When will DAZ have realistic skins?
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
I think I see where some of the confusion is; I will note that calling something 'baked in' is not inherently an insult, and it really isn't intended to be. It comes from processes in modeling and 3D painting applications that have a technique called 'texture baking'. (It doesn't mean something like 'half baked' or have any nasty implication.) People tend to rail against it -- at us as vendors when and if we do it -- because it interferes with animation and some hyper-real lighting setups.
You tend not to see it for highlights often these days, but it's worth mentioning that you DO see it for the reverse quite a lot: for adding shadow detail. It is used often to add 'fake ambient occlusion(AO)' to clothing textures fairly often as well, also to props and scenery. If you open up a few texture files for those items, you'll see it is very commonly used for things like a slight dark line where fabric seams (not necessarily texture seams) come together; if you look at something you're wearing, you'll probably see a little shadow collected in the crease of your real world clothing that's very tiny. It can be harder to replicate that well in a 3D environment precisely because it's so tiny -- and to get AO to behave on various materials is something that can be iffy depending on what software is used/how old the software is/what other materials are in the scene/etc. (You can see why people tend to just paint that in -- there are a ton of very fussy things that could make it not appear, or not appear properly, that are a nightmare to deal with! *chuckle*)
All of these techniques are used a lot in creation of textures for games (though even that sounds like it's changing a little, but much more recently than it did in animation and still renders for film and general render art).
You can get plenty of detail with a more light-neutral reference -- and Candace is an AWESOME example of exactly that. You can see pores, the wrinkles in skin, etc. in the examples posted. In a texture with strong baked detail, they're defined by color variance, but also strong highlight and shadow. In a texture without strong baked detail, the scene light defines where light and shadow appear on the texture, and the texture is more about the variations in color and the color details instead of painting on the light and shadow.
Also! Some of the charsets made lately go a little overboard on the SSS features in my -entirely personal- opinion. That has the potential to wash out a lot of the kind of details I think you're probably looking for as well, because it blends the SSS color with the skin color. SSS and Diffuse both provide color to the skin; diffuse is usually where the texture details 'live' on a material. When you blend the two, unless the diffuse texture is loaded into the SSS setting as well (which you generally don't want to do), the details in the texture start to fade a bit. There's a great example of it in the files for the subsurface shader base, which are here: http://docs.daz3d.com/lib/exe/fetch.php/public/read_me/index/16324/16324_subsurface-shader-base.pdf -- if you scroll down to the part that has the 'Diffuse' title, you'll be able to see a good side by side comparison, and it shows what can happen to texture details. The details are still there on the texture itself... they're just changing appearance with the change in material setting. Age of Armor has a really great description of what's happening in that section of his files that will likely explain it much better than I can.
For some of the textures that seem to be losing details, it might be worth taking a look at the material settings on them to see if this -- or some other odd thing -- is going on. There's a quick way to check, too, which can come in handy. If you cmd-click on a MAT file, it will give you the option of just loading the material settings from that file, and leaving the image maps themselves alone; if you want to take a look at a new skin, I would suggest loading up that new skin normally, then doing the cmd-click, settings only approach to load the material settings from a character skin you know renders in the way you like over the new one (if the new one is doing something you don't like, of course!) -- that will give you the material/surface settings you know you like working with, and the new texture's images. That will give you a really good idea of how the details compare -- and if it's a problem with the textures, or a problem with other settings in the material/surface somewhere that maybe can be adjusted to give you the look you prefer. (Plus, if you have surface settings you really like on a character, you can essentially transfer them over to any other characters you have this way any time you like, which is one of the coolest features of DS, methinks.)
I found this part of your post a little hard for me to follow but keep in mind I don't have anywhere near your experience... Are you talking about going into the character files themselves or something through the DAZ interface?
I realized later that I've actually purchased your "Tamesis" skins because of the very unusual nature of your art... You tend to create almost alien looking features but I admire that cutting edge you give.
Maybe you can explain this another way but thanks and you are right about Candace. I was having another go at it and I'm really pleased with the new character.. so.. the only thing I'm wondering is how long till I see and purchase one of your skins for V6?
You know.. you might be the perfect artist to make a skin themed after the "The Crow" :)
I found this part of your post a little hard for me to follow but keep in mind I don't have anywhere near your experience... Are you talking about going into the character files themselves or something through the DAZ interface?
I realized later that I've actually purchased your "Tamesis" skins because of the very unusual nature of your art... You tend to create almost alien looking features but I admire that cutting edge you give.
Maybe you can explain this another way but thanks and you are right about Candace. I was having another go at it and I'm really pleased with the new character.. so.. the only thing I'm wondering is how long till I see and purchase one of your skins for V6?
You know.. you might be the perfect artist to make a skin themed after the "The Crow" :)
If you hold down the ctrl key (cmd on a Mac) while double-clicking a material file to apply it from the content pane you will get an option dialogue - one of the options is for the handling of maps and if you choose Ignore the preset's numeric values (specular values, sub-surface strength and so on) will be applied but the actual image files that were already on the model will not be removed - that lets you mix the settings from one set, that you know you like, with the image files from another set, that might not initially be working well for you.
I think the term 'photo-realistic' can be broad and subjective. If you mean realistic imperfections in the skin, that's an entirely different meaning than using the term in the more literal sense of 'looking like an actual photograph of a model', because photographs lie. They lie with lighting, they lie with air-brushing or Photoshop, they lie with camera angles and perspective, they lie with color/dodging/burning, and they lie with CG added. Most commercial photography has some sort of retouching that changes the reality of it slightly.
I remember the first time Time magazine used a photo-shopped picture. It was a cover picture of an Egyptian pyramid at sunset. It caused a HUGE uproar because they changed the placement of the sun behind the pyramid to give the picture better composition within the frame of the magazine cover. (I think they actually did it just to use it as a test case for photo-shopping pictures in editorial layouts.) It was roundly criticized for being "fake". Nowadays we would laugh at this accusation.
When it comes to realism in skin surfaces, we can look at details like blemishes, imperfections, freckles, pores, etc., but we must balance this with effects like SSS which can rob detail, like Surreality mentioned. And yet the SSS effect can add realism in its own way.
I personally would like to see skin textures with a stronger SSS component similar to what Poser does with its SSS. I think it actually looks LESS realistic than DS, but has a certain 'touchable' quality that gives it dimension and depth. The over look is waxy compared to DS's more plastic look, but you can feel the softness of the skin with your eyes. It has a translucence that pops. And what pops is often what appeals. I don't think its accidental that many promos I see of characters use the poser SSS renders to show off their models, and throw in a token DS Mat render to show what their make up will look like in DS. I have even seen promos on Daz's site fixate on Poser SSS renders.
I have tried to get this "waxy" look using the various Daz SSS shaders, but so far I haven't come close. I have tried starting with V4 textures, G1 textures, adapting V4 to G2F. I've applied the different SSS shaders, while keeping the jpgs intact. Doing consecutive renders with slight variations to see how each property affected the overall textures. I got interesting results, and even improved slightly on some of the store bought textures after a while, although I have to say, many of the store bought textures are very good even without SSS. They look "realistic", but they don't have that softness and translucence that I was trying to get. I was hoping some PA's would be able to get this look since they seem to favor it so much in their promos.
I've mostly been ignoring this because it comes off as a concern troll
-- Morgan
Trolls... aren't we all? Those who are hardest to love are usually the ones that need it most. Thanks for sharing your valuable time with me... even if I've been a nob head.
You know what it is ... Surreality was right in what he was saying but we don't speak the same language, I have a bit of a attitude because I don't really understand his depth of knowledge on the topic and to be honest, I probably never will... but that is why I purchase skins from people like him on the other hand.. thats why . I'll buy the skin from the people who know... LOL.. because I know they are going to make something that is going to knock my socks off when I see it even if I never understand...
I think to some extent, the critisism is right, I want point and click realism that if I put a photograph from my phone and put it next to it, I wouldn't know the difference... and it will come with that high standard as a preset DEFAULT. So that any dumb @$$ idiot can do it and do it with ease...
And while I'm dreaming out loud... I want it all for free... Hmmm... together we can flood the world with little 'Surreality's.
Rainbows, Peace
and
♥•*¨*•♫♪♥
─▀██▀─▄███▄─▀██─██▀██▀▀▀█─
──██─███─███─██─██─██▄█───
──██─▀██▄██▀─▀█▄█▀─██▀█───
─▄██▄▄█▀▀▀─────▀──▄██▄▄▄█...
While the heart beats, hope lingers..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gte3BoXKwP0&ob=av2e
“Pocket full of sunshine”
Again, Thank you for sharing your valuable time with me.
I think the technology is at a point now where we can take and place a digital map of a real girl and recreate her so that I can 'out of the box' literally tell my 'slave' what position I want him or her in and when I push render, you won't know its a fake. I could scan your image off my phone and place it one my base and make him or her do my bidding... and it will look real.
The possibilities are only as limited as our imagination make it.
Someday this will be a point and click phone app too.
It already is. My father was driving with his grandson behind a particularly slow and annoying driver, when the grandson pulled out his iPad took a short video clip of the car in front, and with a press of a button, a missile launch completely obliterated the offending car-- on video, that is.
Obviously, the video would be recognizable to those of us in this forum as a quick and dirty CG, but to people of 20 years ago when CG was just starting, it would be amazing and realistic.
P.S> I have Surreality's Tamesis bundle too, and it is fantastic. Very creative work. Bravo!
I disagree with you because the fact is, I want individual characters that when I hit render, look like I just took a photograph of a human being... no post production at all.
No offence, but if you want this kind of realism then buy a camera and use that.
The one on the left, in black & blue.
No offence, but if you want this kind of realism then buy a camera and use that.
I've got a great camera so none taken. You going to pose nude for a new character skin? I'm pretty happy using DAZ3d :)
I think the technology is at a point now where we can take and place a digital map of a real girl and recreate her so that I can 'out of the box' literally tell my 'slave' what position I want him or her in and when I push render, you won't know its a fake. I could scan your image off my phone and place it one my base and make him or her do my bidding... and it will look real.
The possibilities are only as limited as our imagination make it.
Someday this will be a point and click phone app too.
The problem here, and the problem which persists throughout your arguments here, is that a texture is simply a flat image which is mapped around a figure. Now, to define 'realistic' you would need to consider dozens of other aspects of the setup, not merely what image you've slapped on the skin.
First off, earlier you talked about 'baked in' and said you didn't mind it if it gave realistic results. Well, I hate to be the one to break the news, but 'baked in' and 'realistic' are two mutually exclusive options here. Baked usually means things like highlights or other details are already on the texture itself. This looks fine in images where the lighting matches the light where the original source material was taken, but is not 'realistic' because should your character turn 90 degrees, you've automatically lost that.
How the light plays on a figure is what determines a lot of what is real and what is not. There have been some incredibly photoreal images posted by people on the forums in the past, and yes they were done using existing texture sets. How do they get such fantastic results? Simple. They understand how the shaders work and how light plays with it.
For realism you need lots of different things. You need good lighting, you need good bump or normal maps, and you may need displacement. For skins you might want subsurface scatter or perhaps even a touch of translucency to make the light play with the skin that more believably. You could double or even treble the resolution of current textures, packing in as much detail as possible, but without all of the right ingredients, you've still got a figure which you can't truly consider 'realistic'.
I myself strive for realism in my work. I know it's possible with the tools at my disposal; I've seen it done already! I need to learn how to master it and execute it myself. Perhaps you too need to learn a lot about the tools you use to hone your skills to create your own level of realism rather than placing the blame on the textures.
WOW This guy looks great!!! We need more characters like this!!
I think daz figures are great but i notice they put more effort into daz male textures than female, and i think they do this cause girls "apparently" have flawless textureless skin, but people thats called makeup :/
They should add the natural detail to the skin. The baked in details is the whole point in using photos to texture a figure.
WOW This guy looks great!!! We need more characters like this!!
I think daz figures are great but i notice they put more effort into daz male textures than female, and i think they do this cause girls "apparently" have flawless textureless skin, but people thats called makeup :/
They should add the natural detail to the skin. The baked in details is the whole point in using photos to texture a figure.
YES! Exactly. Some of Michael 5 skins are brilliant but if you want to get a good looking realistic character outside of the brand new Candace figure whose not very pretty. If I want a skin that is of a hot looking model, I have to go to the competition but the rub is that I like DAZ3D and I think its a great product... I just want to see better stuff.
The problem here, and the problem which persists throughout your arguments here, is that a texture is simply a flat image which is mapped around a figure. Now, to define 'realistic' you would need to consider dozens of other aspects of the setup, not merely what image you've slapped on the skin.
First off, earlier you talked about 'baked in' and said you didn't mind it if it gave realistic results. Well, I hate to be the one to break the news, but 'baked in' and 'realistic' are two mutually exclusive options here. Baked usually means things like highlights or other details are already on the texture itself. This looks fine in images where the lighting matches the light where the original source material was taken, but is not 'realistic' because should your character turn 90 degrees, you've automatically lost that.
How the light plays on a figure is what determines a lot of what is real and what is not. There have been some incredibly photoreal images posted by people on the forums in the past, and yes they were done using existing texture sets. How do they get such fantastic results? Simple. They understand how the shaders work and how light plays with it.
For realism you need lots of different things. You need good lighting, you need good bump or normal maps, and you may need displacement. For skins you might want subsurface scatter or perhaps even a touch of translucency to make the light play with the skin that more believably. You could double or even treble the resolution of current textures, packing in as much detail as possible, but without all of the right ingredients, you've still got a figure which you can't truly consider 'realistic'.
I myself strive for realism in my work. I know it's possible with the tools at my disposal; I've seen it done already! I need to learn how to master it and execute it myself. Perhaps you too need to learn a lot about the tools you use to hone your skills to create your own level of realism rather than placing the blame on the textures.
I wouldn't be so touchy as to worry about minor flaws in realism but for the most part, you are right about lighting and shaders but I still prefer having characters like the new Candace product that have the freckles and skin details built into it so that if I want to zoom in on just a finger, I can see the finger-print.
I don't know why but DAZ seems to be afraid of making beautiful female characters. I look at Candace and I think... woof on the default.. damn she's ugly. She has great potential.. the body is rocking, the details on her are pretty damn good as am finding out while I play with different renders but the face is barking because the morph doesn't flatter her... so I'm finding out that the shape has a lot to do with how it looks to but I have some issues with shaders which from my understanding is more about depth perception.
The way I see it if it looks pretty good on a realistic scale, I'm happy... so I don't mind if there is an unusual glare on the forhead because the lighting is slightly different when you turn the character 90 degrees.. I'm not that worried about it.. just get me to the stage where it looks real and not like a cartoon.
I pay other artist good money so I don't have to fuss over minute details.. I can hide and obscure minor imperfections or lighting issues... so just do it and I'll pay for it and I'm certain other people will follow suite..
I'm telling you what some of us consumers want and if you want to make the product because you know how.. go for it. If you don't want to make it.. don't. This isn't an argument.. it's a request for a new product... and make her HOT!
Here is another example of what I consider to be a good realistic skin that I've posted on my facebook page.
The problem here, ...
Perhaps you too need to learn a lot about the tools you use to hone your skills to create your own level of realism rather than placing the blame on the textures.
I've thought I stated and demonstrated I can do photoreealistic pictures already with V4. I have to buy my skins from artist that know how to produce good ones, if that is you, then do it and stop telling me what I 'need' when this is a request for future products related to the BRAND NEW Genesis 2 with a jaw bone and higher resolutions. In the past I've had to go to competitors sites that I don't believe in mentioning on DAZ's site.. I'd like see artist actually working with DAZ to bring out some great products because I know the potential...
Whether we agree or not does not change anything. Ideas don't compete, egos do.
What we need are great artist making great skins.
Are you going to be the model that stands around while I tell you what position to hold while I get my pictures? Don't forget, you get about $20 (maybe more if you do tricks) and then you have to be ready, day or night on my whim to put on whatever clothing I want you to wear, and you have to be hot.. I mean, I don't want to look at you if your butt ugly if I'm making a beer advertisement... The technology these days should be like taking a picture and bending it to my whim... making you do whatever I want, whenever I want.. A virtual slave.
So, until you know people that I don't need to feed, or clean up after or have a bad attitude with, I think I'll keep using model textures. but if your offering your services, I have the money now.. You coming over so I can use my camera instead of DAZ3D for my realistic human pictures?
Image removed by Moderator.
yes, it sounds like you need to use virtual models rather than real people!
LOL Love it! Let's hope more people follow that 'model'. Thanks... I love a good troll~
Notice: Please keep the conversation CIVIL. The TOS does not allow personal attacks, implied nor directed.
Thank you for that... I think for me its good that DAZ made software that allows me to express what I want in pictures. I used Candace with the SciFi Cadet uniform DAZ just put on quicksale to show you how sorry I am and to express what I 'need'.
Hope all of you have a brilliant day.. Happy rendering.
The one on the left, in black & blue.
No. The one on the left (in black and blue supersuit) is a Genesis model with a V4 skin by an artist named Danea3d.
http://www.facebook.com/Danae3d
The one on the right is Victoria 6. She has an awesome figure but to date the skins look rather bland at a distance and somehow miss a level of realism.
Now some people have been critical of me in blaming the skins and told me that I need to learn all there technical skills rather than just make a product that looks good "out of the box". One person will say 'definition of reality' and another will start talking about lighting and shaders but essentially it all comes down to the fact that it's my fault the skins don't live up to the realism that some rare artist can make...
I'll include this picture that I just made to demonstrate that I can handle complex lighting and that I know what I'm talking about... In the end I would point out that Candace is lonely and wants to join the multicultural world.
Thanks for answering. Peace
Well I've pretty much stayed out of it because I can see both sides of the debate and didn't have anything significant to contribute. However, I will jump in with one perspective to consider. As has been said, and as has been made clear in all of the debate about the differences in 1 generation of DAZ characters; reality, what makes a noticeable difference, what are acceptable tradeoffs, all depend on the individual. You (and others) are fine with baked aspects of textures where for various reasons some are not and the reasons they aren't are good reasons for the people who hold them. So, the question is by definition a somewhat personal one, being 'real' to the person asking it.
The second item, lighting, environments, computing power (cpu/gpu) vs render time, the skill of the person, etc... all do play heavily into this. What this means is, much of this will resolve itself over time as these aspects reduce the need for various tradeoffs. The fact is, realism at a photographic level for people, hair, cloth, etc... is really only achievable on render farms or through very long render times at the moment. We can get close for a lot less, but it comes down to the 80/20 rule. That last 20% is going to be compromise and those compromises are going to vary.
So how long will it take? Don't have the answer, but I can say it will involve more then just texture artists. It will involve high quality lighting that is much easier for the average person to set up, more compute power, improvements in shaders... It's not a simple 'texture artists just need to apply themselves' type of situation.
Having said that, there is quite a bit of difference in the quality of various skins from various texture artists and some quite frankly do take shortcuts I think shouldn't be at this point in the technology.
One thing Gen6 characters do offer is a new starting point for skins. I do think texture artists should be held to a higher standard for skins generated for this generation, and that I believe was your real point.
On another note. Tamesis is one of my favorite skins, and the one I chose for playing with UberSurface 2 quite a while ago. It was also where I learned as Surreality mentioned, SSS can wipe out detail if one isn't very careful in how they apply SSS. I had a whole thread about it quite a while ago in the old forums, and no one was able to improve on my results at the time (at least no one posted any improvements) even though it was an active discussion at the time. Where I have seen better results are in higher end render systems where they have multiple layers and can control the balance to a much finer degree then we have available in the DAZ 3DLight implementation right now.
My point exactly. I'm hoping that people take advantage of that higher resolution and expanded expressions ability to make new skins that bring a new level of realism to the playing field. The bar has been raised and those of us who are the consumers are going to expect more.
We have the technology... its time the character skins start to reflect a new generation is here to stay.
Dublin, one of my other favorite skins :)
[Edit] To be fair though, that is the original texture artists image.
Mine too. Yeah... sorry but she recked me for the rest of you.
"Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."
— Leonardo da Vinci
Most of the Dublin skin's niceness comes from the SSS shader and the lighting. It doesn't have strength maps for anything, or bump maps for anything but the lips and eyes, IIRC. It is a very, very nice and original diffuse texture, but other photorealistic skins plugged into the same shader setup should look equally stunning, possibly more so since they'll offer additional maps for control. I have a ton from the vendor and this holds true for all so far.
Feel free to 'show me the money', name character names or post quotes to where you think Daz is keeping them but my point being is that I want to see that much attention to detail on a Genesis 2f and I'm counting on artist that like Daz to make a Genesis 2 Product since this is the 'product suggestion' forum. If you believe so much in the shader and lighting, I've notice a current trend of some artist to include a light set with there textures for example, I just bought Delilah for Genesis off the quicksale.
http://www.daz3d.com/delilah-for-genesis
I think we all tend to blend our characters.. best eyes and skin are hands down for me in Danae3d's Metropolitan collection. I want to see more skins like that and as the consumer, I get to set the standard... The customer is always right.
Also... while I'm at it.. does anybody know how to make a realistic planet Earth backdrop? The type made from Nasa maps that are public domain. I'd like to have superman flying throught those clouds.. :)
I'm not sure I'd agree with your statement on photo-realism, but I do agree you are obviously talented. Perhaps you could give some examples of what you consider to be 'realistic' skins. There have been countless dozens I could mention from Daz Studio and accomplished Daz PA's which I would consider very realistic, but without a guideline it's hard for me to suggest ones you might find attractive.
For my part, I thought the V6 skins were incredible detailed. The Nyssa texture as well is detailed enough that you can zoom in and see individual pores in the skin. I make no secret that I'm not skilled enough to pull off a realistic render despite my numerous attempts, but I've seen some artists make magic with the same products. Here's a couple of examples which came up in the Subsurface shader thread a while back.
Render using Callum for M4
Another using V5 Brea textures.
Those are made using the 4.6 release AoA subsurface shaders, but there have been people who have done similar effects using the UberSurface shaders too. AoA also posted his settings for the skin so you can try them out if you want.
Indeed. Shaders can transform an average texture into something stunning. snowpheonix, I can't "show you the money" without knowing what programs you're rendering with. I don't use Poser so I can't do renders of other characters using the Dublin shader.
I can render a bunch of different textures all using the same shader/lights setup, if you'd like to see to what an incredible degree that levels the playing field. Dublin is a very nice texture, but no more attention to detail than a bunch of others out there. Attention to originality is there, though. That vendor's primary draw for me is that the skins actually look unique; a lot of others tend to use similar bases until they all blend together.
I'd like to echo what others have said here: what do you consider to be "realistic"? Your own renders?