-
- Thread starter Deleted member 1666680
- Start date
- Apr 23, 2020
- 11
- 17
I think you hate POV? Some people enjoy acting as a main character which is not my thing but yeah I can understand. So some screenshots you showed are POV so that's actually intended that way. Also it really depends what you want to show..
For example you said avoid this(Image that guy and girl having sex on the blue car) but If you want to show how male or dominant character in hurry and excited its a good shoot. So its about what u want to show in that scene. No everything about is female body, male body is also very good way to show posture and drama in the scene.
So I find your examples very dull and pointless. Unless if you just want to see sexy female body. :F
For example you said avoid this(Image that guy and girl having sex on the blue car) but If you want to show how male or dominant character in hurry and excited its a good shoot. So its about what u want to show in that scene. No everything about is female body, male body is also very good way to show posture and drama in the scene.
So I find your examples very dull and pointless. Unless if you just want to see sexy female body. :F
No, I like pov quite a lot and as you can see, the first T1 example in the Sex Scene section is also a pov shot. The problem with the pov shots in the T3 lists isn't that they're pov, it's how they've been done.
Intention doesn't equal great execution, especially if one doesn't know how to do it better. The T3 screenshots I shared aren't really pov, since humans don't have such a small field of view. These are shots that were intended to be pov, but ended up with a bad camera lense and focal distance settings. This happens when developers either didn't learn about the basics of camera settings or intentionally shrink down a scene because they struggle with making the models look good in full frame. Or, of course, laziness / saving time.
These are both pov. See the difference for yourself, that's simply a matter of the camera lense and focal distance:
And this is by all means not the end of what's possible in pov. Check this out:
This is much closer to what a pov looks like in reality, and of course a million times better than the first shot above. Which leads us back to this statement from the guide:
It's not a good shot. You're missing the point and talk about something entirely different in your comment: "being in a hurry and excited". That's not a shot, that's a scene description. How you shoot it is a different matter. You can shoot this scene from other angles that are a hundred times better in actually showing the characters and their hot parts. Objects and body parts of no interest blocking your sight on interesting content is by far no indicator of dominance, but bad camera placement.
Specific perspectives that imply a certain hierarchy between characters do exist (picture #3 under T1 BJ's is one), but that's a different topic that falls under the category of visual language.
Last edited:
Update: I extended the guide with a huge brand new section about POV shots, to clear up some of the misconceptions about what POV's really have to look like.
I also added big chapter headlines to the different sections for an easier reading experience.
Have fun
I also added big chapter headlines to the different sections for an easier reading experience.
Have fun
You're spot on. I've seen trillions of porn images and videos in my lifetime. POV porn sucks in my opinion unless it shows a woman's facial expression or something beautiful about the curves of her body, not just an ass and a dick going in whatever hole. And POV can be lame in a fucking scene because the dude needs to get his priorities straight. Fuck a camera view. Fuck the woman. The POV thing can be so is so clinical, like bad vintage porn or that gape dude named Mike. And any POV isn't as good as a whole picture kinda shot that deftly slides in explicitness in a non-contrived way.
Last edited:
Maybe you go to a couple of shots quick, but they're garbage and not to be emphasized. In a video, there's room for a little 'check-in' to see where it's going, typically if it's anal, but pan the fuck out and show me her body and her facial expression. How she looks and how she feels about it are the most important things. And the chemistry.
You can see the scene from your eyes, but like I showcased in the guide, that doesn't necessarily mean that you have to shrink down the vision of the eyes by 80%.
We're sitting in front of large displays nowadays, there's nothing to miss that would require a zoom-in like mad. In terms of seeing something "with your eyes", that's achieved by switching up angles while still delivering a great full frame.
So instead of getting this which wouldn't be a pov
you get this
Would this really look more amazing cropped in?
I don't think so. There's no issue in the full picture #1 to focus on that part down there if that's what you want to see, but in the #2 trimmed down version, you lose the fantastic upper part of the girl. Could be any girl just lying in front of you there, it has just become mindless. Meanwhile, cutting down the frame didn't really do anything for us, it's not that there are now details visible that weren't there before.
Last edited:
- May 27, 2024
- 34
- 11
I liked some of the "never do this" pics.
Some scenes can be really hot even when a lot is blocked, imagine fucking behind a curtain and you can only see the shadow.
- Dec 17, 2018
- 336
- 735
Seems like all your advice boils down to "cram as much of your female character in your shots as much possible". Would a female character, laid completely diagonally on the screen where her entire body is on display, be aesthetically pleasing? According to you, this would be the ultimate composition as you can see all of her goodies, correct?
I don't think a bunch of examples with none of the theory behind why something that is composed well is attractive is of much use. I am a dev who is also struggling with composition, but it's not like I don't know what looks good. This post is like showing a beginner artist how to draw by showing him Mozart, Picasso, and Van Gogh. Of course I know what looks good; It doesn't require a trained eye to understand that a well composed image is well composed. When you've got an empty canvas and you've got a billion ways you can frame an image, or in this case a render, you just end up shitting out a bunch of mediocre renders until you get frustrated and just go with the least shit out of them all. Just because I have an instinct on knowing what looks good or have you show me what looks good doesn't mean that I now understand the secret sauce behind how to compose a render.
I don't think a bunch of examples with none of the theory behind why something that is composed well is attractive is of much use. I am a dev who is also struggling with composition, but it's not like I don't know what looks good. This post is like showing a beginner artist how to draw by showing him Mozart, Picasso, and Van Gogh. Of course I know what looks good; It doesn't require a trained eye to understand that a well composed image is well composed. When you've got an empty canvas and you've got a billion ways you can frame an image, or in this case a render, you just end up shitting out a bunch of mediocre renders until you get frustrated and just go with the least shit out of them all. Just because I have an instinct on knowing what looks good or have you show me what looks good doesn't mean that I now understand the secret sauce behind how to compose a render.
Trying to get her goodies fully into frame will automatically lead you to good compositional decisions. Because your composition follows a purpose.
Both are rear views, but the right one is automatically the more appealing one as we can see her private parts.
The shot is still not the best we can get out of the scene though. It's good enough (Tier 2), especially if you
just want to focus on the private parts. But why limit yourself if your 3D model is complete and you just need to switch up the pose and camera?
Just get it all into one frame: The face, tits, feet, private parts.
Look how much of an upgrade this is compared to the first boring image.
There are many other aspects that contribute to an overall good render, like I mentioned in the OP. That's colors, lighting, textures, fluids, the background, objects in the scene and such. But by following the general guidelines here (that include way more than just "put girls fully into frame") you'll also erase a lot of things that will drag your composition down.
For a porn game you'll win 100% of your scenes no matter what if your girls are placed well - even if there's room for improvement in other aspects.
Compare these: the first image is a bit plain in terms of lighting, shadows and atmosphere, but just a fantastic shot and pose, while image #2 has all the cinematic lights, shadows, reflections and highly detailed textures, but is just boring because the composition isn't really going anywhere with it:
A good image composition beats other aspects every single time.
As for "how" to fill your frame, where you place your camera and the angles you choose, there shouldn't be much room for significant mistakes left if you match all the check boxes from this guide. If your images still look bad, like for instance because the depth feels odd or unappealing, take a look at things like your camera lense and focal distance as mentioned in the guide, those can make a huge difference.
But if you have questions, feel free to ask - and share examples, if you got something visual to represent the struggle, it's easier to pinpoint the problems.
Last edited:
- Aug 17, 2019
- 5,752
- 9,213
Composition and angles are one of those things that should exist but ideally never be noticed (think of it like your favorite meal missing a random ingredient without your knowledge. You know it tastes off, but you aren't sure where.), unless it's so good it should be noted. Summer's Gone is a notable example of this. The composition borders on cinema-grade.
That's where, in my opinion, OP is a bit wrong. It's not about who or what (unless it's obnoxious or overly distracting for no real purpose) is in the image, but how it's shaped/presented in the render. Angles and composition are everything, even if the player doesn't recognize it - and when players do, it's typically a bad thing in many cases. But just as important as both of those is lighting. It's absolutely integral to making your chosen angle look good.
Even your example isn't terrible, AI or not. She's got five fingers, similar eyes, etc. Background could use some work, but it's plenty workable. Something like this (below) would be traditionally referred to as 'bad composition' for all three of the reasons in the above paragraph:
In the image, you'll see the (shitty) camera drawing point at an illuminated cheek. The rule being broken here is that the broadside (long side) of the face should be either dimly lit or not lit at all to create shadow, the light should be coming from her top right side - which would thus create the shadow. This, mixed with the tilted head angled at the camera pointed nearly straight at her, results in a rather unflattering image. The fact she's centered with no tilt to the camera to counter her tilted head just makes it worse.
If you look at something like the aforementioned Summer's Gone (above), you'll see how he uses shadows to shape the image. Notice how he creates a dynamic of light and dark throughout the image, forcing your eyes across the entirety of it. He uses the angle and the camera to build the base of the image and uses shadows to shape it, while the lighting conveys the emotion alongside the model(s). That is composition. Using everything available in the image to convey a message or story.
The larger problem with OP's examples is that they're all trying to cram everything into a single shot and refusing to let space balance the render/images. The reason for that is that many of the examples are made by people who either typically do one-off renders (meaning they need to show everything in that one render) or Blender animations (that take considerable amounts of time to make), and the few AVN examples he shows are compositionally average, at best.
You confuse lighting with composition. As stated in the OP, I focused on image composition in this guide, not on lighting as that is an entire different subject. The T1 examples are fantastic, none of them is "average at best".
Image composition is about where you place things in your frame, what you put into your frame, the felt weight of a scenery and the feeling that a shot creates depending on various psychological aspects, including gaze guidance through the implication of invisible "lines".
Your picture from Summer's Gone is a good example of a not so good image composition:
The ear is cutoff on the left and there's also a part of his nose in the frame. This setting attempts to be an over the shoulder shot - you usually do not include the nose in this. It just looks awkward.
In terms of lighting, the light creates a double chin for him which is aesthetically unpleasing, in film you'd try to even that out with additional dimmed light panels or in post.
With this focal length you'd want to leave some space above her head instead of cutting it off, and the frame choice at the bottom is also an odd one, since it's stuck somewhere between close up and medium close up. With this focal length however, this would rather be a medium close up shot, which means there's a part from the bottom missing. Mcu ends somewhere at the middle of the chest, sometimes a little bit lower, but not this high.
I understand that you're fascinated by the aesthetically looking lightwork here, but the things you described have nothing to do with image composition.
There's also nothing that "forces the viewers eyes through the image". The imaginary diagonal line you drew isn't supported by any elements in the picture, so there's nothing leading that way. The invisible line in the image would actually lead into the exact opposite direction you drew, from the bottom left corner to the top right corner, which is guided by his arm.
Furthermore, there's only one element of interest which is the woman on the right. You wouldn't want the player's eyes to travel anywhere else - there is nothing to see on the left. The guy is way too present for being only an over-the-shoulder-shot. The goal of OTS shots is to feel as if you were in the position, and in this case, focus solely on her. The other way would be to put him fully into frame and make his appearance part of the shot, but that was clearly not the goal here. So it's a failed attempt either way.
In terms of image composition, this is not a good one. Somewhere between T3 and T2.
Last edited:
- Aug 7, 2017
- 674
- 1,253
As someone who doesn't know anything about composition, I find this all very interesting.
...I still don't get the more technical stuff at all.
BUT, I can say that any shot where we see a man's taint is UNSEXY.
...I still don't get the more technical stuff at all.
BUT, I can say that any shot where we see a man's taint is UNSEXY.
Great information, thanks for taking the time to post. As a rookie solo dev, just the technical aspect of making any kind of game or VN can be quite a bit to handle. Do you recommend any sites like shotdeck.com or something similar? And if so, do you have any favorites? I feel like being able to see what the best of the best can do can really help inspire and guide us who are not well versed in this area. Any tutorial recommendations would be great also. Thanks.
Yes, you can just use collections like that from shotdeck to see how the pro's shot and learn by trying to replicate. But I would also take the time to go over the basics, like getting an overview of what kind of shots exist:
For instance, "cowboy shot" ends in the middle of the quads. If you know that this shot exists, instead of framing your characters so that they're being cutoff at the knees, you can make an informed decision and go for the cowboy shot instead, which will then look professional and familiar to your audience.
The right side shows where the frame ends (at the bottom).
This is an example of a cowboy shot:
Or you see in the graph that medium close up ends at the middle of the chest:
You can combine this with camera angles as well, for instance low angle + cowboy shot =
And then I'd recommend to learn about focal length and lenses (mm). Any Youtube tutorial or article from a channel/site that looks like the author has decent experience will do. I would of course suggest you look for channels specialized in photography/film, if you start with a tutorial for the program you're using, you might get bad info from a hobbyist.
So learn from the best first, and then see how you can apply that to the camera settings in your program.