caught me!

feel a little bit stoopid now - a noob telling a pro how to do his work. sorry for that, didn´t mean it like that. it's just that I´m so ethusiastic with maya...ahh what the heck! U know what I mean.

updates coming soon

I have to ask something. never rigged a thing in my life - therefor -> is it better to model the arms in the classical T-pose or should they be put down, or does it even matter at all?

I would be happy if someone could tell me in a short way. maybe pros an cons on that issue. thx in advance!

personaly I would rig in a half T pose if given the chance buy the ref. Arm's down to the side don't give you enought chance to really get in to the armpit area and work right. full T pose is nice and probably need for some rigging perpuse. I'm sure others will pipe up about that. But so far from a modeling perspective Half T wins for me. At full T it makes it a big harder geting and keeping the uper shape of the sholder right.

I'm intrested in everyones view on this also.

Hey Falott

No apology needed, its just a bit of a natter and all about helping one another, no worries. As for enthusiasm, great!! Its half the battle!! If you want to do it, you will do it.

As for rigging, well the T or crucifix pose is the most widely used. But I have seen digital models from a certain ILM and Weta with the arms modelled slighly bent at the shoulders and elbows but not huge amounts just enough to model and start the deformations off for the areas that matter


Cheers
_J

thank U for your suggestions on the pose. before I got to know your opinions I would have done it in full T-pose. decided to do it in between half and full pose - in a kind of relaxed state like you both mentioned.

next I´ll post a close-up of the breast with little explanation, because some of you were impressed by them. my opinion about this bigBoob thing - exidently happening on models builded by man - is that we compensate aestethic with quantity, or others might say vulgarism. but it´s a big misunderstanding! in order to create something deeply feminine, we´re lazy in shaping and simply make em big. problem is -> it looks apocryphal and everyone notices that.

personally for me this more inconspicuous appearence of the breast results secondly of natural sized mamma but firstly of shaping the.. in my language it´s called aureole (didn´t find translation for that) - the little area around the nipple.
besides that next important thing is - if U look at it U have to sense Gravity.

so my conclusion is -> less is more and if the modeller puts the energy out of quantity and into some more hours of shaping - one can see the difference. it took me 6-7 hours of experimenting to get this little shaded effect around the nipple with a very, very simple mesh. First I tried with bevelling/more closeToEachOther-lying edges to define the topology. but it looked artificial, so I left some edges and in the end I found out that it´s only a matter of the right size of the red marked inner square in context to the angle of the circumjacent squares around it. see it on the piCs

I didn´t want to sound smart alec, it just cost me many hours of trial and error to create this subtle effect which is maybe what pony was impressed by. that and Gravity! Gravity is important!

and the wire

very very nice shape you got with only 4 edges going out form center. Very intresting. I my self prefure 6 or 8 but getting that shape down first is inportant and you did it inpresivly.

I'm also intrested in the very nice tuck you did on the underside.. wire on that ? I see it some in what you posted..

if U think it´s helpful to see the wire I´ll post it in the evening. but I can tell it´s only 3 edges close to each other to get a sharp turn. - if it was that was you meant.

Dude
Looks good, are you using Smooth Mesh or Subd surface?

_J

modeling in polygons and convert it to subDs to check if I did the right thing.

Cooooool, mmmmm SubDs!!

My favourite

_J

Yes, subD´s work fine!

I reshaped the toes and bent the 2nd to pinky one slightly inwards like you Pony submitted. and yes - it does look better of course. the whole heel area doesn´t seem to be right, don´t know what it is by now. but anyways, I have to take care of the ankle as well. have fun with the images and tell if you find something odd!

(how does someone notice when the point is reached where tweaking doesn´t make the model look better?)

and some sideview

don´t mind the shader, I know it has this color like from a corpse. still looking for a realistic skin shader tutorial which I´m able to understand. I found mr. stahlbergs tutorial on his site very interesting - but I don´t understand sh** for crying out loud!

s#i$ ! I'm drooling over thoughs feet. Curent wire would be nice from matching angles as the rendered view.

About your shader.. I think it works fine for this stage ! What are you useing now ? Stahlberg's shader is bilt around the faceing angle from object to the light so that some extra red hue can be added at the temiating edges between the light and shadow side. Hince the SSS afect. On his tutorial he omits that you need to change a value on the clamp. Otherwise it works fine.