Au Naturel - Natural Realistic Looking Models

5.00 star(s) 1 Vote
Discussion Reviews (1)
Yakis0ba

Yakis0ba

Active Member
Aug 7, 2017
628
1,154
Brine_Basilisk said:
Isn't "realistic art" the same as "real looking" women? Is there a distinction in your mind? I'd be curious to hear it.
Click to expand...
In this context, "realistic art" is art that has certain qualities that make it look 'real' to me (the quality of the models, skin textures, lighting, etc.) while "real-looking women" are women who aren't "model pretty" and don't have unrealistic proportions, etc.
For example:

This image is a good example of the first. Let's face it, she's "model pretty" (unless I don't understand what that even means), but the quality is so good you might think it was a photograph if you scrolled past it.
While this:

would be an example of the second. She's clearly meant to be an older woman (it shows in her face), but the colors and the overall style is unrealistic in that it's obviously drawn.

Now you may think that what I'm really saying is that "realistic" means 3D and maybe even that I mean that "real-looking women" is 2D. Not the case. There is a LOT of overlap between the two.

For example, a "real-looking" woman done with "realistic" art:


And a woman done in "realistic" 2D art:

Note that she's got friggin' ELF ears yet is drawn in a style that somehow makes it look 'realistic'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Logan1377, Pun1sh3r13, BaeScout83 and 3 others
S

Six0

Well-Known Member
Mar 22, 2019
1,012
2,677
Yakis0ba said:
In this context, "realistic art" is art that has certain qualities that make it look 'real' to me (the quality of the models, skin textures, lighting, etc.) while "real-looking women" are women who aren't "model pretty" and don't have unrealistic proportions, etc.
For example:

This image is a good example of the first. Let's face it, she's "model pretty" (unless I don't understand what that even means), but the quality is so good you might think it was a photograph if you scrolled past it.
While this:

would be an example of the second. She's clearly meant to be an older woman (it shows in her face), but the colors and the overall style is unrealistic in that it's obviously drawn.

Now you may think that what I'm really saying is that "realistic" means 3D and maybe even that I mean that "real-looking women" is 2D. Not the case. There is a LOT of overlap between the two.

For example, a "real-looking" woman done with "realistic" art:


And a woman done in "realistic" 2D art:

Note that she's got friggin' ELF ears yet is drawn in a style that somehow makes it look 'realistic'.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have said it better myself.

Realistic 'art': Think photo realism. Can be 2D drawn or 3D rendered, but if it's 2D it was most likely AI generated.
Real 'looking' women: Natural looking proportions. AND HAS PUBIC HAIR goddamnit. There's nothing that screams "model pretty" more than women with bald cunts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Logan1377, Demnor and Yakis0ba
Brine_Basilisk

Brine_Basilisk

Member
Dec 3, 2020
261
967
Yakis0ba said:
In this context, "realistic art" is art that has certain qualities that make it look 'real' to me (the quality of the models, skin textures, lighting, etc.) while "real-looking women" are women who aren't "model pretty" and don't have unrealistic proportions, etc.
For example:

This image is a good example of the first. Let's face it, she's "model pretty" (unless I don't understand what that even means), but the quality is so good you might think it was a photograph if you scrolled past it.
While this:

would be an example of the second. She's clearly meant to be an older woman (it shows in her face), but the colors and the overall style is unrealistic in that it's obviously drawn.

Now you may think that what I'm really saying is that "realistic" means 3D and maybe even that I mean that "real-looking women" is 2D. Not the case. There is a LOT of overlap between the two.

For example, a "real-looking" woman done with "realistic" art:


And a woman done in "realistic" 2D art:

Note that she's got friggin' ELF ears yet is drawn in a style that somehow makes it look 'realistic'.
Click to expand...
I suppose my standard is a bit of Column A and Column B. "Realism" in my opinion, necessitates some degree of broader asymmetry, in addition to smaller granular detail such as pores, hair, weight, age, gravity, vascularity, sub-surface scattering, anatomical accuracy and a plethora of other elements that reinforce a sense of the "natural". This doesn't necessarily mean that this standard is strictly for "ugly", or " unconventionally" attractive characters, however those types of characters are an easy crossover. Personally I find the easiest way of illustrating the aim of this thread by showcasing what it isn't:
Plastic-like skin and limited texturing:
b470.jpg
Overly cartoonish stylization:
screenshot0131.png
Bimboification proportionality:
screenshot0004.png
Flat unnatural lighting:
screenshot0003.png
And lastly and much more subjectively the "glamour model" i.e. models that feel too perfect or runway model in nature:
Game_VHvpTgJ9fh.jpg
Granted, the notion of what is or isn't natural is highly subjective, so I don't pretend that I'm somehow the expert in such matters. And also I must note that of course this is no slight on any of the games referenced above, I quite like many of them in fact, they just happen to fall outside of the scope of the thread. The main reason I made this thread was explicitly because most of the industry is exactly what I just illustrated above and not what is highlighted in the rest of the thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robspf, Yakis0ba and nln0
RiddledWithFilth

RiddledWithFilth

Member
Oct 7, 2017
179
85
Yakis0ba said:
In this context, "realistic art" is art that has certain qualities that make it look 'real' to me (the quality of the models, skin textures, lighting, etc.) while "real-looking women" are women who aren't "model pretty" and don't have unrealistic proportions, etc.
For example:

This image is a good example of the first. Let's face it, she's "model pretty" (unless I don't understand what that even means), but the quality is so good you might think it was a photograph if you scrolled past it.
While this:

would be an example of the second. She's clearly meant to be an older woman (it shows in her face), but the colors and the overall style is unrealistic in that it's obviously drawn.

Now you may think that what I'm really saying is that "realistic" means 3D and maybe even that I mean that "real-looking women" is 2D. Not the case. There is a LOT of overlap between the two.

For example, a "real-looking" woman done with "realistic" art:


And a woman done in "realistic" 2D art:

Note that she's got friggin' ELF ears yet is drawn in a style that somehow makes it look 'realistic'.
Click to expand...
Damn, where is the "real-looking" woman done with "realistic" art woman from? She looks heavenly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
5.00 star(s) 1 Vote