FaceGen help?
Blando Calrissian
Posts: 458
Okay, either I am not putting the little green dots where they are supposed to be going, or I accidentally bought PopeyeFaceGen by mistake.
Has anyone else run into this problem? The quality of the source photos never seems to matter; every time I run the script I end up with a balloon from the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade.
FaceGen.JPG
1226 x 1116 - 91K
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
Yes you need to place the dots in different places ;-)
Experiment, see what happens when you place the dots where you think they should be ... and then repeat but place the dots to different locations nearer or further from that spot.
I guess that's where I'm at, and where FaceGen is at, but it seems a little ridiculous to have the program direct you to place the dots in specific places (complete with a photo guide!) if that's not actually where one is supposed to place the dots.
TBH, I was hoping that some sort of rescue might be found in the modifications page and its sliders?
I guess that's where I'm at, and where FaceGen is at, but it seems a little ridiculous to have the program direct you to place the dots in specific places (complete with a photo guide!) if that's not actually where one is supposed to place the dots.
TBH, I was hoping that some sort of rescue might be found in the modifications page and its sliders?
I found that placing the dots ONLY worked best. i.e. not to be adding additional information via the other tabs. I think those work better when one is not trying to photomatch a morph.
{Except that I do check the box to keep the eyes round}
I was really hopeful about the dots. It seemed like that was what was going to put FaceGen ahead of programs like Face Transfer, because the former allows you to tell the program where the landmarks are, and the latter can become confused even when one starts off with a clear photo.
I still don't know why it insists on making dinner plate masks that are larger than the base G8 figure, though. Last night, I tried tweaking the cheekbone and jaw assignments to 'skinny up' the face, but that didn't work at all.
People seem to love the product, and have done so for years, so it's got to be user error of some kind. I just wish I knew what I was doing wrong.
The 'keep the eyes round' box does seem to help keep the eyes from turning into gigantic ovals, so at least that's a step forwards! Thanks!
@Blando Calrissian :
First, it is a matter of opinion if you believe FaceGen is ahead of or behind Daz3D FaceTransfer, but as an over two decade user of FaceGen, I can say with certainty FaceGen is still ahead of FaceTransfer due to the Z-axis (front-back) issue with FaceTransfer that is not prevalent in FaceGen.
Hell, Phil W had to create a product to compensate for this in Daz Studio :
https://www.daz3d.com/face-transfer-shapes-for-genesis-8
Now, with that out of the way...
Are you using FaceGen Modeller or FaceGen Artist?
And, which version number of either one are you using? You might not believe it matters, but it does.
I still use a two decade old version of Modeller which is way better than the crippled verisons available today, and then I transfer my FG model (.fg) to FaceGenArtist Pro (currently using 3.8, but have from version 1.something - 3.8 for use [just downloaded the latest 3.10 from Singular Inversions, but Daz has yet to update to this version for export use]) for exports to Daz Studio.
Last, how good of a 'traditional' artist are you? Meaning, can you look at something and recreate it on paper or canvas?
You might not think this also matters, but because I can draw anything with a 99% accuracy, using the FaceGen cross-hair targets come easy for me to a tolerance within 1 - 3%.
Even with my keen eye, it is nearly impossible to recreate identical, exact same result from the same input image. If there were a X, Y matching numeric system with the placed targets, one could reliably replicate, or adjust accordingly to minute misses on target. But, sadly, there is not one, so you can only eyeball the targets, and learn to get better at where FaceGen wants the target locations to be at for every cross-hair target.
With that said, even I have experienced the brow issue you see in your image (but not the cheek/jaw), and have created adjustment morphs in Blender to apply to any of my FG creations in DS when needed (along with dozens of other adjustment and correction morphs).
I would recommend when you give it another try to make a screenshot of where you placed all your cross-hair targets before you press the create button, and upload it here, so we can take a look and see if we can make any suggestions for adjustments.
Also, what size input image are you feeding it? The larger the image, the easier the placements will be. Smaller images, even blown up to FG screen size for the target work, can yield slightly inaccurate results compared to the larger images set to FG screen size by the app.
Don't give up just yet...
I just made some morphs with FaceGen. I'm using what I think is the most up-to-date version: does 8.1 as well as scans.
The main issue is that the suggested dot placements on that tiny man's face are not accurate.
This I found to work better:
Centre of pupils
Ends of the nostril holes
Ends of the lips
Not the bottom of the Jaw on the face, but the centre part of the lower jaw that juts out the furthest.
Stay on the front of the face when placing the outside jaw and cheek markers.
Keep FaceGen open when opening D/S to check the morph. If/when it's acceptable, close D/S and from FaceGen you can then use the SAME settings, just change the target figure for export - and very easily make the same morph for all the other generations :-) Also on another tab, one can save the .fg file.
IF one uses a profile image with the mouth open, one will get "fuller" lips ;-) Rather important to use passport type portrait/profile images.
So I took a break from coding and had a play in both FGArtist Pro 3.2 (I was wrong -- I have 3.8, but I guess I haven't even installed it yet), and FGModeller 3.22 (latest is 3.31).
My post above relates to the original way to work with 'PhotoFit' as opposed to the current way it works.
The plus for the new versions (both fgA and fgM) is they finally added a zoom function to allow you to set the points easier, but the negative is that they locked the points to a single click.
In the older fgModeller you move the points around into position, and when you are satisfied with the locations, then you move on to the create stage.
The trade off is more control, but on a smaller image.
Older fgModeller example :
Here is the last old school version (3.5.3) that uses this technique, and with arguably better creation/usage controls (Free for creation of .fg files/export disabled):
https://download.cnet.com/FaceGen-Modeller/3000-6677_4-75322767.html
Regarding placing points, Catherine is dead on -- I will only add that I find setting points for the jaw to be in line with the mouth, and setting the points for the cheeks to be approximately horizontal to ear center (but this variates depending on the image -- ears above or below eyeline) or nose bridge center.
These are all great suggestions- I can't wait to try them out tomorrow!
Could you post a visual example of this? Doesn't even have to be a FaceGen screenshot, just any front portrait and profile with corrected dot placements.
Okay, this is of a non-real person. The lower jaw placement would be some trial and error - resulting in a long narrow jaw or a more rounded or squared off jawline. As to how wide the upper face goes - varies with the placement of the dots nearer to the ears. Our eyes perceive the depth, do not use the depth ... stay on the "flat" top of the face image.
I would be careful about the cheek bone and jaw placement points. The more rectangular shaped they are, the more square of a face will you get. This might look good on a male, but not so much on a female face. If you make the checkbone/jaw points more diagonal shaped, then the face will come out more rounded.
That's true and that's why there's always some experimenting required. The OP was trying to get away from the rounded look.
I really can't evaluate OP's problem without seeing his source photo. It doesn't look like a neutral pose if the person is smiling in it.
I haven't had much time to continue my experiments, but all of this looks very promising so far!
So, I've had a week to play around. Thankfully, there's nowhere to go but up! (I mean, you can't get any worse than that PieFace Girl, right?)
I tried a new route this week, taking an existing Daz morph and seeing how closely I could get FaceGen to replicate it. This meant going with "shape on points alone" in the FaceGen options menu.
People asked for photos, so here are some screenshots to guide you. The last "dot" of each side is omitted in these photos, only because FaceGen moves on to the next screen as soon as you click the last spot.
(FaceGen on the left in that last pic; original morphed figure on the right)
Looking at this, it seems like FaceGen actually did a pretty good job of matching the photos it had to work with. The face is long, and the eyes are not the ideal shape, but the nose is spot-on and, if anything, I think the lips look more realistic.
So, closer... just need to find a way to balance between a too-wide face (resulting in Pieplateous Maximus), and too narrow (I think this iterations falls into the latter catergory).
(Edit: So, making hay out of grass... the new morph doesn't look much like the old one, but it looks pretty good when paired with Alexandra 8...)
Three months later, three months of playing around with it, three months of trying different combinations of photos, different dot placements, lighting, using smooth-shaded 3D 'heads' instead of photos, and praying to the gods of face morphs for deliverance...
Result: FaceGen Pro is still churning out Halloween masks, and nothing else.
Daz issued a refund, for which I am very grateful. No more FaceGen experimenting for me. Hopefully others will have better luck than I did.