United3dArtists Archive

An old illustration that I had not finished. Finally I completely redone.

Beautiful work Marcel.

I've seen that tree before! Nice one. I am glad you're also getting human figures or humanoid ones into your work now! Great improvement. Looking forward to more characters.

Well now at least we know how those aliens of yours are planning to take over the world.

marcel wrote:An old illustration that I had not finished. Finally I completely redone.

This is sexist nonsense, Captain Scarlet.
I wish you would put your talent to more considered ends.

@ Saul : I'm not sure to understand what you mean (Google translate).

We've seen Thirsty Tree and it is good. She or something similar was on your designer website? Did you model her completely or is it Daz?

I can't usually find much to criticize in your art but here the girl does not look as realistic as the rest of the image. Her skin looks like plastic (I had the same problem with Golden Age. Bryce vs. Daz/3Delight). It doesn't matter to me if it is realistic or not but the difference does not look good. It should have the same level or look. Also her position on the tree and her pose don't look right. It does not look like she is really sitting on the tree.

@Finis : you are right about the woman on the tree. I will try a solution.
What i don't understand about Saul is "sexist nonsense".

The pose and texture of the woman are better now.

Saul wrote:I wish you would put your talent to more considered ends.

Maybe you should heed your own advise!

marcel wrote:The pose and texture of the woman are better now.

Beautiful work Marcel!

Great work Marcel!!!!

Looks like she has been at that post a really long time! The tree grew around her pose! Wonderful work. I remember seeing this tree before, it is good to see it a little more 'fleshed' out.

marcel wrote:@ Saul : I'm not sure to understand what you mean (Google translate).

Sexist nonsense is maybe absurde sexiste in French?
Having an unclothed woman with breasts that are too large sitting in a tree is 'absurde sexiste'.
This image is an adolescents idea - perhaps Captain Scarlet's( a puppet after all) - of what women look like and how they behave.
She sits in a tree waiting for a man to happen along and help her down, rewards him with sex and then, presumably, she toddles off and brings up the babies while he swaggers off looking for more naked women sitting in trees?
Its absurd and a waste of your talent.

Somehow, I like it even more.

@ Saul : I did not want to go into this kind of discussion in this forum. I have my belief and I can assure you that I am mature enough to do what I like.
You can see on the second picture the legs covered by close. But it is only because i find that more beautiful.

marcel wrote:@ Saul : I did not want to go into this kind of discussion in this forum.

I was under the impression that's exactly what this forum was for.
A place for proper discussion of our attempts to make meaningful art out of this new medium.
It's been 20 yrs since 3D was made available to all of us and its now possible for one man, at his desk, to control all the means of cinematic production.
I think we should take it very seriously, its the beginning of something new!
You are very talented and should be applying yourself more rigorously.

Ok Saul. But it is not for me.
I do not participate in debate because my bad English couldn't translate my
ideas. I'm here for fun. I've had enough discussion in my professional life as a designer that I've never shown here.
I am never sure if what i write is what i think.

Fantastic images take extra effort to make believable because first thing the viewer will notice is the logical/objective stuff.
I have sat in a tree many times. Its not comfortable despite the many layers of clothing I have on. (Watch the LoTR extras for Pippin and Merry take on it))
Why is your Heroine sitting up there unclothed? impeccably groomed, broiling sun etc?
Similar thing with your tentacled door, logically it would have been easy for an assailant to sneak up from the side - not even sneak, 'cos the tentacles couldn't reach him anyway - and hack them off. What kind of defense is that?
vi ... f=6&t=3648"
Thinking carefully, logically, about your creations can only add to their impact.

Looks better. Before it looked like her butt was inside of the tree or that she was on the edge and would slide off. Skin better too. An interesting contrast of high tech and nature. It is like she landed her spacecraft or aircraft just off screen and strolled to the canyon edge to enjoy the scenery.

Did you make the character model yourself (point editing, etc.) or with Daz or something like that?

Thank Finis. I follow your comment and it was a good think to do.
It is a Poser character with trueSpace objects and textures.

@Saul : I told you that these intellectual question (in english) did not interest me and you know why. Looking for fun here then find someone else to criticize !

NEVER THOUGHT IN MY LIFE THAT WE HAD TO FIGHT FOR THE SAME THING 2 TIMES
IN OUR LIVES.. BACK IN THE DUSTY OLD DAYS OF THE SIXTIES.. AND TODAY...
namely freedom of speach and the freedom of doing art the way we wanted to !!!!!!
So yes I like the artwork !
Sorry for the rant in capitol letters but....fighting for a free world at least.. the way we had it
back in th 70´s.. no offense against you Saul.. just my principals..
Peter

@Rayman : I tried to explain my point of view with my bad english (Google translate).

Hope that is clear :

"How to criticize art is an indicator of the moral health of a society. Artistic deviance is a risk to accept if we want to remain free. Because what defined deviance evolved into a control that restricts freedom."

Be free, have fun. An image hurts less than a bullet.

EDIT: aaaaaaahahahahaha posted at the same time as marcel
EDIT 2: Good lord I didn't realise this post was so long

Guys, let's un-ruffle our jimmies here, "freedom of expression" works both ways. It is Marcel's artistic freedom to post this artwork and it is Saul's freedom to question said artwork. I personally think it's bit harsh to say 'sexist nonsense' (because really...boobies are boobies) and just because a given thing offends you does not mean you are right...it just means you are offended.

And thus I shall exercise my freedom to have my turn on the spoon and stir the pot.

Somebody being naked doesn't equate to sex. To automatically make anything to do with a woman being naked be about sex in fact damages the sexual equality cause because it is still an assuming that someones nakedness is the length and bredth of that person's personality and role, it still just makes the argument about body parts and not the person they're attached to. The morality behind your argument is based on the idea of busting out-dated gender stereotypes, don't continue it by assuming that boobies = sexual content made specifically for a male fantasy.

And on that subject, you cannot assume that this image will be looked at exclusively by a male audience. Would your indignation about this image be the same if a number of woman looked at it and said "she's attractive, I like it"? What if she said "hell yeah I'd wait on a tree for an attractive guy to come along", would you think less of her for wanting to wanting to looking attractive even in 50 degrees of heat and being sat on a tree if that's what makes her and those close to her happy? Would your views changed if you knew that this woman was in a typical 'male' dominated career like an engineer? We probably wouldn't be having this discussion if it was a male in the image, would your responses to my questions above still be the same if we reversed everything? If not, where's the equality (ie, not sexist) you're championing?

You can read into any piece of media as much as you want. If you took a blatantly pornographic image (not disputable like we're discussing here) you could still admire its psychological quality. Sex uses pretty much all of the senses and in a pornographic image you're reduced to just 1, sight, which is why it so often looks over-the-top because it needs to be exaggerated to make up for the loss in other senses. Sight is one of the primary sexual drivers in male-oriented brains but in female oriented brains it is the other senses such as touch and imagination (although not a sense) that is most dominant and must work in unison, that's why typically ladies watch or view less porn than men and read more stories instead, although that is slowly but steadily beginning to balance out.

In my view, even if the image were as you say, so what? If Marcel or a viewer said to women-at-large "you suck because you don't look like this" (or words to that effect) then that is a problem. But nobody here has done that.

We have quite subtly slipped into an age where we can get all sorts of things beamed into our personal space in an instant through the internet, and that is good, providing we can differentiate between what is real and what is not. Everybody is very welcome to enjoy (or not enjoy) "non-real" things, but forcing real people to emulate these non-real fantasies when they do not wish to is the problem. So you must equally not force a person to shy away from prettying themselves up and siting in a tree half naked if that's what makes them feel good. We have HD TV nowadays but none of us see the world in HD, there are men out there who like women with chests that are (as you claim) 'too big' but don't view women with smaller chests any less and can enjoy and even share their tastes without being demeaning.

tl;dr. Boobies are boobies, live and let live. I like the technical content, trees and space suits are difficult.

Saul's comments were his honest feedback and critizism of Marcel's work. Although he saw more in the picture then I ever did!
My impression of the response is similiar to someone's reaction to a clown painting on black velvet. Why cheapen good work by adding a sexy woman into an already impressive scene? To a "fine artist" this would be considered the "Clown on Black Velvet" look. To a Commercial artist it is a "Sex sells" reason.
Marcel is not trying to do either so what the heck. I too don't think it adds substance to his already impressive work but I don't mind Marcel having fun either.

Renderosity.com is a perfect example of giving your grandfather the tools to create "art" by inserting a half naked model (purchased with a 40% off coupon!) and having other "artist" tell you that your the next Rembrandt.

As someone who has sat half naked in a tree, the only ones who found it sexy were the mosquitoes.

So I put my shirt back on and kept going.

Which seems like good advice for all involved.

In the past I too discussed (with professionals) things that seem futile today. There are so many people who know everything and do nothing. This annoyed me for a few years but now it amuses me. I do illustrations for the fun. I appreciate this forum, and I have nothing against anyone. Have a good day.
Now it's time to do another image. I do not speak, I act.

RAYMAN wrote: no offense against you Saul..

I am not offended Rayman, if we can't have plain speaking there is no point to our forum. We are not here to stroke each others ego's.........
I don't think freedom of speech is at risk. Marcel is strong and committed and not about to crumble when confronted with criticism of his work.
There is lots of work on this site and elsewhere that i have similar feelings about but i don't wish to discourage anyone, so, I hope, by speaking to the strong, i can have influence on the weak.
That sounds pompous but you get my drift?))

great work as always marcel