Building quality 3d Character Model from scratch. Need some insightfull experienced pointers.

[Bimbo Barbie]

Hi,

So I've been looking around a bit. I want to make my own custom 3d model (starting with a woman to get some of the 'finer arts' down ^^
I don't want to use presets (although I wouldn't mind learning where to find good examples for reference)

There's lots of methods of approaching this, however, I want to ask for some experienced advice before I waste days maybe weeks on a methodology that's not fitting for what I intend to do. Sure it might be great for overall learning, but I rather skip a few deductable corners first.

What I intend to do? Well. Simplest/shortest answer is, stuff like Jackerman (not trying to be the next big thing, just experiment with some modern techniques to see if it works out).

I'm pretty new to this stuff so any additional pointers are also welcome. I don't think 3d sculpting is what I should be doing, and in my limitless knowledge of pirating the internet ^^ I can basically get my hands on any software I want (if for some reason I can't due to licensing, then paying also isn't a problem, but you know 'try before you buy' and all that).

My key focuspoints will be realistic physics (so probably lots of bonezz?). Even if I start out with a single boob, that should be fine (a globe with jiggles lol) , then I want to find out how in the heck I'm gonna get seamless textures, and after that I wanna experiment some with lighting in various environments. If I can get that tri-factor down I might be trying my hands on one of those clothing w/ realistic weavings and figure out how to build a whole body to apply it too. But for now in general I would like some pointers with the best setup/approach/methodology for some nice cutting-edge (and time-effecient) expreimentation.

Please don't say Daz and use presets from websites, because that's not what I'm asking. Just a friendly reminder I said that already
I saw there's basic approaches like;

• Polygon Modeling
• 3d Sculpting
• NURBS modelling
• 3d Scanning

And probably a bunch of other stuff I don't know about. I don't mind how hard it is gonna be, I just want to feel confident I'm busy learning the right stuff for the task at hand. The task being building ""realistic"" custom bodies --from scratch--

Jackerman in sig if you want to see what qualitypoint I intend to aproach. For now all I need is one boobie that can bounce around like jello, with some seamless texture on it, and a bit of lighting. What do I need, and what should I need to know?

All pointers are welcome. Go nuts (please, thank you)

 

[MissFortune]

Blender is going to be your most common answer as it's free and acts as a jack of all trades. But as the saying goes, it's a master of none. Except for maybe is physics. It's pretty nice.

But if you want some high-end results, you'll need high-end software. For sculpting ZBrush, Maya, etc. should be more than adequate. Either 3DCoat or the Adobe Substance Suite for Texturing and/or Texture designing, Marvelous Designer/CLO for clothing+clothing simulation. There's a gigantic list of stuff you can potentially use, and many of which go into that pipeline. As for what Jackerman uses, he likely uses Daz for the figures and both animates and adjusts Daz's MDL textures/shaders for use in Cycles/Eevee. Can basically guarantee that the models are from Daz, though. Imo, if you're starting from Scratch, then go Maya. It's the industry standard for a reason. Blender is a nice option and something that should be learned, but Maya will certainly take you further, especially when mixed with other industry standard software.

The general point is that learning 3D on this kind of level doesn't take days or weeks to learn. It takes years, many of whom have a deeper understanding of artistic concepts, from the shape of the human body and all of its intricacies to a knowledge of sculpting, and so on. It's also a market that will likely be absolutely decimated by AI sooner rather than later. So, you might want to think about where you put your efforts instead of just jumping into the deep end and learning that way. One thing at a time.

I'll never really understand the elitism toward Daz and the whole 'preset' logic, though. All things being equal, creating the same scene between Daz and Blender, Daz does it in half of the time and will often look at lot better. Where Blender separates itself is its physics engine in animation, and that's about it. But meh, different argument for a different post at the end of the day.

 

[Domiek]

I'll never really understand the elitism toward Daz and the whole 'preset' logic, though. All things being equal, creating the same scene between Daz and Blender, Daz does it in half of the time and will often look at lot better. Where Blender separates itself is its physics engine in animation, and that's about it. But meh, different argument for a different post at the end of the day.

I don't want to disagree with you MF so let's pretend I don't . Blender and Daz are entirely different tools. Many things are flat out impossible to do solely in Daz, not because it's a worst software but simply because it's not made for that. For the sake of creating good looking 3D renders with the least obstacles possible, especially in the context of making an AVN, I agree with you and recommend Daz over Blender 9 times out of 10.

For OP, Blender would probably be the best place to start. All that's needed to make a single boobie or a full realistic female character is sculpting. To make textures from scratch you can be a masochist and use Blender's painting tools or just get yourself a copy of Substance Painter. To be able to pose your character you'd need to learn how to rig it and there's plenty of tutorials covering character rigging on Youtube. Whatever you paint or rig yourself will not be anywhere close to what you get from Daz now.

I don't know what your art background is, but if you're starting from scratch you'll probably spend the first couple of years just trying to achieve a basic quality that you would already have if you simply started using a Daz figure as your base. Sculpting, painting, rigging, these are all individual fields that people spend years learning to get anywhere close to the level of a base Daz figure.

The most realistic approach would be to download Daz, load a base figure into Blender or Zbrush and start customizing it there with sculpts. Unless you're young and looking to learn to do everything from scratch because you're planning on eventually working for a studio or something, there's really no reason to not use the resources readily available to you now. Artists like Jackerman are almost certainly not making their models from scratch.

 

[Tompte]

I don't think 3d sculpting is what I should be doing ...

Why not? If you want to make your own custom model but not use any existing ones, then isn't that exactly what you should be doing?

My key focuspoints will be realistic physics (so probably lots of bonezz?).

In that case, shouldn't you be focusing on doing animation rather than modeling? They're two entirely different disciplines. Very few are proficient in both. I suggest you pick one or the other to focus your efforts on. With time, you can learn both.

It's kind of silly to point at a pro artist and say "I want to do that. How do I do that?" when the answer is always going to be to spend an equal amount of time and effort as they have, learning and growing as an artist. I get the sense you kind of just want a quick and easy software solution when there isn't one.

 

[Rintal]

LOL! Good luck with that.

 

[Domiek]

Very informative! And very much appreciated. I've got Daz installed, but I'm still prefering the idea of going from ground up and modelling every inch of the thing myself. I did happen to find some models as a reference in the 'art' sections of f95 which I offcourse will use as material to overcome the learning curve (pretty good 3d animations with the blender files for them included in the download section). But as it stands, besides the masochism on the textures, this is what I intend to do. To learn it all the way from the ground up. The textures thing is probably really gonna be a pain, and it's atm my main concern.

I have some history in art, even some basic education, including things like art history, but I never graduated in the field or anything. It was a 'fling' if you will. I can draw very good, so human anotomy and all that, and the way how muscles and bio-mechanics line up with impactfull motion etc at least isn't completely new to me. So most likely my initial characters won't look like noodles and will start out designed after the real thing (at least on a superficial level).

I've been taking tutorials on making ball-bearings and stuff to 'roboticly' mechanize and produce a skeleton. I will build multiple layers (Skeleton (free movements), Muscles (elastic movement constraints), and Skin(Aesthetics and surface level physics). The Skeleton part seems very doable, and the muscles will probably be more like 'clothes' under the skin, with elasticity as a means to restrict movements, but allow some 'flex' to account for things like disjointing and to create impactfull animations. The skinpart will seem most like typical 3d sculpting I suppose. Putting the headlights on the chest and all the other physics and frills so they somewhat move independently of the core body and it's subskin physics. I've seen how animators abuse the cloth function of blender for physics, that's pretty easy stuff when it comes down to it, but I want stuff to really wrap tight and get rid of the whole 'bloating when bulging' aesthetic. I love the Jackerman animations, but they just feel like empty bags at times, and not real bodies. Anyways, getting way ahead of myself. Long term plans.

I'm getting a pretty good idea on how to start out. I just need better specs as-is. :/
So there is a little issue on starting the project, but I'm doing some relevant tutorials in the meantime until I can really get to work. I think it'll work out. I've got a plan on how to itterativly work on it and get the details down in a managable fashion. It'll be fine as long as I stick to that and don't try to do everything at once.

Thanks for the insights and feedback. Very much appreciated

Good luck with the road ahead. It looks like you're going the Blender route so you might want to take a look at this.

You must be registered to see the links

Also this thread is a goldmine of knowledge. You can actually buy the guys rig if you want to reverse engineer stuff later.

You must be registered to see the links

 

[anne O'nymous]

I don't know what your art background is, but if you're starting from scratch you'll probably spend the first couple of years just trying to achieve a basic quality that you would already have if you simply started using a Daz figure as your base. Sculpting, painting, rigging, these are all individual fields that people spend years learning to get anywhere close to the level of a base Daz figure.

I want to add that, when it come to self learning, Daz is probably the best place to starts. This whatever what you want to learn.

3D modeling ? Morphs are obviously something different, but it teach you what happen when you add/remove volume here or there. Play with the sliders to only apply x percent of the morph, then apply another morph that change something near, and you start to understand how everything is connected. It give you the basis and the visual references you'll need when you'll starts effectively sculpting.
Texturing ? Daz will not help for the texture/diffuse itself. But texturing isn't just this, it's also all the option you'll apply next in order to achieve the looks you want to have. And here, the bunch of surface options are really useful to experiment, and so to learn.
Posing ? Same. While less perfect and less free, the different parts implied in posing will slowly help you to learn. And with the linked morphs and bones, you'll understand that moving a bones can/should imply a deformation of the meshes around, and aren't necessarily without consequences ; at least if you want to keep a realistic looks.


But, Domiek, there's something important that you haven't said, and I feel the need to say it: You started with Daz Studio, before switching to Blender. It's important in regard of what you said, because, whatever end being your preference, you effectively know what both can do and how easily or not they are doing it. It's something relatively rare in such discussion.

 

[anne O'nymous]

Kind of wondering what you meant with that.

Nothing more than what I said.

Most people here will say that Daz or Blender is better, while they in fact never effectively used both. But Domiek have used both, and did it "in production", starting a game with Daz, completing it with Blender. So, when he say, globally, that Daz isn't necessarily bad, and that Blender isn't necessarily better, he know what he talk about. Unlike the Daz boys who believe that there's nothing better, or Blender addict who spit on everything.

 

[Domiek]

Nothing more than what I said.

Most people here will say that Daz or Blender is better, while they in fact never effectively used both. But Domiek have used both, and did it "in production", starting a game with Daz, completing it with Blender. So, when he say, globally, that Daz isn't necessarily bad, and that Blender isn't necessarily better, he know what he talk about. Unlike the Daz boys who believe that there's nothing better, or Blender addict who spit on everything.

Well, objectively speaking, Blender is "better" than Daz in that it's much more capable and has a wider range of tools. There's nothing Daz can do that Blender can't but the same is not true the other way around. Yet if you don't care or need to use these additional tools, Daz is better because it lets you dive straight into making lovely 3D renders with the least amount of hurdles. But again, I want to stress that comparing Daz to Blender is really comparing apples to oranges. Either one can be subjectively better depending on the person's needs.

Bimbo Barbie from what you've discussed as your goal, Daz is absolutely not for you. Most of what you described cannot be done in Daz alone. I recommend Blender because it's free and at a minimum adequate across the board for everything you want. Should you run into some specific limitation in the future, the skills you learned is directly transferable to any other software as well as the availability of the latest standard file formats for a multi software pipeline.

 

[anne O'nymous]

[Note: It's been something like 8-9 years that I haven't used Blender, and I know that it evolved a lot since then]

But again, I want to stress that comparing Daz to Blender is really comparing apples to oranges. Either one can be subjectively better depending on the person's needs.

I don't really agree with you when you imply that Daz Studio is so more limited ; the "so" being the key. From my point of view, and with my many dive in the deepness of Daz Studio, it's mostly that it's rarely fully used. And it's rarely fully used because, except surface manipulation, everything that goes further than the basis is either hidden or a pain in the ass to use ; when not both.
By example, OP talk about realistic physics. It's something possible with Daz Studio... If you are a coder, achieve to understand two undocumented classes, are good in math, and ready to loose time experimenting a lot. But who would want to do that when Blender can do it natively and without needing you to have two doctorate and a gift of divination ?
What mean that where we differ isn't on the fact that Blender is better, but in the fact that for me Blender do "things more easily" and not just "more things".

This mostly because, like you said (reason why I quoted this part and not what was before), they are definitively two different tools, addressing two radically different public. Daz Studio focus on novice or people who focus on the final result (as long as it's static), while Blender... Well, by opposition let's say that it focus on professionals.
This mean that what will be easy to do for one will not match what is easy to do for the other. But it's not because it don't have modeling tools that Daz Studio do not have everything else, from bones definition to weight painting. It's mandatory because assets creators can have to adjust their creation. But like assets creators are a small part of Daz Studio users, and like they don't need to adjust all the time, those tools are a pain in the ass to find and to use.

In the end, Blender is a modeling software that extended it's capabilities with time. This while Daz Studio is a scene build and rendering software that never cared to works on its additional capabilities.
What also mean that you are right, except for gaining experience on the effects themselves, Daz Studio is not what OP want.

I recommend Blender because it's free and at a minimum adequate across the board for everything you want. Should you run into some specific limitation in the future, the skills you learned is directly transferable to any other software as well as the availability of the latest standard file formats for a multi software pipeline.

I totally agree on this, including the experience part.

If I disagree with you regarding the difference between the two, it's precisely because I started with Blender and not with Daz Studio. It gave me a knowledge that people starting with Daz Studio generally don't have, making me search what I was able to do with Blender, and also see a bit more of the potential hidden behind this or that.

 

[Domiek]

[Note: It's been something like 8-9 years that I haven't used Blender, and I know that it evolved a lot since then]



I don't really agree with you when you imply that Daz Studio is so more limited ; the "so" being the key. From my point of view, and with my many dive in the deepness of Daz Studio, it's mostly that it's rarely fully used. And it's rarely fully used because, except surface manipulation, everything that goes further than the basis is either hidden or a pain in the ass to use ; when not both.
By example, OP talk about realistic physics. It's something possible with Daz Studio... If you are a coder, achieve to understand two undocumented classes, are good in math, and ready to loose time experimenting a lot. But who would want to do that when Blender can do it natively and without needing you to have two doctorate and a gift of divination ?
What mean that where we differ isn't on the fact that Blender is better, but in the fact that for me Blender do "things more easily" and not just "more things".

This mostly because, like you said (reason why I quoted this part and not what was before), they are definitively two different tools, addressing two radically different public. Daz Studio focus on novice or people who focus on the final result (as long as it's static), while Blender... Well, by opposition let's say that it focus on professionals.
This mean that what will be easy to do for one will not match what is easy to do for the other. But it's not because it don't have modeling tools that Daz Studio do not have everything else, from bones definition to weight painting. It's mandatory because assets creators can have to adjust their creation. But like assets creators are a small part of Daz Studio users, and like they don't need to adjust all the time, those tools are a pain in the ass to find and to use.

In the end, Blender is a modeling software that extended it's capabilities with time. This while Daz Studio is a scene build and rendering software that never cared to works on its additional capabilities.
What also mean that you are right, except for gaining experience on the effects themselves, Daz Studio is not what OP want.




I totally agree on this, including the experience part.

If I disagree with you regarding the difference between the two, it's precisely because I started with Blender and not with Daz Studio. It gave me a knowledge that people starting with Daz Studio generally don't have, making me search what I was able to do with Blender, and also see a bit more of the potential hidden behind this or that.

I would argue that having a doctorates in mathematics to code and unlock a mediocre version of a toolset that's readily available in other software does indeed make it limited, not to mention goes against the main benefit of the software, quick and easy convenience. You're certainly right that there's more to squeeze out of Daz than what's available on the surface, but then I'd wonder what's the point?

Funny enough, a lot of Blender's tools are pretty outdated and far behind the competition. I think most of this stuff came out at or just slightly after you last used Blender. This whole new direction with geometry nodes has been really fun and I imagine you would have a blast playing around with it, since it's essentially visual coding and you're the coding guru around here.

They've just implemented a new node based hair system and simulation node solvers are next on the roadmap to mimic a (poor man's?) Houdini. I'm not clever enough to utilize it well and just wait for the braniacs to release add-ons.

Just in case I started sounding like one of those blender fanboys again , I'll summarize once more than 9/10 times I recommend to just use Daz.

 

[anne O'nymous]

You're certainly right that there's more to squeeze out of Daz than what's available on the surface, but then I'd wonder what's the point?

Because it's sometimes mandatory, for asset creators by example like I said. And also probably because someone thought that it can be useful.
And it's true that it can be useful. Couple bone creation and weight paint, and you have jiggling boobs ; move the bone like you'll do for the arm or a finger, and the boobs will follow. It's how modders do for Fallout and The Elder Scrolls games. Add a bit of, this time basic scripting, to check the position of the body and boobs in the previous frame, change accordingly either bend, twist or side-side value, and the boobs will jiggle during the animation.

I'm 80% sure that it's possible with Daz Studio, if you are crazy enough to understand how works the mind of those who coded it and made the User Interface. Because it's the main problem that Daz Studio have, it's a software with an UI worse than the worse that you can find on the games here.
Take the scene panel by example. It have two menus, one when you right click on an element, and the one on the top left of the panel. One obviously regard the elements, offering you the possibility to play with their geometry, import morphs, and so on. The other obviously regard the panel, letting you order the elements, select/deselect, and things like that.
But who's the idiot who thought that inverting them was the thing to do ? Why a right click on an element make you manage the panel, and the menu on top of the panel tweak the selected element ?
I'm almost sure than 75% of Daz Studio users tried the right click, at least out of curiosity. And also almost sure that, seeing there were nothing interesting there, 99% of them didn't cared to try the top left menu. And there's so many stupidities like that in Daz Studio.

Funny enough, a lot of Blender's tools are pretty outdated and far behind the competition. I think most of this stuff came out at or just slightly after you last used Blender. This whole new direction with geometry nodes has been really fun and I imagine you would have a blast playing around with it, since it's essentially visual coding and you're the coding guru around here.

"Coding guru"... Think about my ego before you write this
But yeah, I would have probably loved it, if I wasn't so old. Ok, I'm not this old, but now that I'm past fifty, I seek for peace of mind. Reason why, despite my past with Blender, I stick with Daz Studio. I care less for the quality of the result than the fun I have doing it. I dive in Daz craziness because it's fun, but like bone edition and weight painting, when I find that it's too crazy I just forgot about it ; "ok, it's possible, noted. I'll perhaps return to it one day if I'm bored and feel like trying to understand, but I doubt."

They've just implemented a new node based hair system and simulation node solvers are next on the roadmap to mimic a (poor man's?) Houdini. I'm not clever enough to utilize it well and just wait for the braniacs to release add-ons.

They follow the path, Blender is supposed to be a modeling tool with a rendering capability after all.
Exactly like Daz added DForce, but haven't put in full display all the tools available for it. They focus on doing it more than on how it's done.

And in fact it probably summarize the issue, and match your 9/10 Daz is what one should use.
If you want to do it, Daz Studio is enough. But if you also want to know, or really need to change, how it's done, then Blender will always be better.