| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (30)

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That's not CG, that's a photo!... wait. That's not a photo. That's CG!...
...
My head hurts!!

What an amazing job. He could teach something to the guys that did "The Polar Express". That was creepy.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 12:31AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That looks so good..imagine a cg film with that calibur of cg..although then u may aswell use real actors :S
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:21PM JoshMilewski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It looks like uncanny valley to me. Too bad?
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, that is the most impressive cg I have ever seen.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Very few people can do such quality work and avoid the uncanny valley effect (so I wouldn't expect us reaching this level in videogames any time soon). Congrats. That said, still images is one thing, an animated one on the other hand is another challenge all together.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not only could I swear it was a woman in make-up, but all of the pictures past the 4th one look that way!
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:25PM mrfong said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Uh, I belive the Uncanny Valley has been crossed here. But, as always, put it into motion and everything changes :(
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I call fake. Something in the how-to process doesn't quite match up.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:35PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why is it that the girls head moves in the picture? this isnt a 3d model.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:36PM typoink said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The "uncanny valley" is only meaningfully applicable to moving images. This picture may cross the threshhold of photorealistic CGI, but that's quite different.

The "uncanny valley" refers to the fact that when things are almost human looking, you notice the unhuman elements (notably clunky movements and delayed reactions) more than you notice the real parts.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2007 11:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Why is it that the girls head moves in the picture? this isnt a 3d model."
Because as a 3d model, the head can be moved in 3d space.
christ
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 12:04AM Negativecool said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Anyone that doesn't give this man his due props is selling something.

That said, I don't think we can completely void this out of the uncanny valley until we see this "woman" in motion. Then will you get that eerie, uncomfortable, uncanny valley feeling.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 12:05AM bearattack said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nice work.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 12:25AM hvnlysoldr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I still feel something inhuman about that image. Until people know what their image is we can't replicate it.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 12:42AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i want to second and third the thoughts up there reguarding the "uncanny valley" effect. a buddy of mine at work sent this to me today and i havent been this blown away with CGI since seeing eye movement test animation for final fantasy: spirits within. however the moment that model starts to move, problems WILL arise. modeling in CGI is one thing, rigging and then animating it are two totally different things.

still its really great work.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 2:58AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You can easily find absolutely stunningly realistic cgi-humans on any 3D hobbyist forums. The problem isn't getting a still image to look real. But you step into the uncanny valley the moment you try to make the model move.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 3:46AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"7. I call fake. Something in the how-to process doesn't quite match up."

When it sounds to good to be true, it usually is. This guy used a model and then retraced his steps to make it seem like he made it.

I pull the BS flag, too bad so many believed.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 3:58AM Ironhide Delta said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You guys can call fake all you want. It's real as in real cg. He showed a step by step process on how it was made and you still can't believe. Fortunately there are a few of us out there that work with 3d modelling programs for a living and know exactly what can be done. This is simply some of the most impressive cg I've seen in ages. She looks photorealistic and sure, if it were to move, the animator need be very good at what he does to make it work, but this is excellent work.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 4:11AM Ironhide Delta said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
http://features.cgsociety.org/stories/2007_04/night_elf/screen1lg5.jpg

And that link should give you all the proof you need.
Reply

Posted: May 6th 2007 10:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Er, did anyone happen to see the other post of the guy who looked very realistic, you can find the link through the uncanny calley one, about the "yesterdays post" or something. It was by the same guy, Max Kor, now im not saying this is definatly true, but the evidence points towards his ability to make this.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 8:17AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@13: "I still feel something inhuman about that image."

-It's an elf d'uh!

Absolutely great work. Meticulous detail, love it.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 1:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Did anyone take a good look at the eye brows? You will notice that they split... For someone who said that they took so much time, you would think they would take the time to make the eye brow as one. It is clear that the artist used a picture of a model and then added the eye brow, but didn't put in the time to make the eye brow as one.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 3:57PM Ironhide Delta said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You see the proof before your eyes and you still call fake. You realize the time it would take to fake it all in pictures, would be about the same time it would take a talented modeller to produce the same effects? Look at the face map for the eyebrows. The eyebrows still need to be based on some kind of realism. They don't just shoot off into space at the arch, because they still need to be anchored.

This in! People discovering 'Video' games! Games you play as 'Video'!

"I call fake! You can't play games on a television! How can you set the board up properly?" - Guy Incognito

"Just were do you think a 'Video' game can be played? Not out on the ice or a football field! I call bullshit on this!" - Fakey Noproof
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 3:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@#22.

Blizzard actually designed that race's eyebrows to look like that - the central part of the brow simply grows out to a peak. It's very intentional on the part of the artist and not the result of carelessness or laziness. He's just trying to capture a stylized detail on the Warcraft characters and interpret photorealistically.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2007 11:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why do the ears look so totally fake whereas the rest of the face and skin detial is beyond belief?
Reply

Posted: May 6th 2007 1:45PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is fake. You can see where he switched from the modeled face to the photo between segment 3 and 4. The ears and devices might be cg, but he worked them over a photo. Note that he never shows a rendered scene of the face outside of the flat picture. He could have just as easily rendered the further out version, but not here, because it's fake.
Reply

Posted: May 7th 2007 12:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ahem. Final Fantasy characters looked pretty realistic too in stills back in the day with their all geometry hairs and their "micro textured to the pores" skin with subsurface scattering. Uncanny valley only takes over when they move. Miniscule motions of the face features is what's hard to get right, not a still image of a character. Even though this is great work it is nothing but a whisper from "uncanny valley".

My 2 cents.
Reply

Posted: May 7th 2007 1:51PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually, Max (the artist) has been making steadily better and better humans for a while, now. Here's something he did a couple years ago, with an explanation: http://www.cgtantra.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5638

People calling "bullshit" clearly haven't been paying attention to the vastly-improving quality of CG humans over the last few years. Sure, animation is a whole different story, but the models, texturing and rendering are there.
Reply

Posted: Jul 27th 2007 7:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I've closely examined the images of this supposed "CG" model and it's obvious to me that this artist has superior photo compositing skills that he's put to use in the creation of this piece. If it were actually modeled in CG, it WOULD be stunning, but instead it comes across to me as a cleverly composited photo manipulated to appear as if modeled in CG. I don't care about all the B.S. related to shader settings, actual working screen captures, etc. Total B.S. This artist obviously wanted his 15 minutes of fame and he got it, and this work is definitely the work of a talented artist, but a talented "photographer" and "compositor", not a talented "CG" artist. Please don't anybody fall for this.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW