Loading...
> >

Wensday by Elianeck SKIN COLOUR

2»

Comments

  • magog_a4eb71abmagog_a4eb71ab Posts: 769

    Fauvist said:

    I used one ghost light at 200w facing the figure at a distance of 10 feet.  The colour of light was very blue 9000 (K) - (as you can see in the screenshot).  It made almost no difference.  The right side of my rendered image is with this blue light.  The skin is still yellow/peach, not pink.  I think I'll just return the product.

    Yeah, and its giving the skin an ever so slight & hardly noticeable green tint to it, which means its blending with a yellow-ish color. Best way I could describe it. I would at least try to reposition the light similar to how the primary light is in the promo, set to sphere, and wide angled like 80 degrees with a width & height of 50-75, and start with a color temp of 6000K with the Lumens at 95k. From there, you're just going to have to mess with the Hue & Saturation on the Translucency Color and SSS Reflectance Tint.

  • FauvistFauvist Posts: 2,290

    nemesis10 said:

    Fauvist said:

    I've always assumed that the main promotional image for each product at DAZ3d is a true representation of how the product looks without any special lighting or postwork.  Unless a promotional image states right on the image that it is an "artistic interpretation" or something to that effect, I assume it's rendered as sold. 

     

    A long time ago, I had worked with a professional medical photographer.  He occasionally had to submit evidence and testify in trials.  He said it was very hard for people to understand that no image is immutable evidence; every photograph contains the editorial choices of the photographer.  Change depth of field, aperture, lens, film type, lighting or a million other factors and the image changes.  Thus, in a trial, you not only present the photo but have the photographer testify under oath how the photo was taken.  Advertisement images are different.  They are less about achieving a very specific look and more about inspiration.  Imagine you are buying a paint set which has a Vermeer painting on the box.  You buy it, take it home, start painting, and rush back to the store because your "Girl with the Pearl Earring" doesn't look like Vermeer's.  The product you bought looks like it used the figure that was sold, the textures that were included, as well as the appropriate morphs; you are not purchasing the ability to exactly replicate the advertising images.

    The main promo image for a product on a store page is an advertisment of what you'll get if you buy the product.  It's not "inspiration" or an "interpretation" it's like a photograph of a dress in a clothing catalogue.  The colour and texture of the dress in the ad has to match the actual dress as exactly as possible.  The inspiration and interpretation and creativity and exciting flare of the image comes from the $50,000 a day supermodel, the $4000 a day best makeup artist in the world, the $1000 an hour hair stylist, the pose and expression captured of the supermodel photographed 700 times until they get the perfect shot, the $7000 photo retoucher that perfects the appearrance of everything - but the dres - the dress looks exactly like the one you'd buy.  They don't shine purple light on it.  They don't superimpose fabric with little poodles on it.  And then editors and produers and the client who is selling the dress inspect the final image to make sure it looks EXACTLY like the actual dress.  Because if some woman (or man) pays $12,000 for a dress, and it shows up at their home looking different than it did in the catalogue - it gets returned to the store.  You only need to read the reviews on Amazon of the millions of items that get returned because they show up at peoples homes a different colour than the picture on Amazon.   In "editorial" photography, then creativity can run rampant and they can superimpose a psychedelic kaleidoscope of colour and texture on the dress and put it on a giraffe riding a bicycle.  But if you took a catalogue photograph to a court with the dress it's suppose to represent and the photograph is a different colour or texture than the actual dress - the judge is going to make the store give the customer back their money.  I've done commercial photography.  I know what the standards are for advertising photographs.  You don't misrepresent the appearance of a product which is being bought primarily for it's appearance.  It's called false advertising. 

  • magog_a4eb71abmagog_a4eb71ab Posts: 769

    Faeryl Womyn said:

    Has anyone considered asking Daz that all promo's be put in the Gallery so they can be linked in the store, then when shopping you click the image and get the actual person who made the promo at their gallery and it's listed how they got the image to look the way it did. Also a good way to sell more product.

    Seriously, people buy the products because they like how they look in the promo's and want to recreate that same look. Unless the customer has that option, are not promo's a fake representation of the product the customer can't reach as a result?

    I think as long as they provide a couple of promo images using default settings & no post work, they can have as many post-worked whatever images they want. I do agree that we should be given a good idea of how something looks without all of the fancy lighting and such.

  • FauvistFauvist Posts: 2,290

    magog_a4eb71ab said:

    Fauvist said:

    I used one ghost light at 200w facing the figure at a distance of 10 feet.  The colour of light was very blue 9000 (K) - (as you can see in the screenshot).  It made almost no difference.  The right side of my rendered image is with this blue light.  The skin is still yellow/peach, not pink.  I think I'll just return the product.

    Yeah, and its giving the skin an ever so slight & hardly noticeable green tint to it, which means its blending with a yellow-ish color. Best way I could describe it. I would at least try to reposition the light similar to how the primary light is in the promo, set to sphere, and wide angled like 80 degrees with a width & height of 50-75, and start with a color temp of 6000K with the Lumens at 95k. From there, you're just going to have to mess with the Hue & Saturation on the Translucency Color and SSS Reflectance Tint.

    You do it.  I'm returning it.

  • magog_a4eb71abmagog_a4eb71ab Posts: 769

    Fauvist said:

    magog_a4eb71ab said:

    Fauvist said:

    I used one ghost light at 200w facing the figure at a distance of 10 feet.  The colour of light was very blue 9000 (K) - (as you can see in the screenshot).  It made almost no difference.  The right side of my rendered image is with this blue light.  The skin is still yellow/peach, not pink.  I think I'll just return the product.

    Yeah, and its giving the skin an ever so slight & hardly noticeable green tint to it, which means its blending with a yellow-ish color. Best way I could describe it. I would at least try to reposition the light similar to how the primary light is in the promo, set to sphere, and wide angled like 80 degrees with a width & height of 50-75, and start with a color temp of 6000K with the Lumens at 95k. From there, you're just going to have to mess with the Hue & Saturation on the Translucency Color and SSS Reflectance Tint.

    You do it.  I'm returning it.

    That would probably be best & less frustrating. I would be more than happy to play around with it, but I have no interest in buying the product. Unfortunately sometimes you just have to screw around with something for a couple of hours to get it to look the way you want.

  • SeraSera Posts: 1,675

    Forgive me if this has already been considered, but did you check her makeup options? She definitely does not have the blushing in some of the promos. It appears the "pronounced blush" is available in some of her makeups shown in the makeup promo (last one shown). 

  • ioonrxoonioonrxoon Posts: 896
    edited August 2021

    Trying to replicate the promo and expecting to get the skin to look as advertised are two different things.

    If a product requires specific lighting conditions to get it to look as advertised, then it's useless. Listing the lights is not a solution.

    Nevermind that you shouldn't have to purchase extra lights to get it to look that way; even if they were included it'd be useless unless you make promo type of renders.

    You can't just throw in a skin enhancing hdri / position the lights as in the promo when rendering indoor/outdoor scenes and call it a day.

    Post edited by ioonrxoon on
  • SeraSera Posts: 1,675

    Have you guys even looked at the makeups? The blush (which is what OP wanted on the skin) is makeup option!!! 

  • ioonrxoonioonrxoon Posts: 896
    edited August 2021

    @certaintree38 The OP's issue is the skin looking completely different, not the lack of blush make-up. If you look at the images he posted, you can see the blush is already applied.

    Post edited by ioonrxoon on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 111,223

    Since the original poster has decided on their course of action the thread is being closed.

This discussion has been closed.