3D Fig leaf Service?

Yofiel

After putting a month into recreating Botticelli's masterpiece 'Birth of Venus' in Carrara with Victoria 4 and Michael 4, I discover I cannot submit it to my Daz art gallery due to nudity. I understand that much modern art is distasteful, and some arbitrary standard needs to be drawn to prevent the hated 'slippery slope' of moral decay. On the other hand, the net is rife with depictions of the human form which are contrary to Michelangelo's proposition that God created the human form, and so if drawn with Godly love, there is no shame in it.

As you could well know, later on, far inferior painters appeared who objected to the Sistine chapel in the Vatican, and so covered up the parts they felt offensive with fig leafs. After that, many people found the fig-leaf painters more offensive than the nudity, exploiting naive morality in order to desecrate another's art and moreover draw a stipend for the service

I myself do not consider myself a good enough artist to place fig leafs over a 3D rendition of Botticelli's Venus as yet. But maybe that means it is something I should do if no one else dares to. In the interim I posted my art on my own webserver at:

LINK REMOVED

in case any are interested to see the images for artistic or other reasons.

Are there any artists in the 3D community offering fig-leaf services as yet? I would only want to do so for 3D reproductions of classical masterpieces, and maybe that is a good calling, if no one else is willing. For surely there could not be a more noble cause than reproducing the Sistine Chapel and Botticelli in 3D?

I'll be curious to learn your own opinions of fig-leaf toters in the 21st century :)

BlumBlumShub

I have read this with interest, and I do have an opinion of my own, though I suspect you won't like it, for which I am sorry because obviously you've but a lot of work into recreating the classic masterpiece.

My personal opinion is that nudity is nudity, whether I badly render V6 showing off her boobies or whether Leonardo respectfully paints the Cistine Chapel. The Vatican obviously didn't have a policy whereby nudiity would be removed, but DAZ does have that policy, clearly for the forum and for their new gallery. We must all abide by that no matter the quality of our art.

John Sims

Whilst no prude I have to agree with Blum. We are all visitors to this forum and, as such, sould respect the wishes of our host. No nudity is completely unambiguous.

You can't really have no nudity unless it is a representation of a masterpiece. What constitutes a representation? What constitutes a masterpiece?

Herald of Fire

While I don't really mind nudity in renders, I've never really seen the point in a full-frontal. Sure, if you're doing an exact reproduction of Michaelangelo's David it might be necessary, but the majority of renders I see with nudity are either intended for titillation or simply nude for the sake of it. Visitors to my Deviantart will no doubt realise that I've used nudes myself in renders, but I always shy away from exposing genitals because I feel it's unnecessary.

There are very few exceptions where genitals could be considered necessary to convey an image, but most of them are sexual in nature.

[email protected]

This subject makes me laugh.

In art school, we learned to draw from a live model. Real people. Naked people. Young as we were, we understood that, since this is how people really look, this is what we need to study. I attended many life drawing classes, and I never saw anyone freak out over seeing a naked person.

I can't get used to using models with their genitals removed. I think it is twisted. It looks so abnormal, so distracting, I have to put pants on the model.

I do understand that these software models are sometimes used in sexual poses. That's because many users are young boys. We looked at "dirty books" when we were kids. The world didn't end. I won't be making near-pornographic scenes myself, because I'm grown up. However, I am reminded often that software makers know exactly who their target market is.

As far as this website is concerned, I'm OK with the nudity rules. Those who don't like the rules are free to build their own website.

StratDragon

What you do with your art is yours. What you post here is Daz's and you need to abide by what they're asking. At this time they are not telling you you can not use their models for images of nudity, or violence or violent nudity (my personal favorite.) but they are telling you that you may not post it here. When you go to someones home, or their country or their website you respect their rules, this is Daz3d's site so it's their rules, please respect it. You made a very hard statement about Americans being hypocrites who overlook responsibility in the world over at RDNA, how does that suddenly no longer apply to you?

There are a thousand other sites you could post your work on for display, most notably DevantArt (Registered and based in the United States BTW), only if you post there your subject matter becomes mundane and apolitical and well; not that controversial really, however they're fine with it,

Chohole

Plus of course Deviant Art does have Content Advisory filters, which DAZ 3D does not.

Miss B

The old DAZ galleries did have those filters, and I hope they will add them to the new galleries at some point.

While the Venus de Milo and David are classic works of art that I've seen up close and personal and didn't find offensive, there are members here with young children, who shouldn't be seeing them while their mom or dad happens to be surfing the DAZ galleries.

If and when the DAZ galleries do have content advisory filters available, then it will be OK to post these types of nudity, as we will all be able to choose what types of renders we don't want to see.