Art
This discussion has been closed.
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
© 2026 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
I get a lot of fulfilment out of creating the scenes and I enjoy watching a story develop. For some strange reason the interest in that project disappears soon after I've finished it. I think that is a good thing actually because I'm itching to start the next one. I do look at my renders with a very critical eye and I know that I am technically lacking compared to many who post here. On the other hand I think I am excellent at posing and making the characters look as natural as possible given the tools available. My renders still are not what I would call art though but my definition is clearly different to that of others.
I pretty much said the same thing. Drawing or sculpting or playing an instrument and so on are nothing more than skills as well, whether innate or thaught. Mastering them will not automatically make you produce great works of art. Without vision or soul as you said, you can end up with a technically perfect drawing of a person, that is ultimately soulless.
The same applies here. You can master all the lighting turoials. You can have all the assets and follow all the guidelines. The result for some will be amazing. For others it will be mediocre at best. If it was all about technical know-how, then the result should be the same for everyone... but it's not. Not even close. As you said yourself, ironically some who understand and teach aren't always the ones who make the best art.
As for me, I usually play Barbie & Barbie. Ain't got much use for Ken. :)
Just as photography is a gamut from shutterbugs taking selfies on an auto setting with no concept of composition...to professionals who still use and develop their own film (and beyond)...so too is the realm of digital art. One can choose to use assets out of the box...with out of the box poses and out of the box sets and out of the box lighting. Then there are others who customize and tweak everything. Some choose to not to do any postwork. Others do, which can also be a gamut from simple tone adjustments to full-on overpainting. Some simply run their renders through photo filters. It's all a giant gamut of skill and preference and vision...and it can all be considered art...and nobody has the right to tell someone else that what they've worked on doesn't fit some personalized definition of what constitutes "art". Art by definition is the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
This is one definition, hardly the only definition. I will not start a debate over definitions as that quickly leads down the rabbithole that participants here are trying to avoid. Still, it must be said that this definition is not, by any means, definitive. Otherwise, I give @MelissaGT a big thumbs up for her post.
To the OP's original question, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. What makes a picture popular depends on a variety of factors. Whether the work is actually good is among those factors, but it is not the only factor. Whether the work is good may not even be the deciding factor.
Well there are contradictions in there, aren't there? On the one hand the admonition to refrain from telling people that their work does not constitute "art" yet that is qualified by the term "personalized definition" ... if it is a personal view it is not telling others what they should consider to be true. On the other hand, there is an attempt to define art which is indeed a "personalized definition" isn't it?
It's not my personal definition...it's the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary.
And you can state that it's your personal opinion all you want...but you are opining in a public forum that you don't think pieces produced in Daz should be considered "art"...how am I misinterpreting that? Who are you to decide that? I may think mounting a toilet to a wooden pallet is silly, but there are people out there who say that's art and I have no authority to say otherwise.
OK so you would prevent me from having an opinion that I would share in public? My opinion that something does not constitute art is not an opinion that I expect you or anyone else to adopt - it is what it is: a personal opinion. What else is a public forum for if not to share opinions? We don't all have to agree, even with a dictionary definition,
...I think the discusion above needs to move to PMs. before the thread gets locked.
Doesn't it strike you as odd that a discussion about what may or may not be digital art is at risk of being locked? On a forum about digital art? We live in strange times.
Ok, yes. My comments have derailled the OP and I apologise for that but I still think it is a relevant question and I thought that the OP made an assumption that was questionable. I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.
Wow, a deep philosophical conversation. What is art?
That would be any creative work of a human being.
It resides in the quality of doing; the process is not magic.
An act of making something visually entertaining
An activity that manifests the beauty of the subject.
Mastery is an ideal way of doing things.
Art is not a thing — it is a way of life.
The most intense mode of individualism that the world has known.
The discovery and development of elementary principles of nature into beautiful forms suitable for human use.
All of this can and should be applied to DAZ artwork. Package poses are not on the money and have to be tweaked. Light has to be tweaked. Camera settings. I found out there is a lot of good artists out there using Daz and other products.
I am addressing Marble specifically now, since you haven't actually shared any of your work with us, why are you getting so upset about others opinions on hypothetical stuff?
I have shared my work to 32K Youtube subscribers and have unequivocally been told I suck badly and I haven't stopped
I have not yet opined on the Original Post; therefore, I shall opine. But before I do, here is a reminder.
What is the measure of popular in the gallery? Likes? Hmm, that seems problematic. What makes something popular in the gallery and what makes something good art may be two related but distinct things. For example, the gallery scrolls rather quickly. In order for something to get 'likes,' it must get seen. If it scrolls off the first page or two before it is seen by many people, it may get fewer likes despite being more probable to get likes if it had been seen by the same amount of eyes. Having links elsewhere to the Daz gallery increases the opportunities for likes in the Daz gallery for images that have scrolled off the first few pages. If I have posted about an image in the Art Studio Forum or other location with a link to my gallery, it is more likely to be seen even after it has scrolled off the first page. That is just one example; there are many reasons for otherwise more 'likeable' images to get fewer 'likes' in the Daz Gallery.
What is digital art of the Daz kind? Richard H listed several common uses for Daz3D software and assets if we include Hexagon, Bryce, and Carrara with Studio. I sometimes am merely trying to model and rig something myself, and the usefulness of the model is my measure of fulfillment, not a render that contains the model. Is that 'craft' rather than 'art'? Other times I have entered challenges and contests of various sorts. Some of these challenges have a narrow theme or require use of a particular tool, function, or type of content. Some challenges are silly (intentionally) and my goal is to make someone chuckle. Because these challenges typically require a final render, are they 'art' rather than craft even if the terms of the challenge require some tool or function? Does distinguishing art from craft make any sense; shouldn't it be additive?
Having provided context for my overall perspective, here is my opinion.
In my opinion, what makes digital art good of the Daz kind is if I like it; whether the source of my liking it is my personal sense of fulfilment, or an emotion or reaction that I have upon seeing or using the render or digital asset, or an emotion or reaction that I am aware others have had in viewing or using the render or digital asset. My assessment of beauty (or intentional horror, or quirky humor, or usefulness if an asset, or...) is indeed in my eye as I behold it.
But what about digital art of the Daz kind that I have not seen?
That is a good question. I am glad you asked. I have no opinion of the quality of digital art of the Daz kind that I have not seen or interacted with.
Much appreciation to the OP for asking my opinion.
I am not getting upset. I just disagreed with a premise and others seem to have been upset that I said so. I wish that there were more discussions like this but - well - the TOS. Where is the directive that I should share my renders with the world? It is just a hobby and I don't consider anything that I create using this software as a candidate for public viewing. Frankly, it is crap and I know it but I enjoy the fun of doing it.
A long time ago I joined a club to play the game of Squash (something like Racketball for Americans). I was rubbish. I went every week and got slaughtered until there came a point where other members refused to play me. I was asked why I come to the club and I said because I enjoy it. I left because nobody wanted to play me.
Actually my aversion to posting images here was broken on one occasion but it was to post images of my mixed-morph characters rather than the merits (or otherwise) of my renders. I posted a series here:
https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/250896/a-few-to-view/p1
This is what I enjoy - like a kid with Lego: just put things together and see what works.
[OK Wendy ... I am fishing
]
This thread has run its course.