ZBrushCentral

The Emily Project -- Image Metrics' Siggraph 2008 Demo

ZBrush Artworks
#1

[attach=104657]Image_metrics_What_is0000.jpg[/attach]

Hello everyone. I’m the Director/Rigger of the Emily project. In case you haven’t seen it yet, you can watch it here:

http://www.awntv.com/videos/image-metrics-emily-project

There is also a Making Of video on this page:

http://www.image-metrics.com/node/361

On this project we used Zbrush for:


  • Retoping the neutral scan using the Zbrush retop tool.
  • Creating 30 animated displacement maps.
I’d love to hear your thoughts and crits. Many of your questions may already be answered in my cgtalk post:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=5342262&postcount=74

By the way, the render artist on this project was the one and only, William Lambeth (Big Bucks on ZBC). You may remember his Samburu warrior:

[attach=104699]head_wire_web_01.jpg[/attach]

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/showthread.php?t=36891&highlight=samburu

Thanks!
Oleg

Attachments

Image_metrics_What_is0000.jpg

#2

Deriving normals from the different depths at which structured light diffuses… heavy stuff and working with the fathers of CGI! I did some work with Greg Ward a few years back and did not even know he was crucial to the whole HDRI scene.

This is a facinating project with great potential! Congratulations to all involved.

I might just add that there is a good interview with Mr Debevec and a few spots over at FXguide.

-Shea

#3

Hi, already seen this and really have to say, outstanding math! Congratulations.
Having said that, other then replacing bad acting by bad cg acting and a few more bucks for the porn industry when it hits them that they can now really own their “stars” and cut costs, this is the sort of thing that will change culture, and probably not for the best.
Taking as example what is happening with the “new” 3D cinema thing and how it is changing the compositing software, this is in that golden category that will shurely push the freak show parade just a bit more. Wont even go into what it means for video evidence in a court of law.

#4

Well, they still need some sort of acting to capture for the animation, but I suppose that animation could be applied to another face. At least that’s how I understand it. I can’t imagine that would be the most economical choice at the moment though.

The work is tremendous. I would have liked to see it used in a more practical manner, I mean, no one is going to have an actor act and then replicate that same actor doing the same thing in 3d, but the concept is there and it is brilliant. There really aren’t any faults I can find.

#5

I sat through the first minute thinking to myself “So where does the CG part come in?”
Great stuff.

I assume this will enable studios to transfer performances of people who can actually act to people who look good on screen, among others.
I don’t agree with that hypothetical practive, lol, but the technology is amazing!

Congrats.

#6

It would be nice to see the original video with the real woman’s face and no CGI. Then I could judge better. It would be interesting to see that it was a male actor under that CGI too. That would be more interesting.

Thanks for posting,
-Brandon

#7

Everything is perfectly convincing, except for her eyes. They are completely souless. This is just tech for tech’s sake. What the hell is the point of making a perfectly realistic 3d human?

#8

Well, it would certainly make stunt work more convincing. The stunt double would have the actor’s face. I’m sure there are other uses, but regardless, it’s still really cool.

I agree on the eyes to an extent, when she’s showing emotion towards the end they look a little off. Otherwise I think they look just how they should.

#9

just amazing, really crazy to see where the future is going.

#10

so you can shoot her face off mid sentence without actually killing anyone.

how about taking her head mesh, sculpting a cool monster face in it, then using that same animation and releasing it as a video? i want to see her face displace into something that would show the true power of this tech

#11

I was thinking you could scan in an actor in heavy makeup and then capture his facial animations without makeup and superimpose the scanned face over that. That works too though.

#12

check out on their demoreel, it contain various model,
including monster and cartoony stuff face animation.

#13

Wow, such believable! I thought she was real ! :+1: :+1:

#14

Sorta Creepy (no pun intended). I thought the teeth/lips were the giveaway…they had too much gap in them so it looked like she was talking with her jaws clenched. Good thing they kept the scale of the video to a medium size. Outstanding capability but I agree with others…why?

#15

What are you dense? The purpose of this tech is stated in the video, for film, video games, etc. I never understood people who ask “what’s the point of creating a realistic 3d human”. These people never seem to understand the amount of craftmenship, skill, and technical knowledge that goes into shaping, texturing, and rendering polygons into something that appears to be a living breathing human being. How can you not appreciate that? Realistic 3d humans are used all the time in movies, sometimes exclusively (Beowulf) and video games are getting closer to that standard too. Various media outlets want to be able to capture realistic human emotions and this tech is a great step forward to meet that goal. If you can’t understand that, I think you’re in the wrong forums.

#16

oR_Creeper thanks!
I was starting to think I was the only one thinking that it wasn’t looking that convincing.
First of all the face is the only part that has a strong reddish colour. The other parts of the body have a bit if a yellowish colour. So right from the start you could understand that something was going on.
The second giveaway was the lips and the eyes. The movement was a bit strange and I think it was because it lacked some sort of definition.
Anyway it doesn’t really matter. Things are progressing really fast and to the right direction. So congrats for all the hard work.

#17

The criticism on this thread is coming from 3D artists and enthusiasts who are analyzing the footage after already knowing it’s CG-based. I actually showed this to some “laypeople” without telling them it was digital, and they had no idea it was fake!

I’m personally stunned by the rapid progress being made by you guys at Image Metrics, I’m positive you will totally nail digital humans in the very near future. I’m just concerned you will be putting many modelers and animators out of a job… :o

#18

awesome work guys!! :+1: you are on a good way to future technology…

cg emily looks very real.
only if you know its animation you might see that there is something artificial about her eyes and sometimes also at the corners of the mouth.

how many and which texture layers did you use for the skin?

anyway great project.
your light stage is cool! :slight_smile:
hope to see more…

#19

I’d love to see more information about how ZBrush was used in this project. :slight_smile:

#20

Hi Black Crane.

For games, stunt work and special effects, I definitely agree with you. And I definitely appreciate and admire the artistic skill required to produce perfect photorealism. I should have benn more clear.

My argument was that it is pointless to create a photorealistic human just to use as a “virtual actor”. What is the point of a virtual actor? If, for example, someone wants to put say, Elvis, or Marilyn Monroe, in a movie, would it not be more efficient to use makeup FX?

To me, the most successful use of photoreal characters are ones that are somewhat fantastical. Gollum and King Kong, and to some extent the Hulk from Ang Lee’s movie, were perfect.
Grendel was a great movie in and of itself, but the character’s facial expressions and emoting were severely lacking. They never smiled or frowned or blinked realistically, they had no small facial ticks or squints or any of the tiny facial movements that a real flesh and blood human would have.
Can you honestly say that Grendel would not have been exactly the same movie had they used real actors for the human characters?