which road you take if you still end up in the same spot.
The reuslt matters. The only time the process matters is if it's slowing you down.
It depends on what it is you are trying to achieve. If you are looking to only make an image, then the image is all that counts. If you are looking to build the skills to make images, then it is the process that counts.
Neither is better than the other. They are different.
When one practices a skill, or works to discover a new one, the final image may not be what one wants. Numerous times. The goal may not even be to make an image, maybe it is to make an effect for an image.
When one creates an image, the skills used don't matter once the desired image is made.
When one desires to make an image USING the skills that one practiced, both matter.
Kendall
You have a vision that is bugging you to get made and DAZ and Photoshop and whatever else you use is only a means to bring that vision to life so it can stop bugging you. Just like getting a back-scratcher to hit that hard to get itch.
If others don't approve of how you got around to getting your vision shown... their tough luck. It was YOUR itch... not theirs.
The final image is what really matters to me.
If the image I want can be made with preset sets and preset poses using preset lights and preset material settings - I'm not ashamed to do so. That I don't have to adjust anything doesn't happen often, but I'll often use a couple of these "out of the box" - usually sets and material settings.
If the image I want requires me to tweak poses, adjust material settings, create my own lighting and set up my own set - I do so. I'm working on learning how to model better, and one of these days I'll figure out UVs in Hex, but even then, I'm more likely to see if I've already got something close than make it over again.
I don't like to use post work myself because my hand isn't steady enough with my trackball to do any decent painting of hair, or effects. (I don't have room for a mouse, and I've broken too many tablets to want to spend money on a new one.) I also find it boring, tedious, and not particularly inspiring - the process of postwork that is, not the end result. I have no problem when other people use postwork, usually to great effect.
But then again, I really don't care if I'm doing enough to be an artist either. I'm getting an image out of my head, better than I could when I used to try to draw it. That's what makes me happy. And that's what matters.
It really depends for me.
Ultimately, I think results matter most.
*BUT* I do think, however, at the same time, I like originality and creativity so stock vicky's face close up, with premade lights, no original background, and hair, do not excactly get me excited either. Such images of beautiful women are what DAZ Studio is really designed for and caters to. So for me to get excited I need something moe than that.
I prefer images that tell stories, and ive noticed that since IRAY has become the dominant render engine, the focus has shifted towards trying to achieve a realistic result. While that is nice, it doesn't excite my creativity as much.
There are only so many pouty women's faces I can look at. I need to see something that draws me into the story involving that girl.
Playing with DS is a hobby for me. As such, I'm interested in the processes. I want to see what I can kitbash together, or make a morph for, or alter a texture to get an effect. I look for projects that make me develop skills, more than "create images". For example, I don't collect new characters (how many 20-something fashion models does one need?), but love morph collections that let me make my own. But, that's just me, and what I'm looking to get out of it. It might take me hours and days of tweaking details that no one will ever see. The final image is merely an excuse to go thru the exercise. It's kinda like building model railroad miniatures...
I've "done art" for years, and I know I can compose and design and create images. But, that's what I do for a living. This is a hobby.
If you enjoy what you're doing and you like the results, whichever way you get there doesn't really matter. Sure, it's nice to have people enjoy your work too, but in the end, it's all about what fullfills you.