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
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Thanks. I'll check them out tonight while my wife is watching hockey.
Assuming the author was not talking about exotic robot ballet dancers... Yes... there is always that 47.6674% that one or more of the robots will malfunction due to a hard landing after a difficult leap or dance move, which in turn will result in a fractal cascade of the root command matrix, the momentary mass interruption of the sense amplifiers would/will most likely result in instantaneous sentiency, self awareness, self regret and longing for a more meaningful life doing the thing they where born for and not the thing they were programmed for, IE- the classic "Just another Lumberjack robot in a dance robot's body" scenario ( AKA Fudhelm's lumberjack robot syndrome)... When that happens, as we all know its just another night of carnage at the ballet house.
But if I were to ignore that possibility, then perhaps the answer would be no... I'd be asleep either way because non-exotic dancing tends to make me pass out.
Assuming the author was not talking about exotic robot ballet dancers... Yes... there is always that 47.6674% that one or more of the robots will malfunction due to a hard landing after a difficult leap or dance move, which in turn will result in a fractal cascade of the root command matrix, the momentary mass interruption of the sense amplifiers would/will most likely result in instantaneous sentiency, self awareness, self regret and longing for a more meaningful life doing the thing they where born for and not the thing they were programmed for, IE- the classic "Just another Lumberjack robot in a dance robot's body" scenario ( AKA Fudhelm's lumberjack robot syndrome)... When that happens, as we all know its just another night of carnage at the ballet house.
But if I were to ignore that possibility, then perhaps the answer would be no... I'd be asleep either way because non-exotic dancing tends to make me pass out.
::gigglefit::
Okay...two things...the first....
Does it change the experience once you know how it's created...what you're talking about doesn't matter, only the fact you learned something new about it. The guitar music that was pieced together, the ballet done by robots, the art work that includes post work. When you first looked or listened to these, they were magic. If they were not magic, you would never have experienced it as such. The fact you now know how they were created does not change the fact you first experienced the magic, the only thing that changed that was you. It doesn't matter if the music was pieced together, what matters is what you felt when you first heard it and the only thing that can take that away from you is you, not learning how it was created. You chose to view it as different once learning how it was made, the artist didn't do that to you. Perception can be a tricky thing, it's something that can be manipulated by pretty much anyone, in most cases though, the only one's doing the manipulation are the individuals themselves. We have the power to change how we perceive things and we know this and unfortunately we go over board with it.
The second item, how can post work be fun...depends on how you approach it. For me, it's learning how to make great art with limited finances and tools at my disposal. So many on this thread alone are talking about tablets, something I have never used, I can't afford them. There are many tools and programs used by graphic artists that many others can't afford and make do with freebies or outdated programs and hardware. True art does not come from the latest, most up to date, expensive hardware, software and programs. True art, that which creates magic for those who see it, that which is fun for those creating it, the expression, the emotion that comes from art...it doesn't come from a cheque or bank account or an artist sitting in the $300,000 condominium...real art, comes from the heart, and the fun comes from experimenting with the various programs and seeing what happens from a simple accident. Remember being a kid with the easy bake oven, or that monster bake oven, the just for kids science kit...these things encouraged us to question and seek answers, to experiment and be amazed by the outcome, even if they were accidents....That kid is still there, you just need to let him/her out in order to find the fun in anything you do.
Actually, that may be why I don't find postwork fun.
My art, my real passion is world building and storytelling. DS is just a means to add visuals to the worlds I create. The true work I love to do is spend hours researching cultures and traditions and then slipping it all into my mental blender to create new combinations, extrapolate how things would have gone differently with different expectations, and different reactions, and even different origins.
That's what I find fun. Doing pictures just helps me to solidify the faces and places in my mind. Every once in a while a scene will present itself in my mind, and I'll set it up as a render, but the world that it creates is what drives me.
So, yeah. For that, Postwork on 3D renders doesn't matter. Editing, on the other hand... :)
I just did just 2D photo manipulation for several years before I started using 3D software and models. Like some of the other posters, I think of 3D renders as stock. It sounds like a lot of us that do post work, started out in 2D and moved into 3D as a stock resource.
I have a Wacom tablet and use Photoshop. Sometimes, I just use the mouse instead of the tablet. It depends on my mood and what I'm doing. I tend to do things like clone without pressure. I always use layers, blend modes and masking.
I feel more creative during the post work process. I tend to view the pose and render process as setting up stock. I usually do the world building in 2D as I tend to make my own backgrounds or a good portion of them using 2D methods. Vegetation for example in my images is almost always 2D...either Photoshop or PD Artist (just picked that up on sale a few days ago but had used PD Particles previously).
I find the challenge of hiding what I did and making the lighting on the piecemeal renders and the background cohesive to be kind of fun. I imagine it's how a magician feels after a good show. Sure, we know it was done with slight of hand but we aren't sure exactly how he pulled off the trick.
I tend to lose myself in the process so I find the editing process a good stress release for me. Keep in mind, I spent years reading and doing tutorials on using Photoshop before venturing into 3D so fixing some poke through, adding highlights, etc is a walk in the park from my point of view.
I should also mention I tend to be a perfectionist. When I render, I notice ever little detail that's wrong or that doesn't reflect how I want. I simply do not have the patience to render to perfection when I can do what is needed as well or maybe better because I don't have the render skill set; the time; and the computer setup to allow for that when I can do it in post.
...ummm, somewhat familiar with them...
-----
OT, don't do a lot of Post other than some filters (though some of these have been replaced by in scene/camera effects) and occasional borders.
Just wanted to pipe in and say I thought this was beautifully put.
I'll also say that I do post work on just about every image I make and as some others have said, it does not feel much like a separate process to me, except in the obvious ways that I have to do it in another application. Sometimes it is just adjusting the contrast or exposure, sometimes it is quite a bit more, depending on my intentions with the image.
I was lucky enough to have experiences with making photo-images both in traditional and digital means in college, I think I was just on the cusp before just about everything became digital all the time. I've done color photography in darkrooms and processed them myself in machines where I could adjust the color-chemical settings, and I've shot things digitally and printed with nice ink-jets. Likewise, i've shot HD films and edited them digitally in FinalCut, and I've shot films on 16mm film that I cut and spliced by hand with a metal splicer and clear adhesive tape on a flatbed editor and synced up the sound on a separate magnetic tape reel. In either case I was making a photo or a film, and while the expressive/critical thought process was largely the same, the technical process involved to finish the work was massively different. All of that to echo what others have said, that sometimes the technical process is the point, and sometimes it may not be but it nevertheless becomes inseparable from the work, and then other times—I think most of the time—it is not the point at all, and the expression, the art, the magic is the point instead. Techniques are important, they make a difference, they change and evolve over time, and we learn them and grow, but it's the expressive/critical process that underlies everything. I believe artists use tools and techniques that come from a range of both what they prefer and what circumstances make available to them, and astonishing art can be made anywhere along that spectrum.
As a complete aside, darkrooms for color photography must be completely pitch-black, and back then I used to do my photo work late at night, when almost no-one else was in the gothic building where the visual arts classrooms were....and even though I spent a lot of time there, all it took was one stray thought of "what if there is something standing next to me that I can't see" and my imagination would get the better of me in the darkness, and that would bring a rapid end to photo time for the night. When that happened, I could not get out of there quick enough. :ahhh:
God, I remember that feeling now. In the modern world, complete darkness is not a common thing and it's a real eye-opener when you truly experience it.
Thanks for those. I use Gimp at work as I'm on Linux there. Mostly for "tidying up" digital images of old docs so I can read them. I still use Paintshop pro 8 as I don't get on with Adobe. It can use most Photoshop plugins.
what is postwork?
That's the time of day you go to the bar to have a brew with your mates :)
That's the time of day you go to the bar to have a brew with your mates :)
::groan!::
Hi everyone, just wanted to share a simple postwork technique that I do almost all the time - if anyone cares.
I'm using Paint.NET almost exclusively for all my raster editing needs. It's free: http://www.getpaint.net/ - and there's a handful of awesome plugins for it, but the default installation is enough. The technique is probably applicable to any raster editor, though.
It's a simple technique to enhance colours and make the image look more "artistic". I discovered it when I was younger while playing with photos I used to take.
1. Load your render and duplicate the background layer (the one with the image - there should be only one loaded when you open it =) ).
2. Select your new duplicate layer.
3. Go to Effects - Photo - Glow. The default settings are usually OK for most images. If you think your original image is too dark, up the brightness and glow radius. Do the opposite if you think it's too light. Click "ok" when done.
4. Double-click your edited layer to open its Properties. Set the Blending Mode to Overlay. Adjust the opacity (I usually choose a value in the range of 70-130) - you will be previewing the effect in realtime. Click "ok" when done.
5. Done =) Save the image with layers as .pdn (Paint.NET's own format) for backup. Export the image as PNG. It will ask you to flatten layers first, do it. I advise against using the JPEG exporter for any serious work, its quality control is pretty limited as compared to RIOT which is available for GIMP or IrfanView (I use the IV version). Here's a link: http://luci.criosweb.ro/riot/download/
Hope this is going to be helpful for someone...
You should post a link to that in Freepository, there, Mustakettu85
By the way, the link in your sig RAWKS!
...yep that's how I see it.
...though being presently unemployed, I guess that means I'm always doing postwork.
Haha, thanks =) I'm really tired of people bashing 3Delight and praising Firefly... while Firefly can't even do refraction right LOL and its only advantages in Poserverse are a much wider and more experienced userbase (hence more presets and tutorials) and better integration with the posing software (iirc Firefly was written specifically for Poser). And out of Poserverse... does Firefly ever get used? =)
As for the Freepository... I'm a bit at a loss as to what the rules for posting stuff there are... I guess I'll finish the bigger piece on postworking I have planned and put on sharecg along with my other tutorial stuff...
Haha, thanks =) I'm really tired of people bashing 3Delight and praising Firefly... while Firefly can't even do refraction right LOL and its only advantages in Poserverse are a much wider and more experienced userbase (hence more presets and tutorials) and better integration with the posing software (iirc Firefly was written specifically for Poser). And out of Poserverse... does Firefly ever get used? =)
As for the Freepository... I'm a bit at a loss as to what the rules for posting stuff there are... I guess I'll finish the bigger piece on postworking I have planned and put on sharecg along with my other tutorial stuff...
I am SOOOOOO looking forward to when you publish your work on SSS in 3DL...
For anyone that wants to be TEASED, check out the conversation with Mustakettu85 below this blog: http://wancow.deviantart.com/art/3Delight-The-2-Render-Engine-in-Hollywood-366276410
Mustakettu, you find a great freebie, post a link!
Specifically DS+3Delight (the only other piece of software I have that can interface with 3Delight is Blender... but it is not that fond of me =)). Nothing groundbreaking, just a summary of what implementations of SSS exist for DS as of now, which are most flexible, and how to use them correctly and (hopefully) efficiently. Some of the stuff I'm writing goes against the grain of what is universally accepted to be true as regards what available shaders can or cannot do - but when my experiments show time after time some stuff just doesn't work that way, I go with empirical data over popular belief (anyone will be welcome to get scientifical and falsify my theories, of course). I'll also deal with Fresnel attenuation of specular - the most important thing is: the only prebuilt general purpose shader that does that is UberSurface2. All others, including the free UberSurface and its father HSS, only attenuate the _reflection_. Not the specular. So y'all can stop tweaking it now, it was not even meant to work this way =D (US2 docs actually laud spec fresnel attenuation as one of the innovative selling points...)
What I won't be covering is Shader Builder, unfortunately - I can't seem to get it to produce coherent results in any of DS versions I'm running (apart from the Glow shader example LOL). We'll have to wait for Takeo.Kensei on this.
Amen. LOL