Photo realistic CG and photography merging/crossing over

[jimmyd]

interesting subject. i'm a big fan of CG but it has its limitations in scope and results. i wrote up some of my thoughts on the subject but decided to post them on my blog.

http://prettygirlshooter.blogspot.com

[artbyort]

Looks like our time is limited boys!

[Jetboy]

Having dabbled in 3D a few years back I can say at the time it seemed there was a certain amount of disdain toward it, unless of course you were a known comic artist and then suddenly it was no problem to get published no matter how bad your work was (Marvel's "Spiderman: Real Life" anyone?). 3D isn't easy, with the artist generally having to design/build/light the set and model prior to rendering (premade models and sets are of course available online, too). However, it's still a niche. You can't replace working with a real model. Granted it's a heck of a lot easier - the model's always available (not to mention on time), poses exactly as you like and will hold the pose indefinitely. However, a real model contributes to the shoot via her unique character and personality and working together to achieve a stunning shot can be very rewarding. 3D's getting better and better, but in the end it's still only 3D.

Keep shooting,
Alan B.

[jimmyd]

Originally Posted by c_canade'

Limitations in scope and results? hmmm i don't know if i'd agree totally with you on that one jD... i've been privie to some of the most incredible break throughs that are taking place.

there's an interesting paradox developing between photographers and CG artists these days. while the CG artists strive to make their rendered images look more and more real, many photographers use the same tools to make their photographs look more and more fake. the reason so many photographers have a hard time discerning whether an image is of a real model or is CG may have to do with the fact that so many photographers seem to work so hard making their models look like CG. (e.g., plastic Barbie skin, etc.)

[R_Fredrick_Smith]

Reminds me of the movie "Looker" of a few years ago. We may be getting close to that time frame.



Cheers,
rfs

[Jason407]

While I do think CG has come a long way, and there is some really impressive examples out there of images created in a CG enviroment that are completely photo realistic...I don't feel that this example is really showing that.

This particular example shows images that (if you look at the tutorial link) are basically just a recreation of a REAL photograph. While it is an impressive amount of work that went into it...I don't really get WHY. Why would you want to completely recreate an existing photograph by pain stakingly copying/tracing the image in photoshop or some other software?

Here is the REAL PHOTOGRAPH this last image was based on. HMMM...


In case it cannot be hotlinked, here is the link:
http://img10.picsplace.to/3/yukahanedamaid.jpg

[dynamike]

Damn dude. I told you once already #2 is a picture of Angel Boris from Playboy.com that has been reworked. It is not an original image!