ZBrushCentral

Portrait of Scarlett Johansson

ZBrush Artworks
#121

I don’t think anyone wants to police other artists’ methods. Of course people use short cuts. They use scans or project templates as guides. But you really see that as the same as sculpting part of a head and pasting photographs of the major features on the render in photoshop? Really?

Top row is prestigious. It is recognition and great advertising for the artist. I know guys on the top row that actually put it on their resumes.

This is more about honesty than anything. If he had been honest about his method, no one would complain. But also, he probably wouldn’t be up on top row.

#122

@Gaboon - Thanks, you’ve really hit the core issue on the head, Reiterate - honesty.

#123

okay, now i haven’t read through this entirely but people seem to be upset that he’s not explaining himself and that he barely did anything and that he did this or that…

he may not have popped back in to comment but this model was originally an entry in the last hardcore modeling challenge and he did far more than just this head.

so what if the hair was photoshopped in (which i believe some are taking issue with)?, it’s not like he’s the only one to ever do that…

he sculpted several different iterations of hair but obviously couldn’t find one he was satisfied with and went the photoshop route.

seems there’s a lot of people blowing hot air to me…and if they take a look at the thread i linked you’ll see the wip shots for this model.

so lay off him about wireframes, and everything else…because he made this model, and found a solution for the hair which worked perfectly for what he was doing. he doesn’t deserve to be criticised for this.

#124

On CGSociety’s galleries, you often have to show wireframes to prove what you created is valid. I think that’s called for here, as the points made in previous posts do seem to expose this image as fairly fraudulent.

At the very least it should be taken down from the Top Row until wireframes are shown.

#125

there is a link to the wireframes in my post right above yours

#126

awesome dude great work … :+1: :+1: :+1:

#127

Those wireframes bear absolutely no resemblance to the Top Row image.

#128

They’re also from about 5 weeks before this image was posted, which is plenty of time for him to have improved the model…

It’s clear he’s been working on it since mid February at least

#129

Does seem a bit odd that he would angrily abandon that thread at cgsociety because someone suggested her “naso-labial fold” was a bit harsh, then appear here a few days later…never to be heard from again.

#130

Indeed.

#131

But you really see that as the same as sculpting part of a head and pasting photographs of the major features on the render in photoshop? Really?

Really doesn’t seem all that different to me, LOTS of digital artist use photoshop to make there pieces better or complete. Just seems people want to piss and moan about this piece in particular because he got top row because of it.

#132

Uh, well that is exactly why everyone is taking issue with it. As I said, if it wasn’t given top row, no one would complain.

I guess its not plagiarism if it is “digital art”

#133

Guess I just don’t get it then? Like I said I’m a noob in the digital world, but with all that I’ve seen on these forums and others I don’t see what he did as wrong, just business as usual. The way it was explained actually sounded pretty innovative. Jut my opinion though.

#134

And i have word for {cbeese} when you give a comment on something would you please don’t posting a pic and pointing it makes the artist [who that thread for] very uncomfortable…believe me…
but thank’s any way.

100% opposite of what I would have wanted… Feedback with a pic is way better than text. It seems the artist is being a bit touchy with feedback. This would explain his absence here after the bashing. He had one comment where he thanked for the nice comments. After that, nada… I think it’s more that he didn’t like the feedback. A tip would be to work on how you handle feedback. What you are doing on CGtalk and here is not beneficial for you. How are you going to get better if you ignore the good feedback?

My feedback would be to work more on the nose and the lips because they stand out more than the other parts. I guess the pores are made with Spotlight. Did you do anything for the sides as well so it can take a change of view or is it made for this image only?

Funny how the thumb, that looks so awesome, is a photo :lol:

#135

Wow, you’re right. The eye thumbnail is a photograph! How embarrassing for the moderators to have a thumbnail in the Top Row that is a photo.

#136

Wow, really?? I had no idea that having work here was such the be-all / end-all of digital art. I’ve never worked with anyone employed based on how well they can use one tool exclusively. If the criticism levelled at this piece is justified, then the only work available to this artist will be to replicate a given photo, apparently.

Again, I don’t understand the fuss and it just reads as though somebody has cheapened the Little Zbrush Club in some way. Perhaps image-posts should be limited to screengrabs of purely ZBrush work. Surely using other packages and technigues (Mental Ray, Photoshop, Maya modelling) to make a more visually appealing image is also ‘cheating’?

Would look very dull though…

#137

Originally posted by gray_slayer,

Again, I don’t understand the fuss and it just reads as though somebody has
cheapened the Little Zbrush Club in some way.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

#138

Really dude? Yes, using a render engine or other 3D program is the same as SLAPPING A PHOTOGRAPH onto a render. Yeah, its the same thing. :roll_eyes:

There is a hard line between enhancing or polishing an image vs trying to pass off SOMEONE ELSE’S PHOTOGRAPH as your sculpture work.

That photograph was taken by a photographer guys, another artist. For my next “sculpture” on ZB Central I am going to comp works from all the guys here who are defending this guy and post it as my own work without mentioning that it was comped. See how they feel about this subject then.

#139

Hmmm, I can see you’re really upset about this piece achieving top row - punctuated by your shouty caps-lock. I just wanted to explain (or rather re-iterate) my original point as I am in no way ‘defending this guy’. I’m really interested at the anger caused by this posting, and still don’t think that because it sits on the top bar that the artist has conquered Everest or anything.

I checked out your folio, it has a really nice range of good quality work. The wireframes are especially revealing and useful to any would-be employer. If the artist here is guilty of the things you say, then by comparison his options are limited. My point; top row isn’t really worth much… but hey - we’ve all got different opinions.

Maybe the artist is in fact a genius. I’ve heard ‘good’ art should be controversial and get people talking. We’re up to page 10 already…

#140

Alright. nervous laugh You have castrated my anger with your compliment :confused:

I am angry (passionate :)) about this mainly because top row was a goal of mine for a while. But frankly, the standards for what is brought up there seem to be dropping. I don’t want to insult anyone. There are still totally awesome inspiring works going up there. Honestly, I am curious if other artists feel the same way about the quality level of top row lately. Maybe it is just me.

I am not going to continue ranting. I am done.