Which DAZ Genesis 8 M/F characters are the most realistic/beautiful?
This discussion has been closed.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Yup, this is brilliant. I posted it elsewhere before. And to this date it was never replicated to that degree anywhere which should tell you something about how nearly impossible this is to do. This and Rachel are the two best CG human examples we have today IMO.
Yeah, the last one is a photo. I included it for comparison purposes. The first one is from my dream files. I don't remember where I got it. Probably from ArtStation. While I was looking for that one, I saw another impressifve model. Lots of hard work and skill in Zbrush for this one and the others, but they will fool most people.
I beg to differ. Perhaps you mean it hasn't been done by one person since? Here are a couple done by a team off the top of my head: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA3_X5rQLP0 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MIkoLBWRv0 . Benjamin Button was pretty much all CGI character and that's a relatively old movie. Even a single person has done it since Chris (the CGI god!) did it. This is the guy who practically laughed in my face when I approached him for a job with Daz characters. But his work speaks for itself. It's brilliant. Edit: He didn't do the modeling, just the rigging and animation, so Chris is still King.
Plus more have been done that you didn't even notice. Only the failures get the attention.
All uncanney valley stuff.
So the first one isn't CG but a painting traced over a reference image of Marina Nery.
https://nad4r.deviantart.com/art/Portrait-of-Marina-Nery-587034517
Who by the way (unrelated to the discussion) seems to have a super strange body
http://www.fashionmodeldirectory.com/models/Marina_Nery/showphoto/305692/
Maybe for you. You knew beforehand you were going to see CGI and you are a CG artist. Artists are difficult to fool when they know what to look for. But for most people, this is photorealistic. I haven't seen Benjamin Button in a long time, but I remember when I saw it, I didn't think it was uncanny at all. If I didn't know any better, I would have sworn digital Emily was real. Ask a non Bladerunner fan about that scene and most of them won't see anything special about it. That's exactly how CGI is supposed to work. Anyways, I think work that you and a few others have done on your DAZ characters are about as much as can be done with 8 bit textures, no displacement and only 1 level of SSS. The models I'm referring to go well beyond that. The purple marks on your latest's face (around the eyes) are actually a subdermal skin layer (blood vessels). I'm not familiar with iRay shaders, but if you had 3 layers to work with, it would do wonders for your skin. Great work, though.
So we've crossed the uncanney valley in 2008 when Benjamin Button came out? 10 years ago? I think it was pretty obvious to anyone which was actual Brad, Brad buried under an inch of makeup, and outright CG Brad. And that's fine really, as long as people have an emotional response to a digital performance it's all good. But to claim photorealism is a bit of a stretch when, again, Villeneuve felt taken out of the movie with Tarkin and set out to make Rachel the first CG human in a movie to look and feel real. And even then they didn't succeed 100%, but it's still the first instance where I would say true photorealism has been reached.
This is an excellent example of exactly where Daz content Fails
Hair and eyes.
Dr Who, Christmas edition; one of the Doctors was CGI; I knew he was, yet I'm watching it, and telling myself, the Doctor isn't real. It looked real to me.
Except that most of that wasn't Brad, but digitally enhanced Brad and sometimes all digital Brad. http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/14593/ed-ulbrich-behind-the-extraordinary-visual-effects-of-benjamin-button
And that CGI character carried the whole movie, that won an Academy Award. It couldn't have happened if there was uncanny valley in those performances.
"This is an excellent example of exactly where Daz content Fails
Hair and eyes."
Do you think that's an iRay problem? I don't think eyes have to be the problem in DS. Given the right textures, I think its an artist's problem. But hair? Yeah. No hair system in DS. Polygon hair sucks.
Yup. eyes I'm trying hard but never 100% happy. I don't know if it's me or Iray or everything together. I can't enable proper refraction of the cornea without casting ugly shadows on the iris. Relfections always end up looking good with point lights but too glassy with HDRIs. Better transition of lacrimals to eyes is something I thought about tackling.
Hair, can't do much there without a proper hair solution.
I thought it was purely down to resembalnce and good acting. He'd played William Hartnell in the drama about the making of Doctor Who already.
No Iray is not the problem in my view.
The Daz eye geometry seems to lacks a certain
corneal bulge that maks them look flat and fake
and the lower lids lack that wet rim.
they scream DAZ/ POSER and this had not changed
much since the day of the millenuim figures.
Not that she is uber "photo realistic" but
Here is a random "regular" young girl
from a another sites gallery,
next to one of the official promo pics
from the victoria 8 pro bundle.
Sorry daz...but NOTHING about V8's eyes look even close
real to me ..it is ike the difference between a "Final Fantasy" and a "Shrek"
character.
and when you compound that with the 1990's poser transmapped
painted hair strips that look even more rubbish in silouette, you see the folly
people trying to use stock Daz content in the fanciful pursuit of "photorealism".
A cornea buldge morph is included with all Genesis I think, the wet strip is now included in the separate eyelashes starting with G8.
If people can't make realistic renders and characters that fool people with Iray given the characters I've already shown you... It is absolutely on them... It's a simple matter of garbage in gets you garbage out.. put something realistic looking in front of your camera.. something realistic will be produced... even with with bad lighting.. it will simply look like a realistic character in bad lighting.
Snow,
Admittedly, You've lost me a bit here, Snow. I disagree pretty strongly with this insight. In fact I think that this is exactly the problem with the thought processes of so many users, I can see now what Daywalker was trying to address. Garbage in doesnt mean garbage out in my experience. Inputs have no relevance at all, all that matters is the output. There is no "preferred" starting point from which all users "should" or "must" begin, but there is a finish line we all might seek to reach wich is realism to the degree that average viewers will be convinced at least for a few moments
I am the first one to jump into technical discussions in regards to realism regardless of the engine in question. I stay far away from anything directly related to artistic merits, as that really is entirely subjective and most of the time I couldnt care less about the artistic merits. I'm in this game because I love the way we use tech to create art. I can create art with anything, but I create computer art because I like what computers can bring to the game. The entire experience is entirely technical to me. A realistic render of a generic boulder is as impressive to me as a realistic human. Tech tech tech!
Like you, I offer up examples of my own work for discussion all the time. Not everyone has the stomach for such things. But to me it is the only way to steer a conversation. That said,the images you've uploaded to this thread so far do not demonstrate realism to any degree when evaluated purely upon technical merits alone. This is not to say there is not a great deal of artistic value. But we arent talking artistry.
So the question for me is; Are you open to receive technical/critical feedback on your images uploaded so far? Are you satisfied with these results to the point where you do not have interest in revsiting these ideals, or are you always looking to move forward even if you've considered yourself almost if not entirely there? If so, I've got a few things I'd like to discuss. However if you are not open to critical notes, I will gladly keep my silly opinions to myself.
What I am saying is that while you may well be satisfied with the realism in the results you are achieving, keep in mind that other people may have a different set of standards in mind. Not to say that my version of realism is any more real than yours, but they are different.
My word of advice
1. Trust no one other than yourself. That means AVOID ALL PRESETS that perform magic under the hood that you do not understand consciously. This isn't to say not to use presets at all, its to say to at some point when time allows to dissect and break them down so that eventually you DO understand them, and can evaluate from experience if you agree with these settings.
SSS is a great example. Just because Daz3d might ship a new generation of characters with certain SSS setting, it doesnt mean that this setting is fully trustworthy and no longer in need of further consideration. Never argue in defense of settings that you did not yourself design from the start, just in case they are wrong afterall. This is because if anyone asks you WHY a certain setting has been chosen you won't be able to give a specifc answer other than these are the settings you were provided by the "pros" whom you are assuming know better. Assume nothing.
2. You must seek the advice of people who are outside of your typical circles. Hopefully they will be unapologetically brutal, which after some wounds licking, should cause us to question and rethink every piece of art we have ever made. That's a good thing.
3. I was thinking of conducting a thread who's ONLY purpose was for us to share honest insights with one another. Would you participate in such a thread if I started it?
Always love practical tips that help me improve and DAZ Studio is the type of engine that you can always learn more.. I still don't know what half the stuff in the program does .. but I know enough to get the results that I want which as you and every other person making art repeats.. it's all subjective.. "beauty is in the beholders eyes". Do I claim to be the world best graphic artist... well.. not in public but my wife sure does think so.. LOL Guess thats why we stay married.. Anyways.. if you want to tell me how to do better then buy the character that I'm talking about and try it out for yourself.. it's under $20. Once you've done a test render yourself.. then give me feedback and I'll be grateful to hear what you have to say.
I think people should 'put up or shut up'.. no sense in talking about products you haven't tried personally.
I'm game. Point me in the right direction.
Aye there's the rub. You see about three-four years ago I became completely dissatisfied with skins offered here and elsewhere...to the point that I construct all of my own skins from scratch, starting from a literal blank page. I also do not know if the forum TOS would allow us to make ciritical notes about the skin products themselves. When seeking stark realism, everything involved, even the skin texture itself needs to be open for discussion and consideration. The assumption that a particular skin product is already perfect and that all that is needed is proper rendering is entirely untrue to my mind.
But I am more than willing to discuss the realism of textures that I have made myself if that's okay?
Ooh. Eyes! I can talk your ears off about eyes (and if you ever visited the iray skin thread I already have)
As mentioned there is a cornea bulge morph and the lower tear surface has been there in some form for pretty much all the generations. The only *real* difficulty with eyes in iray IMO is the inability to make a material not cast shadows (this is a feature I would absolutely love, but it is rather out of daz's hands) so if you set the eyes to refract properly there can be some shadowing issues (I'll also note that I prefer g3's eye setup to g8's if I'm honest)
That said I think I've gotten eyes in studio far closer to you first example than the V8 promos (not to toot my own horn but I like my eyes better than your specific example which doesn't appear to have much sss in the sclera, though of course I've seen more realistic examples than my offerings elsewhere)
To put my money where my mouth is here are 2 renders where I think the eyes turned out *quite* well:
And yes the only difference geometry wise is the cornea bulge morph and an iris depth morph.
While I strongly disagree with you on this, I'm glad you feel you can make instant art. DS was designed for customers like you and as long as you are satisfied, that is all that matters. After all, this software was created so amateurs can have fun.
Thought I would share some of my finding when comparing Gen 8 models purchased. This might help you when selecting figures on your next visit to the DAZ store. Note: in this test the figures were loading straight from the box without any modifying. I was surprised to find that figure Lavana & Kamilla (same hight) are fairly similar in the face with very slight changes to the body shape, the only obvious difference is the skin materials. The worst looking model is the Lori (older & younger), just poorly made lacking detail and a little freaky looking! maybe one to avoid unless your producing an alien horror! to be honest Teen Josie 8 is also a little freaky looking, I think its her face! just doesn’t look good to me. One of the best models is Daniella, worth investing for sure! the figure has a unique look with plenty of detail in the shape and interesting facial features. Feel free to compare for yourself (see attached images), hope this helps. Heres also my top diverse selection (female only sorry): Daniella, Victoria8, Celestia, Libby, Hyuna, Kallisto & Paisley.
Face comparison:
Height and body shape comparison:
My top diverse selection:
I can't see your photos but I agree about Lavana and Kamilla. They could be sisters. Of course they were created by the same artist and each artist has their own style. They are both good examples of what DAZ has to offer in realism. They rate a 3.8 (out of 5) on my Realimeter
***.
I don't agree with you about Lori (well, only partially). Yes, their body shapes look awkward and strange, but they are teens and teenager's bodiy parts develop at different rates so its not uncommon for unattractive combinations to happen. In that sense, the artist was mostly successful in portraying teenage physical growing pains. Otherwise, IMO, the product is nothing special unless you need this sort of character and are willing to fiddle with the dials. The skins are nothing special either, but I've seen much worse. Definitely not the worse G8. It looks like the artist's first character so they will improve over time. 2.8
Out of your remaining top choices, three products pop out for me: Libby, Hyuna, and Kallisto. P3D has designed consistently excellent characters over the generations. They are well detailed and beautiful, but I wouldn't rate them high as far as realism. Usually, they are slightly to moderately stylized and idealized version of real women. As great as their products are, if one were to equate realism with being faithful to the human form (as I do), then I can't rate them very high. Often times the shapes and facial features of their characters, though plausible, are highly unlikely., and while that's not the case with Libby, I still find her to be stylized. Realimeter score: 3
Hyuna and Kallisto are high tier products, the only two in your selection that I would consider for my limited library. Hyuna has textures that are attractive and exotic and though her body shape is pushing it for a typical asian woman, it's still feasible and it's not quite clear what her ethnicity is so I am willing to give it a pass. What I can't pass, however is the lack of detail in her feet. Just going by the product page renders, her feet look cartoonish and not consistent with the detail level of the rest of her body. Her hands are better, but not by very much. This is the only flaw I can find with her: 4.1
My wife says she has Kallisto but I must have overlooked her because she is up to the same high quality standards of all of Mousso's figures. Mousso has her(his?) own signature style and all the figures revel in it. I see nothing wrong with that, but I wouldn't buy more than 2 or 3 of them for that reason. They are a little too similar for me. Her figures sometimes suffer from the G8 unrealistic eye problem. Nevertheless, Kallisto is an excellent realistic DAZ specimen (with some of the sexiest waist-down morphs this side of...California) and IMO worthy of a top choice. 4.5
***the realimeter score should not be seen as judgement of the quality of a product, but merely my rating of how accurately it portrays a human subject. Realism doesn't equal quality.
The thing is.. we have to have a baseline product for both of us to be able to learn how to improve... Different skins react differently and if the discussion is how to make a character look realistic then it doesn't serve me to learn how to make your characters look realistic since I don't have access to your homemade versions and settings... Now if you want to put them up for sale then I would do the same and spend under $20 and then we can use the same character as a baseline.. If I start doing tweaks that work for your character on mine.. chances are its not going to have the same effect.
In any case... for me asking "Which DAZ Genesis 8 m/f characters are the most realistic/beautiful?" isn't really helpful since most people don't want to say.. "Oh I like this one the best" and leave it at that... it really kind of sucks the life out of the creative process that these threads just ends up being endless discussion about techniques that basically imply the end user is nothing but an 'amatuer' wasting time.
Somebody did you a great dis-service to you by not giving you a job just because your tool was DAZ and while that might have been true in the past ... I think real professionals should re-evaluate things.. the elephant has broken its chains finally.
In any case.. happy rendering.
I don't have an answer to the question in the OP (btw, was that a trick question?), but this has been quite an informative and stimulating thread for me. I'm glad I read through it early in my learning curve.
I think a feature that would enhance realism would be for models to have a chance of blinking or sneezing just as you press the Render button.
Also, I think Rashad Carter's posts are the most beautiful and realistic. ;-)
Yes, unfortunately those aren't going to do you any good if they just sit in his private collection and you never have a chance to own them... But what Mr. Rashad did prove is that it's the qaulity of the character that gets the best end results... He may argue it but Garbage In/Garbage Out was exactly what he demonstrated and showed when he said that none of the characters met with his standards.. It's pointless to talk about characters that you can't buy.