I *ahem* found a picture here which may help as a reference. Be warned that it is a picture of a REAL NAKED WOMAN, but her proportions are scarily close to what you seem to be after.
[EDIT] Dammit how do url text links work in this thing..Okay got it.
glad you kids have gotten this all sussed out on your own, and that constructive crits are still being given and received.
for the record, i agree that solely by way of convention, the traditional "nudity" thread tag doesn't quite encompass the Voyage to the Center of the Uterus we've been treated to here. but the OP has properly amended his thread tag to reflect his attention to detail, so all is well.
in a lesser community i think this would have spiraled completely out of control in a matter of minutes, but you guys done good. bravo. but here on out, now that the thread is properly disclaimed, let's try and focus on helping this guy work on his model.
to that end: i think you're headed in the right direction relative to the proportions you're looking to create, but i personally always find it beneficial to have more of the model "blocked out" before getting so much into detail. anatomical proportions function relative to each other, so it can be relatively difficult to see if the breasts are too large or too small relative to the head or legs or whatever, if those other elements aren't present yet. it's less of a concern if you'e got a particular reference you're working from, but developing the model further overall before detailing so much might be worth considering. i think that's one reason why "strip" modeling a la b1ll or the other practitioners is so popular (the one where single strips of polys are extended out to sketch out a limb position), because it helps give the artist a better sense of the overall form and make adjustments before those areas are built. in any case, good luck and please keep posting your progress.
Thanks Sett, those models are pretty much the style I'm going for. I wasn't really using a referrence but I'll probably use some thing from that site as one.
I think the main thing that pops out (not that, the other thing above it) right, her belly button. Is that right it just looks ugly right now, something like in the image gmanx posted would be better or simply remove it since no one seems to be looking at that anyway.
The rib cage right now doesnt look right just yet, I think you could just soften the hard line thats going on right now and it would be fine.
The nipples could be moved a little, so they point outward a bit more, of course silicon breasts tends to get fucked up alot.
And since you plan on selling this model and it will most likely be used in some sort pf porn thing, you might want to create a giant dildo aswell. It would increase the value and could explain that spread out vagina she got going on.
[ QUOTE ]
If you shouldnt see stuff like this at work dont click on links that say nudity, arguing over the defination of nudity is like arguing over the defination of "is".
[/ QUOTE ]
Sir, I find your verbal use of the word "is" and lack of punctuation offensive to my grammar.
the nudity tag was fine warning we get giant cocks in here all the time. the only thing i'm offended at is the execution of the vageen in general.
find some nice porn and reference in the pose you are modeling, it looks like you found a pic of a woman spreading it open, with a coke bottle inserted.
its like a creepy seamonster mouth, i just want to toss smelt into it untill it gets full and swims away, leaving me alone on the cracked off piece of iceberg floating in the ocean waiting for a passing helicopter to rescue me.
research more tastefull nude reference,, like domai or such
Sorry, but I'm just too mature to get all hot and bothered by a 3D vagina. Get over it people, no big deal, really... I'm not kidding. Every single woman has one, and by my estimates, vaginas arn't uncommon... you guys just arn't priviy to look at them first hand. *BURN!*
Anyway... my critique. By the time you add the shoulders, the hips will become too small in comparison. She also looks like she's missing oblique muscles. I know this is intended to look more exaggerated, but it's always good to stick to true anatomy.
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but I'm just too mature to get all hot and bothered by a 3D vagina. Get over it people, no big deal, really... I'm not kidding.
[/ QUOTE ]
<sigh> roughly when did people stop actually paying attention and reading what they thought they read instead of what they read? You need to read the thread again Z If you think people were getting hot and bothered about the concept of modeling a vagina. That in of itself, was not the issue.
As for the model, I think it'd be easier to critique it in a 3D view etsuja.
[ QUOTE ]
....it looks like you found a pic of a woman spreading it open, with a coke bottle inserted.
...its like a creepy seamonster mouth, i just want to toss smelt into it untill it gets full and swims away, leaving me alone on the cracked off piece of iceberg floating in the ocean waiting for a passing helicopter to rescue me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Funniest thing I've read on the interweb all day!LOL
The vag looks to big and open and the shoulders are kinda big for a girl, but just keep working on it, and it'll come together.
Remember, crititques are useless if you don't implement changes that address them, but if you're happy with what you're doing, who can tell you you're wrong.
middle is your model with the ref overlayed over it
heres what i'm atempting to show with the image
1. the breasts, the reference as in a lot fo female glam poses has her chest puffed out and her back arched, you can see that clearly on the shots from the site that holds the ref material. you modeled the arched shape in the front view, but i'm not sure if you actualy arched the models back from the profile, which you should, so it will match up better, the main problm this brings is on the reff the arched back makes the breasts pert and point upwards, not realistic for natural boobs, but nice for a style like this,, you boobs apear to be facing straight forewars, while siting on an arched chest,
2, the green triangle bits on the hips show that you have these masses modeled pointing into the crotch area, where on the reference they run alng the thigh framing the crotch area, doing them like you did makes the legs seem pinched at the connection point.
3. leg angle, its understandable not wanting to model legs together, but you have them perfectly straight down, but spread apart, this is pretty unatural, the legs should angle outwards from the hip connection.
4. your outter thighs seem to have a smooth curve alway to the knee, where the refs curve is wider at the top portion of the thigh, and then tapers more narrow near the knees, on the ref the curve is almost straight severl inches before it tapers into the knee area. on yours it seems to curve the same all the way untill it meets the knee.
5 waist, you can see this more clearly on the middle image, see how much smoother the refs waist is? it dies not pinch in nearly as far. and is not as sharp angled.
6. shoulders, i was thinking the shoulder was too wide. and they may be.. but i think a lot of it is that while your shoulder width matches fairly ok with the ref. your upper chest is a good bit more narrow, see on the middle pic, not only do th breasts jut out more on the sides, but also the ribcage is a good bit wider (i would suggest modeling arms at a 45 degree angle. just seems to work better that way, .
7. the vageen. notice the ref it its not swollen and ready to consume any orphans that may pas by.
those are my crits to the piece, over all i was suprised how well it matches the ref, especialy how it lines up height wise in the front view. keep working on it and refining and you'll get it awesome in no time.
guys.. have any of you thought that perhaps the reason the vagina is so gapeing is that it might need to be animated via morph targets, and so to make vertex selection easier he is starting with a wide open hole rather than the closed, overlaping manifold structure? (jokes about men's inability to find women parts come to mind *cough*) I don't think etsuja has stated the end purpose of this model.
The topology of the model itself seems a bit busy and it seems that the hips will be quite hard to animate without some very odd squash and stretch occuring. and ditto to rhynokey's crits.
OMG! it's hidius, for real you shoudn't have posted a model of this quality on the net, keep working on your skills, re make the model many times, and keep track of what was better the the last model each time before you start a new one.
But the order you chose to build this in makes you wonder what the hell is going on in your head.
Yeah, the topology is a bit grid-ish, without following the countours of the muscles well. I got tagged for this on previous models and I think I understand it now.
[ QUOTE ]
OMG! it's hidius, for real you shoudn't have posted a model of this quality on the net, keep working on your skills, re make the model many times, and keep track of what was better the the last model each time before you start a new one.
But the order you chose to build this in makes you wonder what the hell is going on in your head.
[/ QUOTE ]
The whole idea of keeping to your self and not posting for crits until you improve seems rather counterintuitive...
Replies
I *ahem* found a picture here which may help as a reference. Be warned that it is a picture of a REAL NAKED WOMAN, but her proportions are scarily close to what you seem to be after.
[EDIT] Dammit how do url text links work in this thing..Okay got it.
Everyone here contributed to make my day:D
for the record, i agree that solely by way of convention, the traditional "nudity" thread tag doesn't quite encompass the Voyage to the Center of the Uterus we've been treated to here. but the OP has properly amended his thread tag to reflect his attention to detail, so all is well.
in a lesser community i think this would have spiraled completely out of control in a matter of minutes, but you guys done good. bravo. but here on out, now that the thread is properly disclaimed, let's try and focus on helping this guy work on his model.
to that end: i think you're headed in the right direction relative to the proportions you're looking to create, but i personally always find it beneficial to have more of the model "blocked out" before getting so much into detail. anatomical proportions function relative to each other, so it can be relatively difficult to see if the breasts are too large or too small relative to the head or legs or whatever, if those other elements aren't present yet. it's less of a concern if you'e got a particular reference you're working from, but developing the model further overall before detailing so much might be worth considering. i think that's one reason why "strip" modeling a la b1ll or the other practitioners is so popular (the one where single strips of polys are extended out to sketch out a limb position), because it helps give the artist a better sense of the overall form and make adjustments before those areas are built. in any case, good luck and please keep posting your progress.
Arora has the front on shot that is a good ref.
I'm curently in love with Agent Venus.
The rib cage right now doesnt look right just yet, I think you could just soften the hard line thats going on right now and it would be fine.
The nipples could be moved a little, so they point outward a bit more, of course silicon breasts tends to get fucked up alot.
And since you plan on selling this model and it will most likely be used in some sort pf porn thing, you might want to create a giant dildo aswell. It would increase the value and could explain that spread out vagina she got going on.
This sentence made my day. thanks.
If you shouldnt see stuff like this at work dont click on links that say nudity, arguing over the defination of nudity is like arguing over the defination of "is".
[/ QUOTE ]
Sir, I find your verbal use of the word "is" and lack of punctuation offensive to my grammar.
find some nice porn and reference in the pose you are modeling, it looks like you found a pic of a woman spreading it open, with a coke bottle inserted.
its like a creepy seamonster mouth, i just want to toss smelt into it untill it gets full and swims away, leaving me alone on the cracked off piece of iceberg floating in the ocean waiting for a passing helicopter to rescue me.
research more tastefull nude reference,, like domai or such
Anyway... my critique. By the time you add the shoulders, the hips will become too small in comparison. She also looks like she's missing oblique muscles. I know this is intended to look more exaggerated, but it's always good to stick to true anatomy.
Sorry, but I'm just too mature to get all hot and bothered by a 3D vagina. Get over it people, no big deal, really... I'm not kidding.
[/ QUOTE ]
<sigh> roughly when did people stop actually paying attention and reading what they thought they read instead of what they read? You need to read the thread again Z If you think people were getting hot and bothered about the concept of modeling a vagina. That in of itself, was not the issue.
As for the model, I think it'd be easier to critique it in a 3D view etsuja.
....it looks like you found a pic of a woman spreading it open, with a coke bottle inserted.
...its like a creepy seamonster mouth, i just want to toss smelt into it untill it gets full and swims away, leaving me alone on the cracked off piece of iceberg floating in the ocean waiting for a passing helicopter to rescue me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Funniest thing I've read on the interweb all day!LOL
The vag looks to big and open and the shoulders are kinda big for a girl, but just keep working on it, and it'll come together.
Remember, crititques are useless if you don't implement changes that address them, but if you're happy with what you're doing, who can tell you you're wrong.
ok this may not really be a paint over.. as much as some scribbled guide lines and comparison pics,
on the left is your model.
on the right is the ref you posted,
middle is your model with the ref overlayed over it
heres what i'm atempting to show with the image
1. the breasts, the reference as in a lot fo female glam poses has her chest puffed out and her back arched, you can see that clearly on the shots from the site that holds the ref material. you modeled the arched shape in the front view, but i'm not sure if you actualy arched the models back from the profile, which you should, so it will match up better, the main problm this brings is on the reff the arched back makes the breasts pert and point upwards, not realistic for natural boobs, but nice for a style like this,, you boobs apear to be facing straight forewars, while siting on an arched chest,
2, the green triangle bits on the hips show that you have these masses modeled pointing into the crotch area, where on the reference they run alng the thigh framing the crotch area, doing them like you did makes the legs seem pinched at the connection point.
3. leg angle, its understandable not wanting to model legs together, but you have them perfectly straight down, but spread apart, this is pretty unatural, the legs should angle outwards from the hip connection.
4. your outter thighs seem to have a smooth curve alway to the knee, where the refs curve is wider at the top portion of the thigh, and then tapers more narrow near the knees, on the ref the curve is almost straight severl inches before it tapers into the knee area. on yours it seems to curve the same all the way untill it meets the knee.
5 waist, you can see this more clearly on the middle image, see how much smoother the refs waist is? it dies not pinch in nearly as far. and is not as sharp angled.
6. shoulders, i was thinking the shoulder was too wide. and they may be.. but i think a lot of it is that while your shoulder width matches fairly ok with the ref. your upper chest is a good bit more narrow, see on the middle pic, not only do th breasts jut out more on the sides, but also the ribcage is a good bit wider (i would suggest modeling arms at a 45 degree angle. just seems to work better that way, .
7. the vageen. notice the ref it its not swollen and ready to consume any orphans that may pas by.
those are my crits to the piece, over all i was suprised how well it matches the ref, especialy how it lines up height wise in the front view. keep working on it and refining and you'll get it awesome in no time.
The topology of the model itself seems a bit busy and it seems that the hips will be quite hard to animate without some very odd squash and stretch occuring. and ditto to rhynokey's crits.
But the order you chose to build this in makes you wonder what the hell is going on in your head.
Scott
OMG! it's hidius, for real you shoudn't have posted a model of this quality on the net, keep working on your skills, re make the model many times, and keep track of what was better the the last model each time before you start a new one.
But the order you chose to build this in makes you wonder what the hell is going on in your head.
[/ QUOTE ]
The whole idea of keeping to your self and not posting for crits until you improve seems rather counterintuitive...