3D-Daz Daz3d Art - Show Us Your DazSkill

[Deleted member 34473]

Thanks. I've decided to stick with this same model, and just use different hair, skin, eyes, lighting, dome, etc, until I master the software. I see little point in creating new models until such time. As different lighting alone can make your model look way different. That's before we start with skin textures that can add or take 10/15 years off a character.

I love your work by the way. This is the reason I started getting into D3D. I want to create art based off the renders. Not just render for the sake of it. I was planning to take photographs all summer. But, lockdown, blah blah. So I decided to create my own virtual models. I love your art!

your model always improves, like you I also use daz studio for a short time, I work better with photoshop, here there are many fantastic artists, we can only learn and improve

 

[oliseo]

your model always improves, like you I also use daz studio for a short time, I work better with photoshop, here there are many fantastic artists, we can only learn and improve

You know, I haven't changed the model. Everything else I have. You can spend eterinity just messing with the model. So I stopped. Just got the one now. That's my only one. It looks different doesn't it. Goes to show what good lighting can do.

 

[5ickcycl3]

There is change that the textures, must be tested on GF3 sometimes like the skin (compatible)...

You must be registered to see the links

Modified the texture by copying the anus part from it to the original texture with PS... getting there, but not fully satisfied:

I 'm going to keep on experimenting with this, see how good it can get.

 

[Larry Kubiac]

your model always improves, like you I also use daz studio for a short time, I work better with photoshop, here there are many fantastic artists, we can only learn and improve

The only one fantastic artist is LBW, the rest just acts of presence (myself included)
I'll still make friends with that, but that's the reality.

I 'm going to keep on experimenting with this, see how good it can get.

It's not bad, it just needs to darken it up a little bit.

Might as well put the new gen GF8 on GF3, faster and simpler.

 

[HFSTime]

Advice Required - 3 point lighting.

So, I did my first render today using the 3 point lighting method. Key light, rim light, and fill light. The problem I have is that I'd prefer to use a reflector for the fill light. In the render below I used another soft box as the fill light. It's not quite the same, as it's an emittor of light. Rather than reflecting the light from the key and the rim. So it's not quite right. You can see the issue on the reflections of her eyeballs. With a reflector, that wouldn't happen.

Does Daz3d have any kind of reflectors to use as a fill light?

Hmmm, Daz doesn't have one built in. And now that I think about it I'm not even sure if I've seen one in the various photo studio assets out there. Probably your best shot is to make a plane or a large cylinder with a really small height. Then apply material shaders that are reflective. I've not tried the idea myself but I know of reflectors from my photography background. I'd be curious if this works for you.

 

[Deleted member 34473]

The only one fantastic artist is LBW, the rest just acts of presence (myself included)
I'll still make friends with that, but that's the reality.


It's not bad, it just needs to darken it up a little bit.

Might as well put the new gen GF8 on GF3, faster and simpler.

do not be so drastic, take the point of view of those who have just started, see everyone good

 

[Larry Kubiac]

do not be so drastic, take the point of view of those who have just started, see everyone good

That's my point of view, and to say that there are several fantastic, no. Even those of the first hour don't do any better, despite their so-called "complex" stuff.

He's the only one who uses light properly.

 

[TheAmazingRolandder]

do not be so drastic, take the point of view of those who have just started, see everyone good

Useful criticism and feedback, even if it's "I don't know why exactly this is wrong, but this is wrong" is good. It's great when it explains how to fix the problem, but sometimes just pointing to a problem and identifying it as such is fine.

"This sucks" is not. It's not useful, it's not helpful, it does nothing to help someone improve.

Similarly, though, a Like is also hard to measure as it's hard to tell if it's the content or the composition being rated.

 

[Larry Kubiac]

Useful criticism and feedback, even if it's "I don't know why exactly this is wrong, but this is wrong" is good. It's great when it explains how to fix the problem, but sometimes just pointing to a problem and identifying it as such is fine.

"This sucks" is not. It's not useful, it's not helpful, it does nothing to help someone improve.

Similarly, though, a Like is also hard to measure as it's hard to tell if it's the content or the composition being rated.

Yeah, well, when you come to criticize the name of an image, it becomes a big mess... So comments and likes, yes mean absolutely nothing.

 

[Phanex]

Yeah, well, when you come to criticize the name of an image, it becomes a big mess... So comments and likes, yes mean absolutely nothing.

What's going on?

 

[Deleted member 34473]

Useful criticism and feedback, even if it's "I don't know why exactly this is wrong, but this is wrong" is good. It's great when it explains how to fix the problem, but sometimes just pointing to a problem and identifying it as such is fine.

"This sucks" is not. It's not useful, it's not helpful, it does nothing to help someone improve.

Similarly, though, a Like is also hard to measure as it's hard to tell if it's the content or the composition being rated.

I don't think I've ever said anything different, in fact I said I'm here to learn, look also at my first answer, I don't like the useless controversy

 

[Larry Kubiac]

What's going on?

Nothing, I had given a name to an image and I was criticized because it didn't really correspond to what we saw on the rendering, but then when you have more than 1000 renderings in the folder it becomes chaotic to find names...Now, I have "fjhdfhfhdkfhkjdfkjdfkjd" for name, just to see what we will criticize in the future xD

 

[Phanex]

Nothing, I had given a name to an image and I was criticized because it didn't really correspond to what we saw on the rendering, but then when you have more than 1000 renderings in the folder it becomes chaotic to find names...Now, I have "fjhdfhfhdkfhkjdfkjdfkjd" for name, just to see what we will criticize in the future xD

Lmao

 

[fenelia]

Advice Required - 3 point lighting.

So, I did my first render today using the 3 point lighting method. Key light, rim light, and fill light. The problem I have is that I'd prefer to use a reflector for the fill light. In the render below I used another soft box as the fill light. It's not quite the same, as it's an emittor of light. Rather than reflecting the light from the key and the rim. So it's not quite right. You can see the issue on the reflections of her eyeballs. With a reflector, that wouldn't happen.

Does Daz3d have any kind of reflectors to use as a fill light?

I often use a flat plane as an emitter behind the camera. A big, flat, unfocused emitter. You can always project a light onto the plane, and vary the surface qualities of the plane (like an umbrella stand for a photographer, I guess).

How is a reflective surface any different? If the planar surface emits its own light OR if it reflects a light at the model, the effect is a photon going out from the planar surface to the face of the model. You'll get similar.

You might vary the ANGLE of the planar light... above the camera, angled downward towards the model. This might reduce the effect that you see. (I don't put my emitter panels in line with the camera. It's always at some angle.)

(Funnily enough, with 3DL textures, people ADD those white boxes onto the eyeball maps to make it look like they're reflecting a big square light...)

 

[Larry Kubiac]

Lmao

It's pathetic, I know...

 

[oliseo]

I often use a flat plane as an emitter behind the camera. A big, flat, unfocused emitter. You can always project a light onto the plane, and vary the surface qualities of the plane (like an umbrella stand for a photographer, I guess).

Thanks for the advise, that's quite a good idea.

How is a reflective surface any different? If the planar surface emits its own light OR if it reflects a light at the model, the effect is a photon going out from the planar surface to the face of the model. You'll get similar.

An emittor adds photons to the scene, a reflector simply changes the direction of the existing photons. It also can act as a diffuser to make hard lighting appear softer, something you can't do with an emittor.

You might vary the ANGLE of the planar light... above the camera, angled downward towards the model. This might reduce the effect that you see. (I don't put my emitter panels in line with the camera. It's always at some angle.)

(Funnily enough, with 3DL textures, people ADD those white boxes onto the eyeball maps to make it look like they're reflecting a big square light...)

I shall give that a try.

 

[palemaster]

wip

 

[fenelia]

Okay, another pinup while I was doing work. Mix of Daz and photography (the German Rhein-land behind her).

I forgot I had this Sherman tank in my library (by Polish, on the Daz store). It's a nicely detailed tank, but I guess the cannon does not elevate. (Sadface)
I don't have the Tiger tank. I have a Panzer III and Panzer IV, though. (Panzer III/StuG III are my favorites, anyway.)

The best tank, though, it DarkEdgeDesign's Merkava. (Yum IDF girls) Independent suspension, even. Just great detail work on that baby.
Maybe I do some IDF girls later.

 

[oliseo]

Hmmm, Daz doesn't have one built in. And now that I think about it I'm not even sure if I've seen one in the various photo studio assets out there. Probably your best shot is to make a plane or a large cylinder with a really small height. Then apply material shaders that are reflective. I've not tried the idea myself but I know of reflectors from my photography background. I'd be curious if this works for you.

That's thinking outside of the box, which I like. Just make one from a mirror, add a diffuse overlay or a sheer fabric over the top of the mirror itself.

 

[TheAmazingRolandder]

An emittor adds photons to the scene, a reflector simply changes the direction of the existing photons. It also can act as a diffuser to make hard lighting appear softer, something you can't do with an emittor.

While I doubt this is in any way original and I've also not tested it at all -

You can mess with the opacity of surfaces. It just occurred to me that you might be able to make a almost but not entirely translucent rectangular primitive in front of a lightsource to build a crude diffuser. It'd take some tinkering to make it right, but I can't see why it wouldn't work. I've done it with some rooms where I want an even light from a high ceiling.

No idea why it's only now occurring to me to try it more directly.