Poser

[Sabre]

Long time members know my opinion on this. For those who don't let me tell you of an issue I have with this so called art.

While I'm all for enabling people to express themselves artisticly, but poser, Daz, and to a less extent Gmod, frustrate me no end. The reason being it makes 3D trivial to anyone with an internet conection. Simply download, drag and drop. This results in a mountain of tatt. Most is in the form of "Here's Krystal on a beach. Here's krystal in the street. Here's Krystal in a dress. Here's krystal acting out of character. Isn't that hillarious?"

Some people even become well known 'artists' this way, whereas other artists or real quality 3D projects are completly ignored. It's fine as a stepping stone, but I have yet to see anyone take the next step. I find the whole thing artisticly lazy with no ideas and no talent is exicution. I'm told there are good poser arts out there, I have yet to see them. Haliod came close, but again, it was poorly made with bad sets, models (inconsistant), pacing, action, lighting and animation. Only the dance scene at the end was entertaining.

[Asper Sarnoff]

Okay, guess I'll have to step up to defend my honour. 

I've been dabbling with Poser for over a year now. Gone a little tired of it as well, and now only bring it up when I have time to spare and not much else to do, to make illustrations for a story or to visually show an idea I had, or as gifts for my friends.

To me, it seems your dislike for it can be broken into several minor issues.

1. 3D "Art" isn't really art.

Answer: It's really hard to come up with a number of hard rules which define what is art and what is not really. I've always tried not to refer 3D rendering as art, but on the other hand, it sort of can be. While there might be controversial about this as well, the majority of people will now agree that photography can be art, not IS, but CAN be. And, what's the difference between 3D rendering and taking photographs of objects you haven't created yourself really?

As a photographer, one can go out into nature, find a scene which one would like to immortalize, move around small things a little, find a nice angle, and press the trigger. Is that really much different from what one does in 3D rendering? The exception being that you have much greater control in a program like Poser, where you can change virtually everything to suit your liking as long as you have the skills to do so.

I'm personally not a good enough modeller(did try it a couple of times, but don't really have the time and want to learn it fully) to make good 3D models from scratch, but I do often take bits from different models, and stick them together as to create something one otherwise wouldn't be able to include in ones renders. An example of this could be how I used a humans male body, dressed in a suit, and put a slightly "malyfied" Krystal head on top of it to create an image of Mr. Krystals avatar for his birthday, another example could be how I did it when I tried to make a birthday gift for you in fact. Anthro T-rex with purple frills for hair, in Tactical Space Marine armor. Looked badass, but the WIP file disappeared when my laptop suddenly decided it was a lady, and got PMS.

2. 3D rendering is to easy. Every twat can churn out garbage and call it "art".

How easy one wants to make it depends on how much effort one chose to put into it really. I've seen 3D renders that I found to be as horrid and requiring as little efforts as the average 3-year olds drawings, and I've seen masterpieces that have taken the man/woman behind several weeks, and looks so real one would almost like to stretch out a hand and touch it. Depending on how complex my renders are, I spend everything from 2, to around 15 hours, excluding rendering time(For those who don't know, that's when the computer takes the scene you set up, and calculates it into a ready picture, which you can later edit in PS, GIMP, or a similar program, and then publish if you'd like to.). I wouldn't really say that it's particularly easy. The best traditional drawing I ever did, a half-naked SFAD Sharpclaw, to practice drawing musculature and anatomy, took considerable less time and effort than most of my renders, even how many times I had to pick out the eraser because some proportions got a little wrong.

3. It takes away the glory from those who make 3D models from scratch.

Can't argue with that. The reason I suppose is because the mayority of people who look around the internet for art they like, don't really know how much work goes into modelling and rigging a 3D model from the bottom. But then, as long as one's work is good enough, one's also sure to get praise from those who know how much work goes into that process, and in the end, isn't that's what most important?

While I really appreciate someone coming up the me, and saying about my work, be it renders or anything really is very "kewl", the feeling of pride one gets when someone who knows what he's/she's talking about stop by and say they like it, and praise for how much work, creativety and soul one has put into it, is even better.

As for the poll itself, I wouldn't in any way call everyone a masterpiece, because that would be a blatant lie. But neither would I say that they're a lazy way of expressing yourself, and "meh" isn't really the word I'm looking for either. I'll pass voting, and let this post speak for me.

[evilwaffles]

If I see someone post a 3D art, I would like to see them using an original model they made. (That Krystal model is old and becoming annoying to me). Although there are some people who edit models to make them seem original, it is still easy to see the similarities.

So, unless the the model is made by the artist, I just see it as a picture.

[Sabre]

Okay, guess I'll have to step up to defend my honour. 

I've been dabbling with Poser for over a year now. Gone a little tired of it as well, and now only bring it up when I have time to spare and not much else to do, to make illustrations for a story or to visually show an idea I had, or as gifts for my friends.

To me, it seems your dislike for it can be broken into several minor issues.

1. 3D "Art" isn't really art.

Answer: It's really hard to come up with a number of hard rules which define what is art and what is not really. I've always tried not to refer 3D rendering as art, but on the other hand, it sort of can be. While there might be controversial about this as well, the majority of people will now agree that photography can be art, not IS, but CAN be. And, what's the difference between 3D rendering and taking photographs of objects you haven't created yourself really?

As a photographer, one can go out into nature, find a scene which one would like to immortalize, move around small things a little, find a nice angle, and press the trigger. Is that really much different from what one does in 3D rendering? The exception being that you have much greater control in a program like Poser, where you can change virtually everything to suit your liking as long as you have the skills to do so.

I'm personally not a good enough modeller(did try it a couple of times, but don't really have the time and want to learn it fully) to make good 3D models from scratch, but I do often take bits from different models, and stick them together as to create something one otherwise wouldn't be able to include in ones renders. An example of this could be how I used a humans male body, dressed in a suit, and put a slightly "malyfied" Krystal head on top of it to create an image of Mr. Krystals avatar for his birthday, another example could be how I did it when I tried to make a birthday gift for you in fact. Anthro T-rex with purple frills for hair, in Tactical Space Marine armor. Looked badass, but the WIP file disappeared when my laptop suddenly decided it was a lady, and got PMS.

2. 3D rendering is to easy. Every twat can churn out garbage and call it "art".

How easy one wants to make it depends on how much effort one chose to put into it really. I've seen 3D renders that I found to be as horrid and requiring as little efforts as the average 3-year olds drawings, and I've seen masterpieces that have taken the man/woman behind several weeks, and looks so real one would almost like to stretch out a hand and touch it. Depending on how complex my renders are, I spend everything from 2, to around 15 hours, excluding rendering time(For those who don't know, that's when the computer takes the scene you set up, and calculates it into a ready picture, which you can later edit in PS, GIMP, or a similar program, and then publish if you'd like to.). I wouldn't really say that it's particularly easy. The best traditional drawing I ever did, a half-naked SFAD Sharpclaw, to practice drawing musculature and anatomy, took considerable less time and effort than most of my renders, even how many times I had to pick out the eraser because some proportions got a little wrong.

3. It takes away the glory from those who make 3D models from scratch.

Can't argue with that. The reason I suppose is because the mayority of people who look around the internet for art they like, don't really know how much work goes into modelling and rigging a 3D model from the bottom. But then, as long as one's work is good enough, one's also sure to get praise from those who know how much work goes into that process, and in the end, isn't that's what most important?

While I really appreciate someone coming up the me, and saying about my work, be it renders or anything really is very "kewl", the feeling of pride one gets when someone who knows what he's/she's talking about stop by and say they like it, and praise for how much work, creativety and soul one has put into it, is even better.

As for the poll itself, I wouldn't in any way call everyone a masterpiece, because that would be a blatant lie. But neither would I say that they're a lazy way of expressing yourself, and "meh" isn't really the word I'm looking for either. I'll pass voting, and let this post speak for me.

Interesting you bring up the idea of photography. While 3D art is art, using your example, there is apparently emotional hitting or beutiful pictures, but poser is the equivelant of a photo of a dog for facebook.

To point 2. People can just do lazy doodles. If they want to get well known they either have to have ideas or exicute it really well. For poser that's not a requirement, it's optional.

[Asper Sarnoff]

Interesting you bring up the idea of photography. While 3D art is art, using your example, there is apparently emotional hitting or beutiful pictures, but poser is the equivelant of a photo of a dog for facebook.

Well, I have in fact seen truly stunning pictures made in Poser or DAZ3D. So I guess that depends on what you see really.

As you bring up the infamous Krystal model by Charleyfox and LittleDragon, I think your impression will be tainted quite a bit if you base your view on rendering from that. I don't think I've ever seen a really good render with that model in it. Some who haven't been too shabby, but not truly beautiful ones.

And as I know you do like a couple of the animated movies, as made by Pixar for example, I do think that if you searched trough all the millions of frames in such movies, you would ultimately end up with at least one image which you like rather well. The process in making fully animated movies is exactly the same as when putting together a single still in Poser or Daz Studios, albeit in a larger scale and with a considerably bigger budget and fancier programs.

To point 2. People can just do lazy doodles. If they want to get well known they either have to have ideas or exicute it really well. For poser that's not a requirement, it's optional.

I doubt there are many, if anyone, who have gotten well known or famous trough 3D rendering. Sure, on DA one can find those who churn out mediocre renders with no effort put into them in the thousands, and amass quite a bit of pageviews over them. But should one really care about it? I don't have issues with it when other people ecounter success, despite it some times being truly undeserved. Popularity is quite overrated, as long as one enjoy doing what one does.

If I see someone post a 3D art, I would like to see them using an original model they made. (That Krystal model is old and becoming annoying to me). Although there are some people who edit models to make them seem original, it is still easy to see the similarities.

So, unless the the model is made by the artist, I just see it as a picture.

The reason for that is quite simply really. As of now, it's by far the best free anthro model out there for Poser or Daz Studios. It's versatile enough that with some twists and a bit of experience, one can turn it into almost any kind of normally sized vulpine/feline/lupine/canine character there is, and not make it look like just a retextured Krystal.

As far as viewing them as pictures, that's what I do with all art honestly. Be it an expensive painting hanging in front of me on the wall, a digital painting wich can leave one completely stunned, a few dots and striped put together in MS Paint, or a quick render in Daz Studios, they are all pictures to me. Some good, some bad. And I praise those I think is good, and give advice on how to improve those I don't think are as good.

[Guest Julius Quasar]

Meh.  Some of it's good, some of it's bad....

[Dublinthefox]

Meh.  Some of it's good, some of it's bad....

^ Agreed.

[Guest Para Astaroth]

If the art has a meaning and/or purpose, then I would allow it to be good. 

Quality doesn't always have to be the remaining factor.

[Guest FoXXX]

Some of it is good, most of it sucks