CompuServe Messages

>> I took a look at some of his work as soon as you mentioned it, and while it is very impressive, I still pegged it as having "Humanoid" by Crestline origins <g>.<< OK, are you now going to tell me that when you watch Babylon 5 and see a figure in a space suit, or seaQuest DSV and see an underwater diver, that you've recognized their Humanoid origins, as well?<g> Had I not pointed you toward GT's work, I doubt you would have realized that some of his more outlandish characters were partially derived from Humanoid. Humanoid not only provides meshes for people to work with and reshape for their own needs, it also provides a more general structure to use as a guideline for a variety of other human-oriented applications. Furthermore, I doubt that the general public, or 3D clients have seen so much of Humanoid that they've reached the point of saturation like you apparently have. As an insider and 3D artist yourself, I think you might be overly sensitive to this issue. I imagine that most users of Humanoid are simply glad they have an affordable way of injecting the human element into their work, without having to develop the skills of some computer-based Michelangelo. If someone has the skill to create all the models they need, great… more power to them. I'd love to see their work. But I don't see any benefit in demeaning users who don't have these skills yet, or depriving them of the enjoyment of working with nice models like mine. Also in my software, I've worked very hard to avoid pigeon-holing users into working with the models as is. They are completely free to alter the geometry to suit their needs, and I've provided some basic instructions to guide them in this. And I went to a lot of trouble to make the meshes in all the figures compatible, so that new figures could be interpolated out of the base models using morphing. Yes, these things are somewhat limited, but they were the best I could manage at the time. In addition, Humanoid is not the last word from Crestline on the subject of human anatomy. I hope to expand the flexibilty of future sets to allow users to create different characters or morphologies. But this stuff takes time to do well. I think what you are really objecting to is the notion that buying ready-mades is an easy *fix* for some people, and it might discourage them from trying to develop their own unique modeling skills. If this were really a problem, I'd be as rich as some Crack dealers now, and everyone would be buying up my software right and left. But that's not the case at all. Most of my users are thoughtful people who've explored and exhausted their other options, and have fallen back on my work to get them through a tough spot, or they wanted to examine my work for its instructive qualities, or use it as a stop-gap till their own modeling skills have developed more. I don't think there's any shame in this. And I resent the implications you are making along these lines. >>Personally, I'll always custom build my own, mainly because I feel let down every time I see an animation and say: "oh, they used Mannequin's 50pman (or Viewpoint's freebie man, or Schreiber's man, or …..), for that scene". Call me a snob, but I like original work and I think it differentiates your work from "the pack".<< >> I think people should just try harder to differentiate their work. << I agree with you in the few instances when people overtly misrepresent their work in contests or exhibitions as `original art'. And I think in these cases, people should make an effort to use as much original material as possible, or at least compose the elements in their work in some original fashion. *I* get tired of seeing the same models used over and over in such things. And I think sometimes artists who create entirely original work do not get the proper distinction they deserve. But these are issues of `art for art's sake'. You obviously have a lot of emotional investment in the discipline of original modeling. But I don't think you should hold this same standard up for *all* 3D users. Modeling does not have to be an epiphany for everyone. For many, it's just a tool to get the job done. Many folks are just trying to make a decent living with 3D, and I don't think its going to bring the medium down for them to use ready-made's in some of their work. If you are making `very cheap' (your words, not mine <g>) models for people to use as well, I think it's a bit hypocritical for you to be making remarks, like the ones above, so flippantly. But listen… I don't want to get into a blood bath over this issue. Live and let live, I always say (well not really,… but it applies here in any case <g>). And I agree with some of what you are saying. I just wish you wouldn't offer knee-jerk reactions without putting them into some perspective for others who may not have the same skills as you do. My original remarks about Humanoid were intended primarily for Robert Ritger and others like him, who were obviously frustrated about the human models available. I was not attempting to make a wash over the whole 3D community, to insidiuosly coerce them into buying my models. By the standard of originality you've invoked, we'd have to say that a 3D user's work was not truly original unless they *programmed* the 3D rendering software themselves. In fact, why use 3D software all? Wouldn't it be more `pure' for you to be using pencil and paper, or brushes and oils? Models can be a useful tool just like 3D rendering software is. – Tim