[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/3/ - 3DCG

View post   
File: 161 KB, 598x774, j-em-2001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681550 No.681550[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

He was once under the name of /jamartrenders on artstation but now hes gone, does anyone have more stuff from him?

>> No.681553

I hope not.

>> No.681555

Also, that stupid ass fucking chromatic aberration fad is pissing me off. For so many decades mankind has worked to eliminate that problem in lenses and it is hardly noticeable anymore even on entry level cameras nowadays BUT """"""""~artists~""""""""" crank that shit up to 11 in hope it makes their uncanny valley shit more realistic and it absolutely does not.

>> No.681557

What is it a photo with some 3d elements. I remember that was a fad for a while. Someone made a charleze theron or whatever her name is and got called out for just overlaying 3d elements in photoshop.

>> No.681559
File: 2.97 MB, 1920x3806, j-em-myroomcomp1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681559

I remember one post where somebody, smugly, asked him to post wires. He did, and the other guy was like, "well time to give DAZ another look then."

>>681555
>chromatic aberration fad
Here it's more of a tool to conceal the CGI nature of the images, together with the noise.

>> No.681560
File: 16 KB, 324x357, 1280098722415.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681560

>>681550
BUT THEN WHO WAS CAMERA

>> No.681566

>>681555
Funny, I had a conversation with a former Ampex engineer about this while visiting NAB Show last year. He thought it was kinda funny that people put back in all these flaws that he and his colleagues tried to eliminate over the past 40 years.

>> No.681568

>>681555
>in hope it makes their uncanny valley shit more realistic and it absolutely does not.

Well I thought it was a picture from the thumbnail so I guess it does. Doesn't hold up on close inspection but it's still impressive nonetheless.

>> No.681570

>>681555
>>681566
I think it's just because it's "one of those things" that's instantly recognized with cameras despite many people not actually knowing what the effect is on an intellectual level. It's one of those things that when we see it, it's easier for the mind to make it seem less artificial. Granted, it's pretty much been eliminated from cameras for a long time (even though OP pic is supposed to look like it's been taken with a cheap disposable, and those lenses are cheap as hell), but a little tiny bit can make that extra little difference depending on what you're going for. The problem arises when people over-do it and make it look like an out of focus projector. I think it's also a little bit about nostalgia and the feelings associated with it (old Polaroids and stuff like that), but that might be reaching for something that's just a lens effect.

It might not be realistic anymore since it's being phased out pretty much, but it's just one of those things that are ingrained into the public psyche without really knowing it. Kind of like 24fps for film, something higher or lower, and it'll feel off. A person might not be able to tell why, but they'll know. Chromab doesn't have that much of a negative effect if it's missing, but adding it does usually have some positive effect, at least for people that don't know what it is.
All that being said, I'm not really a fan of it when it's used. People abuse it way too hard. Shit looks like a 3d movie without the glasses.

>> No.681611

>>681557
nope, these are all 3d assets easily accessible from the daz store or shady russian sites

>> No.681621

these are deeply unnerving, in a good way.
dude may be a dazlet, but some of these pob belong in an art gallery.

>> No.681630

Photorealism was a mistake

>> No.681631

>>681630
that is why the greeks abandoned it

>> No.681752

>>681550

But there's a mirror...and we should be able to see the camera in it...

...maybe spend a tiny bit more time understanding composition and less time fucking around with the render settings?

>> No.681754

>>681752
You don't get it. The camera is hidden in the toilet cistern. And she knows it.

>> No.681757
File: 201 KB, 598x774, 1554471709796.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681757

>> No.681759
File: 188 KB, 598x774, 1539355417988.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681759

>> No.681761
File: 112 KB, 731x516, 1541633170326.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681761

>> No.681762
File: 139 KB, 731x516, 1551992552982.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681762

>> No.681763
File: 91 KB, 707x565, 1540159216925.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681763

>> No.681765
File: 69 KB, 946x668, 1528037020693.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681765

>> No.681766

>>681765
how do you do the chromatic aberration ?
In PS ?

>> No.681767
File: 86 KB, 962x577, 1546944133188.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681767

>> No.681768
File: 67 KB, 962x680, 1551032015481.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681768

>> No.681770
File: 61 KB, 949x671, 1540019366797.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681770

>> No.681771
File: 46 KB, 959x927, 1531919228668.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681771

>> No.681772
File: 86 KB, 959x927, 1555406755181.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681772

>> No.681775
File: 732 KB, 730x4594, 1533635516002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681775

>> No.681776
File: 53 KB, 648x917, 1550556111907.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681776

>> No.681778
File: 98 KB, 962x680, 1528548047202.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681778

>> No.681779
File: 61 KB, 962x769, 1529417195017.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681779

>> No.681780
File: 170 KB, 972x927, 1541386120215.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681780

>> No.681781
File: 76 KB, 972x927, 1557137652681.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681781

>> No.681782
File: 54 KB, 965x772, 1548997306009.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681782

>> No.681783
File: 102 KB, 965x772, 1554916656861.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681783

>> No.681785

>>681766
I'm not the author, don't know what he does exactly, but it would be possible to add it with PS, yes.

>> No.681791

This is a pretty neat effect for retro polaroid vibes.
Though a lot of it reminds me of the full screen effects in the PT demo.

>> No.681813

Does the guy have a blog or smtn?

>> No.681848

>>681813
im curious, what are you gonna do with all the time you saved by not writing "something" properly?

>> No.681850

>>681848
prob masterbait.

>> No.681851

>>681850
noyce

>> No.681855

>>681848
in due time thats how every1 is going 2 talk since its much fastr to just leav out some consonants, its the future for the internet

>> No.681868

>>681855
Nah, I doubt it.
There was a phase of it back when everyone talked like they were texting, but now everyone has gone back to just talking normally. At least in the places I frequent.
The only people that ever really talk like that now are 13 year olds and people of an increased melanin concentration.

>> No.681928

>>681868
That's not true since my melanin concentration is low and I dont live in the hood.

It's a natural evolution of the languages, now more than ever before we are writing/reading way more text, it's common to compress some shit to communicate more shit.

>> No.681979
File: 483 KB, 498x247, tenor.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
681979

>>681855

>> No.682472

>>681780
AW GOD WHY

>> No.682741

>>681780
SLEEP ALL DAY

>> No.682751

>>681780
Is it me, or does she have a shitload of pubic hair?

>> No.682799

>>681559
>>681550
Okay, this work is pretty impressive, i had a hard time believing it was a render when looking at the first picture(i was sure it was an actual photography).
Kudos to the artist, making an animation with this would land you a Netflix contract, not a studio job.

>> No.682805

>>682799
He just laid some random furniture around and posed a girl for myspace-grade camera angles, in Daz, using presets everywhere, maybe even for the poses. How is that artistry?

>> No.682833

>>682805
Post your work or get out.

>> No.682834

>>682833
He just laid some random furniture around and posed a girl for myspace-grade camera angles, in Daz, using presets everywhere, maybe even for the poses. How is that artistry?

>> No.682837

>>682805
>Daz, using presets everywhere
>DAZ
>PRESETs
NOOO
S H I T

>> No.682851

>>682834
Post your work or get out.

>> No.682853

>>682851
He just laid some random furniture around and posed a girl for myspace-grade camera angles, in Daz, using presets everywhere, maybe even for the poses. How is that artistry?

>> No.682870

>>682853
this

>> No.682872

>>682853
>>682870
>Distinctive lo-fi girl-next-door aesthetic
>Convincing CG photorealism
>Pushing the boundaries of what's possible with a software
Yeah it's art

>> No.682874

>>681550
>no cameraman standing in the mirror
who took the picture?
trash.

>> No.682886

>>682874
That´s the only thing giving away the fact that´s NOT a picture, anon.
Fire DAZ and try to do something similar. I dare you.

>> No.682895

>>682886
Give me the list of morphs, textures, poses and props he used, and I'll make you dozens of variations on the same theme.

>> No.682919

>>682853
ngmi
SAD!!

>> No.682925

>>682919
>dazlets telling others they're ngmi
The absolute state of /3/.