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
This is also a Dforce bed that conforms to her body.
Woah! Thank you so much for your kind words Rashad Carter, and for your precise feedback! Guess I spent so much time fiddling around with skin that I completely forgot about anatomy.
To your knowledge, is there any rule of thumb as to what facial features of standard models are 'too perfect', or 'too enhanced' to pass as real? I'll definitely have a look at the eyes now for sure, but I have a real hard time deciphering what's 'off' truly.
Hey there!
I think both renders are really good! I do agree with lilweep slightly in that you might want to tone down her facial expression a little. It's not really odd, but so strong that it takes away a lot of attention from your skin features.
Besides that, you might want to add some asymmetric features to her face. The odd beauty spot or skin irritation really helps to make a face look more realistic.
On a non-model related topic. May I ask how you lit the scene? The room itself looks incredible! :O
Going to throw some suggestions here for this, but I by no means know how to achieve photorealism. Im just going to go with what my eye's see and make those suggestions of the overall image. I know at this time you might be more focused on the girl but it helps to improve the whole scene also.
Bump her hair/skull cap scale up a bit it will get rid of those squiggly lines on her forhead.
The bed to me needs some wrinkles and indention to make it look like shes acutally sitting on it. Either that or the bed/comforter is hard.
The bed is floating to me? Not sure if this is intentional or not. Also whats going on with the floor under the bed? On the right it looks scratched with detail then it goes under the bed and gets all blurry and weird lines on the one without DOF.
Her skin tone looks to orange to me. Doesn't quit match her face and there looks like a line where the textures meet on her left arm.
Personally I like the one without the DOF better, I think it might be to strong in the other.
I think you have a very good start!
This is odd: in the small view, it looks CGI to me—in fact, it looks kind of old-school 3delight with too much baked in detail. But when I look at the full-size image, it's incredibly convincing. I think it's because you've given teh character such pale skin, the dark details really pop in the smaller version. And probably because the context (the daz logos make it look like an awards show photo zone) suggests a place where women would wear enough make-up to even out the skin tones and have sculpted eyebrows. This is one thing I think @jeff_someone does well: the context of his "dorm room" flash photos make a lack of make-up believable and harsh lighting convincing.
All that said, when viewed at full resolution, this is stunning work, J
...Well that is helpful. Thanks for pointing that out, I'll work on the pose with this in mind. Can't believe I didn't know that. Thanks!
Thanks for the CC and the kind words! I will try to tone down the expression and repost. I should also post a close up of the face, I feel like it has some assymetry and blemishes from the texture but I think its too far away to see plus with the expression issue you mentioned it clouds the details fo the face. I'll work on that.
The lighting setup is a simple spot light set to square. Nothing special. I think what actually makes it look more believable than the default setup for this environment is I went in and changed the colors on a lot of the assets. Euro Apartment is really detailed but the colors of everything are really kidnd of wacky. I went with more of a gray pallet (as is in vogue around my neck of the woods) and desaturated a lot of stuff. It instantly made a huge difference. I also took Jeff's advice and scattered a lot of clutter. I really think it has more to do with the colors of the room being less zany than anything I did with the lights!
Thanks for the notes on the hair cap. I had been removing lines in Photoshop but forgot to on this upload. Its nice to know that you can fix it in Daz!
I hear you on the comforter. It was mentioned that this is a D Force bed, so I am going to mess with that to get the post and bed to look better.
The bed has legs but you can't see them in this shot. It does look like its floating. I probably need to do something about that. It is "realistic" but leads to more scrutiny of the shot which you don't want when you are shooting for photoreal renders!
Thank you for the feedback.
Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I really appreciate you guys taking the time to give me notes. This helps a bunch! What a great thread!
I'm sure someplace there is some sort of study that may shed light on naturalistic facial proportions. But generally I'd say look carefully at the morphs you;ve assigned. Anything such as The Girl, or Aiko, will all give stylized cartoonish facial proportions. From the look of the structure of her face I'd say you have a bit of The Girl dialed in. Remove that, and it should look more natural.
You're welcome! I remember when I figured that out... I was blown away by the change! I honestly have no idea why 1.5 is the default. Waaaay too blurry.
As for hair, you could try different shaders.... the "Backlight" ones are pretty awesome.
If I had to give one piece of advice for trying for realism is 'attention to details'. Every little detail adds up and makes a big difference and most of them can be fixed without a lot of technical know-how. A few examples from your latest picture post:
- Its good you fixed her 'floating leg'. Now if you look at that same leg you can see the bend is causing an unnatural bend in her calf. There are products to fix this such as natural bend morhphs, etc.
- If you look at her face compared to her neck and body, it appears to be a different, less saturated color. Is this because you customized the face texture but not the rest?
-Someone else pointed this out, but her expression is frankly odd. It's fine if you want to go for an aggravated look but it is weird that she'd be comfortably sitting on a bed in yoga outfit and be so pissed off.
- The reflection off of bright pink top is casting too strongly on her arm...as if it is set to emit light and/or you must have a really strong light pointed directly at her top.
- Her panties... they looked painted on vice being an actual piece of wardrobe geometry. Are they? i.e. there is seemingly no thickness to them.
- Also, overall, you can see she is more saturated and orange than the rest of the scene. Think you need to desaturate her skin tone a bit.
Anyhow, these are not meant to be mean; rather trying to be helpful. Keep at it!
Trust me when I say I have a lot of expirience and reference for pale skin, I get to see it all the time in every lighting condition makeup and without, freshly washed, not wahed for 3 days etc. And this isnt one of those "I'm vaguely used to it so I haven't examined it closer" I examine it positively scientifically (I have shone flashlights at the side of my eye while holding up a mirror, It gets weird)
The skin to hair contrast is pretty nigh identical mine in copletely raw photos, so I think it probably reads as natural to me, as its what I'm most used to seeing in the mirror even if it might be unusual enough to you to seem off, Those first 2 images you linked are tanner than I have ever been, and quite possible am phisically capable of getting, The eyebags are possibly a bit overdone (although again If I made them the color mine look in photos everyone would definitly think it was unrealistic)
for comparison, my hair vs skin with only the exposure adjusted (the contrast and saturation was untouched) and wearing light foundation and no eye makeup. (yes in case you're wondering wihout makeup those undereyes are even more purple) also note this photo has more diffuse lighting, which softens things up
So my main influences were my skin
+ and some photos of Kristen Stewart I'd been using as hair reference for something else
+ some other influences
Trust me when I say in definitely can be in photos (and we are talking photorealism), I have some family members who aren't great with taking properly exposed photos There are *lots* of photos of me so white that the color data got lost for large chunks. Behold the color of my skin whenever my dad takes a picture of me:
Theres no lowering the exposure back from that
See this is a bit of an assumption here, Are you sure about that? because again as a person with very similar skintone I tend to prefer photos of myself relatively high key ie somewhat "overexposed" as as long as it doesnt hit actual white I find it far more flattering as even the slightest bit underexposed I tend to look very red (all over). So very genuinely when running it through Blender because I prefer the filmic tonemapping I did pretty intentionally bump up the exposure because it is an aestetic I personally prefer
Also your use of the term "overexposed" might just be rlly confusing me as its something I think of as applying to a whole image. One part bein overexposed vs another not just isn't how I think about things as all parts of the image are exposed the same amount
Sorry if this came off as whiny/pissy, Its just, as I said, pale skin is something I have a lot of expirience with so your telling me how it "should" look and then posting reference that... isnt really all that pale (she's wearing bronzer in the first pic my dude, bronzer) did rub me the wrong way a bit.
Oh man you hit the nail on the head here. This is a deninite flaw in my workflow where I tend to get ideas and change direction partway through a project. She started out very 90's grunge where the lack of makeup and sculped brows made much more sense, but then I could not get the grungier clotes to look good so I switched to more formal clothes (I think this is when i added the backdrop because i found it entertaining) at which point I thought "you know this person not wearing makeup is a bit weird in the context. Ugn but I'd have to change the skin texture or paint maps... naaaahhhh" so I was lazy
All,
thanks for the helpful feedback. Per Rashad and some other's I changed up the guy a bit to make him look his age (supposed to be 21 or so) and redid his face and hair. See below, welcome feedback!
@j cade I think it looks great except the slightly baked in shadows at the lips (other areas probably fine) and maybe needs a smoother transition from eye to eyelid (edit: I could be wrong after seeing your photo as a reference). Great work.
These reference images are great! I can see the direction you are going. We do not disagree, we are just looking at these issues from different perspectives. These examples will help me better describe my observations.
Firstly I should clarify the ideal of what I mean with the skin being "overexposed," in that the specular highlights seem to compete and get lost quite a bit against the brightness of the base skin itself. To me this reads as a possible overexposure of that particular surface, which is odd because as you say, overexposure should affect the entire scene, but somehow it doesnt here. In the Kristen Stewart reference image, she is indeed very pale, but notice there is still adequate whiteness "headroom" within the color palette of the dynamic range of the monitor for the specular highlights on her forhead and cheeks to remain clearly visible. There is still a clear distinction between the pale color of her skin, and the grayscale reflection on the surface of her skin. I don't observe those clear distinctions in the rendered image you supplied, and it seems to me the proper specular highlight are indeed there in the material settings, but they are likely being out-competed by the base lightness of the skin. This is by no mean particularly right or wrong since you prefer a more high key light, its just that if you're going to envision one surface as high hey, then all of the other surfaces need to be envisioned the same way.
The overexposed reference image you supplied is a good example of the overall effect I'd expect to see on all of the surfaces if the entire image was uniformly overexposed. The more light, the less obvious the reddish areas around the eye bcome. We also lose all height information as well as specular distinctions, behind the glare of the overexposure.
The reddish hues around the eyes in your reference image are actually much more subtle than the way they appear in the rendered image. The reddish area they cover is much tighter, restricted to the eye lids framing your pupil (which is beautiful by the way), not extending over the entire eye socket as they appear to in the rendered image. The extended area of redness could well be a makeup choice, so it is easily justifiable. Also notice the subtle color shifts of the eye redness rings. The above ring is red-orange shifted, and the below ring is red-blue shifted. But neither is the bronze sort of ideal I see in the rendered image. Perhaps the contrast of the original skin document is shifting the colors somewhat? Its hard to know. But if you could somehow vary the hue of that area I think it might further improve the image.
I think you're going to keep getting suggestions to change the male until he ends up looking like this guy. That's not the guy she fell in love with. And he shouldn't be growing a beard just because one guy called him "soy boy". Maybe if two or three did, but one?
lmao
TIL... some people consider Adam Lavigne masculine. Still the best comment of the day, though :)
Hey, we can't be mad at Jeff for making it more consistent. He is achieving a closer consistency and thus a stronger asset-real state. Now if he would have made the bodier heavier and with less hair, he could likewise have left the head alone, and likewise achieved a more asset real state. As far as Photo-real, it looks realistic either way.
Besides, we all know there is a girl taking the photo, who is the actual girlfriend to the guy in the photo....and the one shown in the photo is single!
HAHAH you all crack me up ! ;)
@jacksonlighter Thank you so much for the advice! I really have to work on textures a lot more I guess.
@Rashad Carter Haha, that was it! For whatever reason I had eyes dialed up to 30%. Now that can be easily fixed at least.
@Leonides02 Truly eye-opeing. So much quality with just a simple click. I really don't get why the standard would be 1.5 either. May I ask you for a bit of elaboration on that backlighting shader though? Is it an extra product? :)
I know right. So many tattoos to compensate having a whiny voice and weak chin, smh.
I referred to him as a soyboy because it's a memeable word and also in defense of the character looking "asset real", so as to say this is an archetype of person that exists so it's not "breaking the immersion" for him to have kind of a pudgy youthful face and also body hair at the same time, as if people dont go through puberty till theyre 50 years old or something.
I think I've gotten somewhat lot closer, this the culmination of a weeks worth of tweaking every now and then.
Especially EXR > Filmic Blender > Affinity Photo
Love to hear feedback as well
Another test, render plus some filters.
I tried to take advantage of everything I learned in this thread so far, as well as:
- Hiding revealing details in the aesthetics of an old polaroid
- Adding details that make the render adequate for the 80s, so that nothing seems out of place
- Doing what I always did in high school when we had to draw things that were difficult for me: hiding everything that I cannot do well :D
What do you think could be improved? C&C welcome!
LOL, I never heard of "soy boy" and I highly doubt the 'scientifically proven' claims attribute to them and to the effects of soy consumption.
Anyway, I felt the original boy in Jeff_Someone's render looks like the gal's teen brother or boyfriend or even just platonic friend. A lot of the teen assumption is based on their dress and that decorations in that room and not that by age 21 all males should visibly display wrinkling in x number of areas in y number of places or similarly with hairiness; which exposes how ridiculous it is when you try to define age empirically by anything other than actual calendar days. The render is just a one off snapshot with no other clues so no surprise guesses are wrong. Anyway, does a male have to look like a 'Dusk Dynasty' cast member to avoid ridicule?
I am impressed, very cool :-)
Impressive! I'm with Masterstroke on this one.
circa 1980's
This looks great overall, but I'd say there's still some "plastic" look to her skin.
Also, FYI, you can do filmic in Affinity so you don't need to go to Blender first. :)
Yes, but they're excellent hair shaders:
https://www.daz3d.com/backlight--hair-shaders-for-iray-
OMG please not tattoos Why people want their bodies to look like my school jotter doodles I'll never understand.
Otherwise the boyfriend did look boyish in the original but the new look is much better although I think the face shape has changed and that might have been good enough without the stubble.
I think that picture would have people asking who she is, and nobody would suspect it's not a real person.
super