Celebrity Look-a-Likes for 3D figures Part 2

Haruchai

List 01 - 25 https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/4054716/#Comment_4054716
List 26 - 50 https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/5014556/#Comment_5014556

New one added
List updated 

CS51 - Salma Hayek
CS52 - Keira Knightley
CS53 - Reese Witherspoon
CS54 - Sofia Vergara
CS55 - Halle Berry
CS56 - Juliette Lewis
CS57 - Hayden Panettiere
CS58 - Mila Jovovich
CS59 - Bryce Dallas Howard
CS60 - Drew Barrymore
CS61 - Alexis Ren
CS62 - Anya Chalotra
CS63 - Alicia Vikander
CS64 - Sophie Turner
CS65 - Katy Perry
CS66 - Ana de Armas
CS67 - Michelle Pfeiffer
CS68 - Maya Hawke
CS69 - Kaley Cuoco
CS70 - Anna Kendrick
CS71 - Ashley Benson

https://www.most-digital-creations.com/poser_daz_studio_characters.htm

Stephen_2674477

Haruchai said:

Google image research leads me to believe it is Ashley Benson :)

Edit - the difference in face shape is probably my bad as I made the two images the same size it made the CS71 image thinner.

That would explain why immediately after I purchased her and loaded her into my runtime she demanded to be rendered alongside with CS25

RayDAnt

90% certain it's supposed to be Ashley Benson (try running any/all of the promo images through StarByFace - +50% certainty on images of a 3D model from multiple angles is extremely rare.)

fred9803

RayDAnt said:

90% certain it's supposed to be Ashley Benson (try running any/all of the promo images through StarByFace - +50% certainty on images of a 3D model from multiple angles is extremely rare.)

I'd say 95% of it is the power of suggestion with regard to celebrity likenesses, and the other 5% is squinting with one eye closed with that suggestion in mind.

DS currently can't do anything like reconisable people given the polygon model limitations of the base model, let alone the inperceptable details that the mind's-eye relys on to distinguish real from fake. The only instantly reconisable celebrities have been caricatures like M4 Leon or Red. The rest is purely wishful thinking. Not that there's anythig wrong wth that.

Stephen_2674477

fred9803 said:

RayDAnt said:

90% certain it's supposed to be Ashley Benson (try running any/all of the promo images through StarByFace - +50% certainty on images of a 3D model from multiple angles is extremely rare.)

I'd say 95% of it is the power of suggestion with regard to celebrity likenesses, and the other 5% is squinting with one eye closed with that suggestion in mind.

DS currently can't do anything like reconisable people given the polygon model limitations of the base model, let alone the inperceptable details that the mind's-eye relys on to distinguish real from fake. The only instantly reconisable celebrities have been caricatures like M4 Leon or Red. The rest is purely wishful thinking. Not that there's anythig wrong wth that.

I have found that matching a representative hairstyle with the celebrity morph can make a vast difference between being recognizable or not

Antono

coffman_steve2009 said:

fred9803 said:

RayDAnt said:

 

I have found that matching a representative hairstyle with the celebrity morph can make a vast difference between being recognizable or not

You're 100% right, this is a huge factor in the "likeness" of a character. But, to be fair, you'd have a hard time recognizing some celebrities if they appeared bald of a sudden. 

Hylas

fred9803 said:

RayDAnt said:

90% certain it's supposed to be Ashley Benson (try running any/all of the promo images through StarByFace - +50% certainty on images of a 3D model from multiple angles is extremely rare.)

I'd say 95% of it is the power of suggestion with regard to celebrity likenesses, and the other 5% is squinting with one eye closed with that suggestion in mind.

DS currently can't do anything like reconisable people given the polygon model limitations of the base model, let alone the inperceptable details that the mind's-eye relys on to distinguish real from fake. The only instantly reconisable celebrities have been caricatures like M4 Leon or Red. The rest is purely wishful thinking. Not that there's anythig wrong wth that.

Disagree. This may or may not be true for CS71 (I'm not familiar with Ashley Benson) but there are many celebrity likenesses that I recognised immediately when I wasn't even thinking about what celebrity it could be.

Haruchai

New - Lynae by Kadaj15 is Dakota Blue Richards

Haruchai

Kadaj15 characters

Sabine - Lea Seydoux
Eboni - Meryl Cassie
Tilly - Ally Ioannides
Stella - Angela Bassett
William - Tom Hiddleston
Noella - Nicole Beharie
Sarai - Jennifer Connelly
Caelan - Anya Taylor-Joy
Audrina - Audrey Hepburn
Rachael - Daisy Ridley
Lyzia - Elizabeth Olsen
Deiydra - Tessa Thompson
Biyu - Bai Ling
Amondi - Lupita Nyong'o
Eolanda - ?
Cynthia - Gina Carano
Izabelle - Anna Silk
Kaela - Ksenia Solo
Teeka - Tika Sumpter
Joelle - Jodelle Ferland
Talita - Nia Long
Lynae - Dakota Blue Richards

TJohn

Antono said:

coffman_steve2009 said:

fred9803 said:

RayDAnt said:

 

I have found that matching a representative hairstyle with the celebrity morph can make a vast difference between being recognizable or not

You're 100% right, this is a huge factor in the "likeness" of a character. But, to be fair, you'd have a hard time recognizing some celebrities if they appeared bald of a sudden. 

Except maybe Britney Spears.

Gordig

TJohn said:

Antono said:

coffman_steve2009 said:

fred9803 said:

RayDAnt said:

 

I have found that matching a representative hairstyle with the celebrity morph can make a vast difference between being recognizable or not

You're 100% right, this is a huge factor in the "likeness" of a character. But, to be fair, you'd have a hard time recognizing some celebrities if they appeared bald of a sudden. 

Except maybe Britney Spears.

Or Imperator Charlize Theron.

RayDAnt

fred9803 said:

RayDAnt said:

90% certain it's supposed to be Ashley Benson (try running any/all of the promo images through StarByFace - +50% certainty on images of a 3D model from multiple angles is extremely rare.)

I'd say 95% of it is the power of suggestion with regard to celebrity likenesses, and the other 5% is squinting with one eye closed with that suggestion in mind.

Speaking as someone with 10+ years of professional experience lighting the faces of many extremely famous celebrities for major portrait and fashion photography projects, you are objectively wrong. Celebrities are just as likeness-able as aynone else. You just have to find a way to get a feel for the way they actually look - which is seldom very close to how they are commonly marketed as looking in consumption-level media.

xyer0

Viseria by LUNA3D

i53570k

All stylistic stills are caricatures and some Daz3D products are decent enough to pass muster for likeness with proper lighting and camera angle IMO.  Lifelike stills and animations are where far more details are needed such that current consumer grade hardware probably cannot handle.

Gregorius

Well, I decided to try at least roughly recreating the pose, lighting, camera angle, and expression of a high-resolution reference photo and see how illuminating that would be, and it did inspire a few worthwhile tweaks, I think.  From the neck down, the body shape is obviously not true to life, but hopefully the face is at least close.  What do you think?

\

NylonGirl

Gregorius said:

Well, I decided to try at least roughly recreating the pose, lighting, camera angle, and expression of a high-resolution reference photo and see how illuminating that would be, and it did inspire a few worthwhile tweaks, I think.  From the neck down, the body shape is obviously not true to life, but hopefully the face is at least close.  What do you think?

\

I think you did really well.

Silent Winter

^Definitely getting closer - the morph looks right now. There's still a little something off about the skin (she looks a little pale / needs more 'glow') and the eyes could be a touch darker (eyes are always hard to get right in 3D).

Sevrin

Silent Winter said:

^Definitely getting closer - the morph looks right now. There's still a little something off about the skin (she looks a little pale / needs more 'glow') and the eyes could be a touch darker (eyes are always hard to get right in 3D).

And her eyebrows are a major feature as well. They need plumping.  Maybe add some fibremesh?

Gregorius

Silent Winter said:

^Definitely getting closer - the morph looks right now. There's still a little something off about the skin (she looks a little pale / needs more 'glow') and the eyes could be a touch darker (eyes are always hard to get right in 3D).

Thanks for your continued feedback!  Well, the morph is my real focus anyway, but just for the hell of it, does this version look any better?  I have the figure rigged so that I can control eye color with a parameter dial, so I dialed it back to half of its original value.  I also mildly enhanced the vibrance at a strategic point in my tone-mapping technique to hopefully alleviate some of that apparent pallor.

I have next to no clue what fibermesh even is, and if it's not Poser-compatible, I doubt I can do anything with it.  I think the thickness of her eyebrows might vary anyway, though.

 

Paintbox

Gregorius said:

Silent Winter said:

^Definitely getting closer - the morph looks right now. There's still a little something off about the skin (she looks a little pale / needs more 'glow') and the eyes could be a touch darker (eyes are always hard to get right in 3D).

Thanks for your continued feedback!  Well, the morph is my real focus anyway, but just for the hell of it, does this version look any better?  I have the figure rigged so that I can control eye color with a parameter dial, so I dialed it back to half of its original value.  I also mildly enhanced the vibrance at a strategic point in my tone-mapping technique to hopefully alleviate some of that apparent pallor.

I have next to no clue what fibermesh even is, and if it's not Poser-compatible, I doubt I can do anything with it.  I think the thickness of her eyebrows might vary anyway, though.

 

There is something weird with the texture around the eyes; it's all reddish, like she's not been sleeping a while. Look at the reference, she has more definition around the eye, and it isn't red.

Hylas

Looking good, @Gregorius!

As others have said, her skin is a little darker and warmer; her her eyes are darker and perhaps a slightly more red shade of brown; the skin around her eyes is less red (and celebrities basically always wear makeup, even if it's relatively minimal like in the above picture); and she has a beauty mark!

richardandtracy

Her beauty mark at top left corner of her mouth is quite three dimensional, possibly needs something in the mesh or displacement map. Her chest in reality is not as prominent as in the model. But it's a good likeness, wish I could do anything half so well.

Regards,

Richard.

Sevrin

N

Gregorius said:

Silent Winter said:

^Definitely getting closer - the morph looks right now. There's still a little something off about the skin (she looks a little pale / needs more 'glow') and the eyes could be a touch darker (eyes are always hard to get right in 3D).

Thanks for your continued feedback!  Well, the morph is my real focus anyway, but just for the hell of it, does this version look any better?  I have the figure rigged so that I can control eye color with a parameter dial, so I dialed it back to half of its original value.  I also mildly enhanced the vibrance at a strategic point in my tone-mapping technique to hopefully alleviate some of that apparent pallor.

I have next to no clue what fibermesh even is, and if it's not Poser-compatible, I doubt I can do anything with it.  I think the thickness of her eyebrows might vary anyway, though.

 

Her brow ridge is more pronounced and eyes are more deep set in the photograph.  The nose, cheeks, mouth and jawline look very good, but, the eyes are always the main focus in a face, so getting them right is vital to creating a good likeness.

Gregorius

Thanks again for the helpful comments.  Here she is after a few more tweaks, particularly around the eyes, brow, and nose bridge.

 

Dareshiranu

Hylas said:

fred9803 said:

RayDAnt said:

90% certain it's supposed to be Ashley Benson (try running any/all of the promo images through StarByFace - +50% certainty on images of a 3D model from multiple angles is extremely rare.)

I'd say 95% of it is the power of suggestion with regard to celebrity likenesses, and the other 5% is squinting with one eye closed with that suggestion in mind.

DS currently can't do anything like reconisable people given the polygon model limitations of the base model, let alone the inperceptable details that the mind's-eye relys on to distinguish real from fake. The only instantly reconisable celebrities have been caricatures like M4 Leon or Red. The rest is purely wishful thinking. Not that there's anythig wrong wth that.

Disagree. This may or may not be true for CS71 (I'm not familiar with Ashley Benson) but there are many celebrity likenesses that I recognised immediately when I wasn't even thinking about what celebrity it could be.

I agree with the respondent as well. It somewhat depends upon how good a likeness it is. Often the static image is far more identifiable than one with facial expressions distorting the visage. But I will say that some obvious likenesses are often mistaken for others and that is either the power of wishful thinking or a simple inability to distinguish basic facial characteristics such as jawline, the shape of the nose, the brow ridge and other obvious telltales. Sometimes it's simply because people are just not familiar with a particular individual for one reason or another. In that case what is glaringly obvious to one becomes obscure to others. Not everyone is familiar with all pop stars of all ages, or TV actresses vs film or older vs newer. So often you might see something close to what you know rather than what is intended.

 

Dareshiranu

Gregorius said:

Thanks again for the helpful comments.  Here she is after a few more tweaks, particularly around the eyes, brow, and nose bridge.

 

Far closer to your source than previous examples. The tip of the nose needs work - if you have the right morphs or can sculpt it. The mole is a little too large as well as far as I can see, the source seems half the size? But leaps and bounds an improvement. 

TritiumCG

Gal Gadot Head Morph now available, just hit the well disguised download button - https://www.deviantart.com/tritiumcg/art/Gal-Gadot-Head-Morph-for-G8F-852287397

It was not my intention to compete with Sangriart or Mousso (I'm a huge fan of both) or anyone else but the client requested me specifically to do a morph of Gal too. I figure you can never have too many morphs of the same person, if you dial them all in a little bit eventually it should get pretty close to perfection. :)

Gregorius

Tritium, that Gal Gadot looks pretty good, though some textured renders might help determine just how good, if you're looking for constructive critique.  In any case, if we combine her with my Chris Reeve morph for G8M, we're just one Christian Bale shy of my fantasy cast for the DC trinity!

 

This is what my attempt at Naomi Scott looks like after some tinkering with her nose and philtrum as well as some slight eyelid thickening.  Better?  Worse?  About the same?

 

TritiumCG

Gregorius said:

Tritium, that Gal Gadot looks pretty good, though some textured renders might help determine just how good, if you're looking for constructive critique.  In any case, if we combine her with my Chris Reeve morph for G8M, we're just one Christian Bale shy of my fantasy cast for the DC trinity!

 

This is what my attempt at Naomi Scott looks like after some tinkering with her nose and philtrum as well as some slight eyelid thickening.  Better?  Worse?  About the same?

 

Texturing is my big glaring weak spot, luckily my clients just want the morphs and do the texturing themselves. ^^;

If you want my critique, I think your eyes and nose are spot on but looking at some pictures of her online I think the chin might be a bit narrower? The chin is always tricky because that area is the most doctored in images, but what I would do is use the smooth brush on the chin and cheeks to just smooth out the whole area a little. My advice is never to focus too much on one photograph, trying to replicate just one photo is a trap that will result in a morph that matches only that one photo.

Her skin could also use just a tad of saturation/glow, but that can be done in post so it's by no means a priority. I think you're definitely getting there. :)

Paintbox

Gregorius said:

 

This is what my attempt at Naomi Scott looks like after some tinkering with her nose and philtrum as well as some slight eyelid thickening.  Better?  Worse?  About the same?

 

While you are improving step by step. I still feel the skin around the eyes is too red. I am behind a calibrated monitor, and it definitely looks way too red compared to the reference image. Could you doctor the texture map and make it more in-line with the reference image. Use the color picker to compare!