Anonymous at Wed, 18 Aug 2021 18:54:22 UTC No. 844926

Its not stylized so its useless

Anonymous at Wed, 18 Aug 2021 20:57:08 UTC No. 844961

>>844926
what the actual fuck?

Anonymous at Wed, 18 Aug 2021 21:00:01 UTC No. 844962

>>844922
Impossible to make cute girls. Completely useless

Anonymous at Wed, 18 Aug 2021 23:18:01 UTC No. 845001

>>844922
can only use in unreal engine
absolutely useless

Anonymous at Wed, 18 Aug 2021 23:56:54 UTC No. 845007

Is there truly nothing that can defeat daz? They must be stopped

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 00:16:50 UTC No. 845009

>>845007
Blender Marketplace... aaaand it failed too.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:09:45 UTC No. 845017

>>844922
It can't create creatures. Completely useless

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:20:04 UTC No. 845022

>>844922
Can you make white people in it yet?
What about nude models, or at the very least without clothes but with Barbie genitals?

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 05:36:45 UTC No. 845058

Ducky was right.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 06:38:57 UTC No. 845070

>>845009
Wait Blendermarketplace shut down?

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:19:32 UTC No. 845074

>>845058
Who?

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:53:36 UTC No. 845090

>>844922
What garbage, it's basically a locked in AAA NPC/player creator, useless, unless you want to make walking simulators "with a compelling story" a la David Cage.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 11:26:04 UTC No. 845110

>>845074
Some hack Blender user.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 11:33:34 UTC No. 845113

>/3/ is so stupid they can't think of a way that free rigged human topology with blendshapes could benefit them

keep thinking dumb dumbs I'm sure you'll get there

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 11:42:04 UTC No. 845115

>>844922
Can only make play dough, fucking useless
Targeted at making ugly niggers, its fucking USELESS.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 11:44:04 UTC No. 845117

>>844922
There is a very limited number of options (right now), with limited sliders and morphing from pre-made assets. So it's impossible to make unique looking characters, and everyone ends up looking vaguely the same. Women especially all look more or less Asian.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 12:32:08 UTC No. 845129

>>845113
Daz has been around for more than a decade now.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 13:18:29 UTC No. 845138

>>845117
like all the character creators on the market
it's cool to see there's more and more focus on photorealistic character modeling and digital doubles but someone needs to step up and show a better solution than what we have now

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 14:56:09 UTC No. 845143

>>845138
The fuck are you taking about, you can make werewolves and orcs and just about everything humanoid in Daz via 3rd party morphs.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 15:02:11 UTC No. 845145

>>845143
they look ghastly

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 15:03:03 UTC No. 845146

>>845143
I think this was a fatal flaw in the MetaHuman business model. The devs flat out said that they will not open MetaHuman to custom content creation.

Who the hell did they think will even use MetaHuman? AAA studios have enough money to create their own assets without having to waste time reverse engineering the MetaHumans to work on their projects. Indie studios opt out for stylization because they don't have the time and monetary resources necessary for anything more meaning MH is useless to them.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 15:09:43 UTC No. 845151

I don need to remember it
its here bitches

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 19:45:07 UTC No. 845210

>>844922
Just dropped:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEYT1IPX0wg&ab_channel=UnrealEngine

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 21:26:30 UTC No. 845232

>>845146
Is Makehuman not used anymore? I'm behind on the new generators

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 21:36:06 UTC No. 845241

>>845232
Makehuman was never used to begin with.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 21:41:17 UTC No. 845242

>>844922
Only good for woke shit, so not good.

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 21:42:53 UTC No. 845243

>>845241
I only use makehuman for a quick base mesh for horror props (rotting corpses for exemple) but I'd never use it for real characters though. They're too easy recognizable (and ugly).

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 21:49:24 UTC No. 845246

>>845243
That's an interesting use for them. What do you use for real characters?

Anonymous at Thu, 19 Aug 2021 21:53:13 UTC No. 845247

>>844926
lel are you for real?

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 02:41:16 UTC No. 845292

>>845007
is it actually possible to create a nice face in daz without sculpting?

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 03:33:13 UTC No. 845295

>>845292
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sewwvYIUkk&ab_channel=Faux2D

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 11:17:19 UTC No. 845345

>>845295
>mix and match models you have to buy individually

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 11:42:01 UTC No. 845354

>>845345
or you can use MH and make ugly 56%-ers for free that only look good in UE5

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:30:54 UTC No. 845376

>>844922
Memehuman, just another case of corp not knowing what to do with their money so it’s time to buy something/anything to integrate into a corp product suite.
Fucking Daz offers vastly more customisation options (have to cancerously hunt for addons tho).

If you want to know were future will be look at Nvidia, Audio2Face for example (and not a vague limp dick Metaverse).

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 15:04:11 UTC No. 845384

>>845145
Your butthole looks ghastly.

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 17:39:02 UTC No. 845421

>>845376
>Audio2Face
The tech demo was really impressive but from the subsequent videos it all seems very underwhelming. It seems to be morph-based meaning the animation only looks good on the base figure. It transfers the deformations of the mesh rather than using the mesh's face control rig. Useless for production.

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 20:30:21 UTC No. 845444

>>844922
kevin sorbo? Herc?

Anonymous at Fri, 20 Aug 2021 20:46:05 UTC No. 845448

>>845145
They're werewolves, isn't the point for them to look ghastly?

Anonymous at Sat, 21 Aug 2021 07:24:18 UTC No. 845543

Kinda curious, anyone know what the standard is for facial capturing right now?
I figure there's still plenty of beatiful white people around me that could easily work as stand-ins in a game.

Anonymous at Sat, 21 Aug 2021 08:31:55 UTC No. 845552

>>845543
There is none.

Dynamixyz was the best commercially available tool out there but they've been bought. Everything else is too shit for words. They promised Masquerade 2.0 will come out almost 2 years ago but still nothing. Faceware is like a shittier version of Dynamixyz so there's really no point.

There's a giant hole now in the market. I've been trying to recruit several coders to make something but nobody is interested. There is a ton of open source stuff out there for mocap so it's mainly a stich-up job. In one year a dedicated team could most likely release a Beta. I'm currently learning to code so hopefully one day we'll have something us lowly plebs can use.

Anonymous at Sat, 21 Aug 2021 11:29:17 UTC No. 845591

>>845552
That kind of sucks.
I was hoping for something to help me get going on being able to make something akin to Yakuza's use of celebrities.
Although I guess that might be less "facial capturing" and more high res photographs used for texturing?

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 01:16:15 UTC No. 845735

>>844926
>saves devs the money/time of having to scan people while providing a complete facial rig
>useless
If you want stylized, hire an Indian on Fiverr to throw some primitives together in Zbrush and dynamesh them.

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 03:21:56 UTC No. 845747

>>845735
the industry doesn't want shitty $5 fiverr style

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 16:09:15 UTC No. 845846

>>844922
realism = technical, ubiquitous
stylized = artistic, unique

Not all artists are capable of mimicking another person's style but all artists are trained in reproducing realism. At the end of the day realism is a cheaper alternative because any artist your hire can be replaced instantly. A stylized look is dependent on your main artist(s) meaning there's a content creation bottleneck happening due to the talent needed to maintain a coherent art style.

100 artists working at the same time will create 100 realistic assets. These assets can also be used for future projects.

100 artists can't work at the same time to produce 100 stylized assets because all these assets needs to go through an approval stage. The chances that most of these assets will have to be fixed or remade to fit the art style is high. These assets cannot be used for future projects.

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 17:03:19 UTC No. 845858

>>845846
>Not all artists are capable of mimicking another person's style but all artists are trained in reproducing realism.
>At the end of the day realism is a cheaper alternative because any artist your hire can be replaced instantly.
If that were true, there would be no or nearly no stylized commercial art and everything would be realistic.
Not every artist is able to produce realism, those who can't, do (bad) stylized art. Realism is a pretty solid reference, either you can do it or you can't.
Stylized art opens the door for lazy and bad artists to pretend that their inability is deliberate. It can be used to hide lack of artistic abilities (not implying that all stylized artists are doing that, but tons of them do). It's also much cheaper to produce on every level which gives it a strong economic incentive.
>>845846
>100 artists can't work at the same time to produce 100 stylized assets because all these assets needs to go through an approval stage. The chances that most of these assets will have to be fixed or remade to fit the art style is high. These assets cannot be used for future projects.
Explain why Blizzards style and the ugly Fortnite style for example is so ubiquitous, while truly unique and great styles are rare and even more rarely seen in big mainstream productions.
Everybody does the same types of cheap and ugly styles that have been known for a while and that can be produced by artistically handicapped Indians/Chinese. In the end there are like 12 different mainstream styles that are repeated ad absurdum.
Stylized art makes it possible to lower the bar so more people who are not that great can be used as worker drones to produce more cheap shit.
If you pay attention you also realize that the argument that realism is inferior to stylized is often made by those who are unable to do realistic art.

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 17:47:53 UTC No. 845864

>>845384
where's the cock

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 18:24:56 UTC No. 845871

>>845858
>If that were true, there would be no or nearly no stylized commercial art and everything would be realistic.

Consider the entire pipeline. Stylized art depends on the MAIN concept artist. There's only so much art one man can produce, this is a bottleneck. Realistic art depends on the concept art of dozens of artist each with their unique style. There's no bottleneck because the asset artists just have to adapt each concept art to a realistic style.

>Stylized art opens the door for lazy and bad artists to pretend that their inability is deliberate.

So? What they say and what the audience perceive aren't the one and the same. If an artist is incompetent then by that very definition the audience will notice and said artist will get fired.

>It's also much cheaper to produce on every level which gives it a strong economic incentive.

Wrong. When you're dealing with environments it's more expensive. It's using real world reference vs redesigning every single element in the scene from the ground up.

>Explain why Blizzards style and the ugly Fortnite style for example is so ubiquitous

Blizzard has been honing its own artistic look for almost 2 decades now. Overwatch is the pinnacle of that design philosophy and no other game out there managed to achieve the same look.

Fortnite looks cheap and it's just a copy-pasted look from studios like Blizzard. Comparing the two is like saying that just because cars are everywhere then it must be really easy to build your own car.

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 20:45:30 UTC No. 845890

>>845871
>Consider the entire pipeline. Stylized art depends on the MAIN concept artist. There's only so much art one man can produce, this is a bottleneck.
It is not because you can separate concepts into categories. There is no bottleneck unless there is not enough money to hire enough adequate concept artists. Availability isn't a problem either because there are 100 times more concept artists available than jobs.
That ignores the fact that most companies do use a generic style that can be adapted easily by other artists.
Your argument that concept artists can't adapt styles from others is also very weak. I can and I am drawing just for fun and I am nowhere near a pro concept designer.
>If an artist is incompetent then by that very definition the audience will notice and said artist will get fired.
The audience is even more incompetent and doesn't know shit. Why do you think there are so many games with supergeneric art - because the audience doesn't know or care. Also I meant incompetent in relation to realistic art.
>When you're dealing with environments it's more expensive. It's using real world reference vs redesigning every single element in the scene from the ground up.
You are wrong - the overhead in design is easily balanced by the easier production due to less complexity.
Also the same kind of procedural tools that are used for realistic environments can be used for stylized work.
Realistic art is more expensive because you need better hardware for the whole team and more expensive software (and more types of it), everything becomes bigger and more complex, it generates more data when scaling up to realism and this doesn't stop since realism is a moving target. Compared to Blizzards style for example that can be done with 10 year old hardware and way less software.
>Overwatch is the pinnacle of that design philosophy and no other game out there managed to achieve the same look.
Looks like generic crap to me.

Anonymous at Sun, 22 Aug 2021 22:39:32 UTC No. 845917

>>845890
>Looks like generic crap to me.
>to me

your posts in a nutshell

Anonymous at Tue, 24 Aug 2021 19:41:55 UTC No. 846281

well if people are using DAZ nonstop to create shitty porn and getting paid millions, i don't see why they just can't use metahuman instead
at least the women won't look like creepy trash dolls

Anonymous at Tue, 24 Aug 2021 21:04:56 UTC No. 846301

>>846281
>at least the women won't look like creepy trash dolls

should we tell him?

Anonymous at Wed, 25 Aug 2021 02:37:19 UTC No. 846336

>>845858
I see you're a man of culture as well, anon… Your post was a pleasure to read.

Anonymous at Wed, 25 Aug 2021 04:30:27 UTC No. 846350

>>845871
Valve achieved unique and iconic look like 20 years ago with TF2, over watch is not a good example

Anonymous at Wed, 25 Aug 2021 14:44:41 UTC No. 846428

>>846350
If you think Overwatch is not a good example of great character design then consider the fact that you might not be qualified to have any opinion on anything regarding art, design, and marketing.

Anonymous at Wed, 25 Aug 2021 16:15:01 UTC No. 846455

>>846336
thanks anon
>>846428
I considered the possibility that he might not be qualified to have any opinion on anything regarding art, design, and marketing, but I rather came to the conclusion that you are unable to discuss things properly like an adult and instead act like a child throwing a temper tantrum in face of different opinions that are opposed to your personal taste. See, you are not the only one who can attack the individual rather than the argument.
Its perfectly fine to have a personal taste, but being unable to see things from multiple perspectives and actually listen to opposing arguments is a sign of an naive mind.
Overwatch is commercially successful, so you actually have a point when it comes to successful art-design and marketing, but their motivation is not to make an artistic work that has supreme quality in the art category, but rather making a commercially successful product that they can earn money with (and they did, tons of it).
The masses of consumer has no real understanding and interest in supreme art, it wishes to consume inoffensive things that are neither too complex nor to alien to their perception - in short, something they already know.
As a consequence companies that produce said mass consumer media products go the way of the lowest common denominator, Overwatch is a perfect example of that.
The art is inoffensive, generic, mainstreamed, sanitized, builds on known design principles, is not inventive, new, alien or contrary to what the consumers already know. There is not ONE single element that stands out.
Of course that doesn't makes it bad, but it clearly falls short of greatness.
By the very definition of the word great, it can't be great because it doesn't has any quality that makes it so.
If you disagree, then name one!

Anonymous at Wed, 25 Aug 2021 16:49:06 UTC No. 846466

>>846455
tl;dr
why not just accept my different personal opinion based on actual objective data?

Anonymous at Thu, 26 Aug 2021 17:37:10 UTC No. 846706

>>844962
degenerate coomer.

Anonymous at Sat, 28 Aug 2021 11:07:07 UTC No. 847099

Am I the only one who notices an Asian tinge to most metahumans?
Like all of the characters I've seen out of there look part asian and it's too obvious.
I've also yet to see any good looking characters, they all look like basic 6/10s with clay skin and dry eyes. The hair is decent though I'll give them that, though I don't know how game-friendly it is.


Aside from that, as an Indie dev who's making a game with high quality characters I find CC3 to be a much better alternative personally. Metahumans are cool but I don't think they're game-ready and they all look similar.
DAZ is cool but I find a lot of those characters look similar as well unless I download custom morphs and addons and I don't have time to fuck with that.
CC3 has a headshot plugin that takes care of the foundations and has decent morph sliders, skin pigment ect already built in.

The one thing I'm lacking is a decent hair creation tool. They're all weird or made for extremely high end situations. I want to grow a hair mesh card out of the skull using its designated UV and continue switching UVs/growing/shaping like I'm painting/sculpting. But every program has these steps separated so you never quite see the finished product until the very end.

Anonymous at Sat, 28 Aug 2021 11:09:15 UTC No. 847100

>>847099
>Am I the only one who notices an Asian tinge to most metahumans?
Bro, everyone notices that.
They all look like some generic multi-ethnic rebel character you'd see in a Disney Star Wars movie or an EA game.

Anonymous at Sat, 28 Aug 2021 11:18:28 UTC No. 847101

>>847100
Ok good so I'm not just jaded from the forced diversity/race-mixing propaganda in other media.
I have yet to see a single plain black/white person come out of that thing. They all look multi-ethnic and it's weird that they've seemingly made no effort to fix this as it makes their characters look like *their* characters rather than a unique individual style for each character created by the artist working on the thing.

Anonymous at Sat, 28 Aug 2021 11:37:46 UTC No. 847107

>>847099
thoughts on DAZ's metamorpher?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sewwvYIUkk&

Looks like a worthwhile tool for creating NPC background character

Anonymous at Sat, 28 Aug 2021 13:41:15 UTC No. 847114

>>847099
>Am I the only one who notices an Asian tinge to most metahumans?
>Like all of the characters I've seen out of there look part asian and it's too obvious.
Are you talking about the pure (unchanged) characters or the end result of mixing them?
If its the latter than I might have an explanation.
Metahuman kinda works like genetics, you mix the available faces and get a result.
I think the gene pool is simply too small and the end result will always look multi-ethic because the extremes will always come through.
Try to make 20 unique pure blooded Asians or Africans and you'll probably have the same problem.
In order to get believable variations in one ethnic group, there need to be much more faces available.
Also the faces they have look too average, they need to hire and scan some models that look beautiful - without outstanding Beauties to mix in, the end result will always be these fugly mutts.
In that regards their algorithm is worse than nature - ugly parents sometimes have nice looking children, their system however cannot create beauty from mediocrity. The sum will not be more than the parts.

Anonymous at Sat, 28 Aug 2021 20:45:11 UTC No. 847189

>>847101
Another issue is if you call them out on it, you're perceived as a racist by the trannies on twitter.

Anonymous at Sun, 29 Aug 2021 02:22:58 UTC No. 847245

>>847189
I've come to expect this as a white man commenting on anything racial. I pay them no mind anymore, they've desensitized me to that word.

Anonymous at Sun, 29 Aug 2021 02:42:37 UTC No. 847252

>>847107


The ability to morph between different character styles is useful. I know CC3 has something like that with the default characters but I'm not sure they have that with custom characters. It would be especially useful for creating family members of characters as they would inherit the traits you'd want.


Picrel is what I can get out of CharacterCreator3 with the headshot plugin and a few adjustments to the texture and mesh. The main area I'm lacking in terms of quality and skill is the hair, but I feel comfortable with the quality and ease of the overall character creation process to justify using CC3 over other character creation tools.

Anonymous at Mon, 30 Aug 2021 19:19:50 UTC No. 847573

>>846706
>thinking cute girls are cooming stuff
How have you arrived at such an unreasonable idea?

Anonymous at Mon, 30 Aug 2021 19:39:45 UTC No. 847576

>>844922

Anonymous at Mon, 30 Aug 2021 21:09:00 UTC No. 847601

>>847576
soul / soulless

AYN04

Anonymous at Tue, 31 Aug 2021 15:36:31 UTC No. 847763

>>847601
>soulless
Because of looks or because of execution? Thanks for the critique.

Anonymous at Sun, 5 Sep 2021 18:21:09 UTC No. 848781

>>844922
Bruce Dickinson?

Anonymous at Sun, 5 Sep 2021 22:41:56 UTC No. 848823

>>847763
He's probably just shitposting. Btw what is that image? Looks like a photo edit, heavily compressed.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Sep 2021 14:45:31 UTC No. 848959

>>844922
My biggest problem with the software is that every character end up looking mixed race and mixed gender. Mutts and trannies, basically. Ironically this is the opposite of the real diversity they are going for with distinct ethnic phenotypes and a continum of masculine and feminine features. If they really had the option to create, say, a distinctly african man dark as the night and with a big ol flat nose or a korean with a boxy caved in head people would call it "racist".

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Sep 2021 23:29:48 UTC No. 849047

>>848823
I know nothing about OP image but my edit is GAN art.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Sep 2021 23:55:20 UTC No. 849050

>>848959
I believe it's a common problem in computer art. The root cause is sameface topology, enabled by modern decline in artistic skills, body politics, and certain idiotism of people involved in computer graphics. Not only in 3DCG. Samefaceness is also evident in GAN art, where they wrongly blame it on "bias in input data". You only need to look at Nvidia's https://ThisPersonDoesNotExist.com to observe subtle but steadfast samefaceness. Authors have already patched the "race bias" – without fixing or even acknowledging the real problem.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Sep 2021 02:26:12 UTC No. 849077

>>848959
>My biggest problem
It's only a rightwinger's problem though

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Sep 2021 02:38:16 UTC No. 849080

>>849077
disgusting
stop posting
go away

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Sep 2021 02:54:06 UTC No. 849081

>>849077
Why would a rightwinger have a problem with the hiding of minority racial characteristics, and racial mixwashing? Obscuring differences in favor of national uniformity is what rightwingers are all about.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 Sep 2021 14:36:53 UTC No. 849597

>>845113
Most people here are just shitposters that wandered in from /v/ who think they understand graphics because they participated in a few threads there that said ray tracing is a meme.

Anonymous at Thu, 9 Sep 2021 21:32:53 UTC No. 849654

>>849597
This.
And mobilefags that get confused as to where they are like a senior with Alzheimers.

Anonymous at Sun, 12 Sep 2021 14:54:40 UTC No. 850277

>>847101
What do you think they could do? Create multiple presets for each ethnicity? That's an awful lot of work that won't be immediately appreciated.

Anonymous at Sun, 12 Sep 2021 21:18:56 UTC No. 850319

>>850277
>Create multiple presets for each ethnicity
They already do have that. But white people are a fraction of the amount compared to black and Asian.
I think there's maybe 2 or 3 white person presets (that already have a tinge of mixed to them), while the rest of the 20 or so presets is everything else.
If you're looking to make characters that are asian, black or anything in between, it's pretty good, but white people are pretty much impossible.
Which is ironic considering there's plenty of "white" people hair, but nothing you can consider black or asian.

Anonymous at Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:44:50 UTC No. 850933

>>850277
>no South African (White)
:(

Anonymous at Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:39:36 UTC No. 850997

>>847114
sadly, the plan for the increased pool already has mutts planed
there's no way extremely beautiful people will be called in for scanning

Anonymous at Wed, 15 Sep 2021 14:16:05 UTC No. 851003

>>850277
>What do you think they could do?
Like I wrote here: >>847114
Dramatically increase the amount of head scans so that there are more people of all kinds of ethnicities.
Also hire some actually great looking models so that their beauty offsets the ugliness of the others.
You can't create a beautiful person from an average of mediocre looking persons.
>>850997
Then their Metahumans will inevitably become a mediocre mutt library without beauty and class.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 00:26:27 UTC No. 851093

>>850277
This White American is so 1980s Hollywood. Also how has White American become so different from English?

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 01:30:07 UTC No. 851101

>>851093
Americans who arrived to the new world where only 50% english. So you are like 50% english, 25% german, 20% scottish/irish and 5% rest of europe.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 01:32:56 UTC No. 851102

>>851003
>You can't create a beautiful person from an average of mediocre looking persons.
That's exactly how you get beauty. The less special a face is, the more beautiful it seems.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 01:38:25 UTC No. 851104

>>847114
>They need to hire and scan some models that look beautiful – without outstanding Beauties to mix in, the end result will always be these fugly mutts.
There’s a fine line between genius and madness – and so is the line between beauty and ugliness. Fools and dunces mistake wisdom for non-controversy – and beauty for non-ugliness. Hence why they are fools and dunces. I trust you’re not that dunce, my fellow artsman.

Case in point: me (pic related).

>In that regards their algorithm is worse than nature - ugly parents sometimes have nice looking children, their system however cannot create beauty from mediocrity. The sum will not be more than the parts.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 01:39:25 UTC No. 851105

>>851102
Found the dunce.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 01:56:54 UTC No. 851111

>>851102
Not the less special, but the more symmetrical and balanced a face is in it's features the more ideal we perceive it.
If you think about it it'd would be super weird if we didn't find the result highly fuckable as the average of all of us is who all of our ancestors chose to fuck.

When you take several people and start combining them all their non ideal features start to cancel one another out and something more perfected emerges.
You can keep doing this exercise with already beautiful people to make even more beautiful people.

I've been making faces for characters like that for years crossbreeding my favorites.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:08:58 UTC No. 851116

>>851105
That dude is correct. All research into beauty converges at that idea, never heard of the Marquard beauty mask?

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 07:01:20 UTC No. 851144

>>851102
That study was made by retarded people. Not an insult, only autistic people (retards) think the key to beauty lies in numbers.

The average (female) face is attractive. Think of it in simple terms: zero attractive, kinda attractive, attractive, above average attractive, perfectly attractive. So on a scale of 0 to 4, with zero being "no sexual allure", the average female ranks at 2. 3's are what most people describe as "perfect 10's". 4's are 3's with perfect bodies.

Considering just the face you can think about it in terms of facial features: eyes, nose, mouth, etc. 0 means someone with no perfect features, and 4 means someone with 4 perfect features. What someone likes is of course subjective which is why this metric is so useful. If you can determine someone's preferences you can then accurately predict where that person would rate a certain female at.

To explain why the average female is atractive let's consider this. Let's say someone finds bushy eyebrows attractive (+1) and thin eyebrows unattractive (0). An average face would have eyebrows which lie somewhere in between, not too bushy, not too thin (+0.5). Repeat this same logic with any feature and you can see how it all adds up in the average female having an attractive face.

Sources: I sculpt a ton of faces. If you think I'm full of shit, post a picture of an unattractive face and see how after I make slight changes in features (making them more "perfect") you'll get an attractive face. Pic related: I just made 3 features move towards the average meaning her regular face got at most +1.5 points.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 07:14:50 UTC No. 851145

>>851144
cont

The issue with MetaHumans is not about attractiveness. The reason why people find the generated faces as "bland" has to do with facial proportions. Even within members of the same race, the facial proportions can vary to a large extent with asians having the largest variation out there. MH facial proportions are uniformed with very little variation. This was done by choice and it has to do with how they implemented the technology. Their aim was to provide "realistic faces" so in order to achieve this they added customization limits to their character creator interface. They purposely didn't want their users to end up in the uncanny valley lest they go over the top with their facial proportions.

There's also the possibility they had no idea how to adjust the facial rig properly so they just opted out to use the same rig on all generated faces. This means they had to constrain the face proportions to the proportions of the facial rig.

Sources: Unreal MetaHuman livestreams.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 11:53:59 UTC No. 851181

>>844926
Fpbp

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 13:49:25 UTC No. 851211

>>851144
The left is ever so slightly better but all you did appears to be to even out that weird kink in her eyebrow and improved her jawline. Imma set up a face morph using my method and see how she turns out.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 14:50:57 UTC No. 851225

>>851144
Here's a demo mixing the Arya Stark girl (don't know her name) using max's morhper modifier. This is what happens if I mix her with an amalgamation of averages combining my favorite looking actress/pornstar/singer/model etc

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 17:48:24 UTC No. 851251

>>851116
Normalfaggotry is the blight which is holding back the human race from reaching the stars.

>>851144
Patrician. True beauty is aberrant. Normalfags mistake blandness for beauty because they are physically and spiritually impotent. The difference between beauty and ugliness is subtle and quantifiable but it lays elsewhere than they think.

Their fetish of the normal, and their automatic misperception of the extraordinary as degenerate, is what makes normalfags natural racists.

>Only autistic people (retards) think the key to beauty lies in numbers.
One point where I disagree. I believe that beauty is computable, measurable, and quantifiable. The blind just follow the wrong formula for reasons all too obvious.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 18:16:43 UTC No. 851254

>>851251
A huge tard you are, appealing to mysticism while disregarding how beauty is quantified while agreeing it is quantifiable?

Your mistake is to confuse the 'averaged' face for what we in common vernacular mean by an 'average' face. We're not talking about bland average as in a face that scores a 5 on a scale of 1 to 10. It's about how beauty emerges when you let everyones features balance one another out zeroing in on the ideal.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 18:25:51 UTC No. 851255

>>851144
I feel we are missing an important point here that females are attractive because men are programmed to want to fuck females. From this point of view, even though on paper Maisie Williams looks like a goblin, men still would fuck her, because she is in fertile age.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 19:28:28 UTC No. 851259

>>851255
You are an absolute idiot and YOU are missing an important point. The fact that many man are thirsty and don't think with their brain but with their dick has no relation to beauty (or the lack of it).
Its just men with low standards wanting to fuck a pussy. If your horniness distorts your perception of beauty then you should just shut the fuck up and stay away from this discussion since your brain isn't working correctly and you can't be trusted with your judgement.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 20:23:04 UTC No. 851275

>>851251
>True beauty is aberrant.

My metric accounts for personal preference. Very often have I pointed out the beauty of someone one to hear others say "I agree" and others say "she's ugly as sin, bro". People have specific preferences thus they seek out specific traits. If a face exhibits those specific traits they'll qualify it as beautiful. If the same face exhibits none of the traits someone else looks for then they'll qualify it as ugly.

Hair, forehead, nose, chin, etc are the facial traits I'm talking about. A woman who exhibits perfect hair, a perfect chin, and perfect lips will be described as beautiful by those who seek out those traits. The same face will be described as unattractive by someone who looks for eyebrows, nose, and eyes. This is not to say that someone either prefers lips or eyes. I'm saying that one will carry more weight over the other.

>>851225
All you did is lower the opacity and overlay it on some other photos. Waaaaaaw...

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 20:40:55 UTC No. 851282

>>851259
Beauty standards are created by horny men. Deal with it.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 21:31:42 UTC No. 851288

>>846706
flaming fag

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 21:41:51 UTC No. 851290

>>851275
>All you did is lower the opacity and overlay it on some other photos. Waaaaaaw...

That is how morphing like >>850277 face merging works. However you can't just overlay some images as they wont line up.

You must move every point of the canvas so your features blend together, this is done by segmenting your image with a 'morphmask' like depicted on the left there.
You mark the location of features you wanna blend and then moves them around so they blend with your target.

You can morph anything this way, not just faces. You just need to create a custom morphmask for whatever it is you wanna alter.

Anonymous at Thu, 16 Sep 2021 23:36:53 UTC No. 851309

>>844922
i dont see why everyone was freaking out. It's literally just facegen but not in-engine.

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 01:16:46 UTC No. 851312

>>851282
nonsense.
Beautiful woman make men horny, not the other way around you shit for brains.

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 01:22:06 UTC No. 851314

>>851144
Mark the differences, then. I can't see them. They're the same picture for me.

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 01:28:21 UTC No. 851316

>>851314
Not him, but at a glance, there are changes in the eyebrows, her right eye, the nose width, the bottom lip width, and the jawline.

Btw, I think the left one is the most attractive. I don't know which one is the original.

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 01:41:22 UTC No. 851320

>>851316
>Btw, I think the left one is the most attractive. I don't know which one is the original.

I was curious as well thinking the same, so I googled the image and it turns out the edit was the one on the right.

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 02:14:41 UTC No. 851327

>>851320
>it turns out the edit was the one on the right.
F

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 04:03:36 UTC No. 851337

>>845384
This is on Daz? looks very nice. do you have any render tips?

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 08:14:34 UTC No. 851367

>>851316
>Not him, but at a glance, there are changes in the eyebrows, her right eye, the nose width, the bottom lip width, and the jawline.

Only made 3 small changes: more narrow jawline, thinner more shapely eyebrows, and larger lips

>Btw, I think the left one is the most attractive. I don't know which one is the original.

Right side is the modified one. I have no idea why people find the left more attractive but like I've said: my metric accounts for personal preference. Find someone who doesn't find Maisie Williams attractive and ask them which picture they prefer.

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:30:00 UTC No. 851392

>>851367
>Find someone who doesn't find Maisie Williams attractive and ask them which picture they prefer.
You found him.
I don't prefer one picture over the other since they both look too similar, if you would fix the god-damn goblin nose maybe then this face could appear attractive to me.
IMHO there is nothing wrong with her eyes, her mouth, her brows or general facial proportions except the nose - its 100% the nose that makes this face unappealing to me.

Anonymous at Fri, 17 Sep 2021 21:23:08 UTC No. 851435

>>851312
Visit >>>/b/soc to witness highly indiscriminate straight men. They form a sad majority of the male gender, ruining gender relations for all.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Sep 2021 02:08:57 UTC No. 851467

>>851101
More like 30% English, 20% Italian, 6% Irish, 10% mexican, 14% jewish, 20% nigger,, 30% fat and 100% fructose corn syrup

Anonymous at Sat, 25 Sep 2021 12:42:52 UTC No. 852992

>>844926
Exactly. We already have lots of tools for realistic people, we need tools for stylised characters.