Female figure on curved up background (not suited for work)

kwistenbiebel

Just don't go wild Biebel!

Ah some subtle nudity....I hope the internet isn't entering some Victorian age.
A naked body is just a beautiful thing.

I have no intention in making it pornographic in any way...
although I have a good pornographic memory...or was that a photographic memory......with me it kind of relates to the same thing I'm afraid

Gaieus

I didn't mean to be "Victorian" - was just joking...
And yes, the renders are indeed nice.

ehaflett

Awesome work, Biebel, I'm dumbfounded.

Did these renders motivate anyone else to readTHIS POST ?

boofredlay

Eric... Booooooo

mateo soletic

Where is that 3ds model ??
By the way nice work.

Frederik

What a nice model, Chris!
You're a true artist...

kwistenbiebel

Thanks!

...And the last one of the series.
The image is meant to emphasize on the beauty of the female body and not to be disrespectful. if people would find this last image to be offensive I'll kindly remove it. (I hope not though).

Cheers and thanks for watching,

Kwistenbiebel

RAW Fryrender output:

solo

It was just a matter of time...LOL

She has a pet.

kwistenbiebel

It's merely a shadow

nomeradona

christ,

the viewpoints you have shared here are much even surprising... excellent.

kwistenbiebel

Thanks Nomer,
I wish I had your artist skills and use these images as a starting point for a real painting...
I did do some paintings some years ago, but I can't control oilpaint that well as you can.

Phil Rader AIA

Can you explain a bit of the process for FryRender. Is it a standalone renderer? do you export the image from SU and import it to Fry. Is there a plugin for SU to work directly with Fry?

Just curious how it compares to VRAY or Maxwell

kwistenbiebel

Fry has a Sketchup plugin that contains a pulldown menu and an icon bar.
When you have a material selected in SU's material list and click on the Fry paintbucket icon the Fry material editor pops up. Sun and sky setup has it's own panel, just as the general settings and camera panel.

It takes some getting used to, but after some experimentation it works quite smoothly.
You start the rendering by choosing the export>3dmodel>Fryrender in the file menu of SU.

Once the export is done the FRY standalone GUI will pop up and the rendering starts.
That GUI has a 3D viewport where you can change the view and you can also change mlaterials/environment/camera/render settings over there (actually the same things you can set up through the Plugin itself).
The Fry standalone isn't as elaborate as the Maxwell studio as the developers wanted to make a 100% 'render from host' product.

You can download a demo on the Fryrender.com website.
It is fully operational (though the size image is max.800X600 and watermarked ).

Cheers,
Kwistenbiebel

Jackson

@kwistenbiebel said:

The image is meant to emphasize on the beauty of the female body and not to be disrespectful.
It's not so much emphasizing the female body as emphasizing a particular part of the female body. I'm not offended, but that last pic (and to a lesser extent the first one) is a bit tasteless IMO.

Stinkie

With all due respect, I firmly disagree. If Christ's renders would have been pornographic, then you'd have a valid point. But are they pornographic? In my opinion: no. They merely show a naked body. Nothing wrong with that: the nude has been an artistic genre for centuries.

Maybe it's because I studied art, but these images seem fairly 'common' to me. They're just your average tasteful, even bourgeois nudes. (Not meaning to insult you here, Christ.)

kwistenbiebel

Thank god for the open minded people. (cheers Stinkie )

Personally I had it with the negative comments from the moderators.
Too much nude, not enough Sketchup...
Anything else?
You're pushing me away here.

boofredlay

@kwistenbiebel said:

Personally I had it with the negative comments from the moderators.

Hey, don't lump us all in one single minded category here
The only comment I made was a Booo to Eric's bad joke.
I like the images. At first I thought to myself: "There is no way this is computer generated". So I had to look closer

kwistenbiebel

Thanks Tom and Eric.

@Eric, I should have said 'some' moderators.

tomsdesk

IMHO: the thread title is enough warning for the faint of...well, taste. (Though I will admit my first impression was other than "what a nice rendering of a really accurate 3d model", since it actually is an amazingly realistic rendering of a perfectly realistic 3d model :`)

If we didn't know what is was and what it took to produce, then maybe I'd wonder why the image is here...but we do. And so: WOW! Nice work, indeed!

Jackson

@unknownuser said:

With all due respect, I firmly disagree. If Christ's renders would have been pornographic, then you'd have a valid point. But are they pornographic? In my opinion: no. They merely show a naked body. Nothing wrong with that: the nude has been an artistic genre for centuries.

Maybe it's because I studied art, but these images seem fairly 'common' to me. They're just your average tasteful, even bourgeois nudes. (Not meaning to insult you here, Christ.)

I also studied at art school for 7 years so I'm by no means prudish when it comes to artistic nudes. Please note my criticism was directed at only two of the images: the ones that are centred predominately on the genital area of the figure. If you were to analyse these images from an artistic standpoint, the choice of "camera" angle is vital in interpreting them, so my criticism is valid IMO. Maybe I'm being more critical than others as I used to frequent the Renderosity forums a lot for Vue tips and was frustrated by the overwhelming number of renders there of nude and lingerie-clad female Poser figures (usually unrealistically skinny, with enormous breasts and practically teenage faces ). There is no doubt in my mind that the renders on Renderosity are soft porn and frankly made what was otherwise a very good CG forum feel somewhat tacky and creepy. I'm not saying that Christ's renders fall into that category, but judging by Renderosity it's a fine line when nude renders start being posted before they start flooding in and their content becomes more questionable.

@kwistenbiebel said:

Personally I had it with the negative comments from the moderators.
Too much nude, not enough Sketchup...
Anything else?
You're pushing me away here.
Christ, I don't know what to say other than what's wrong with a bit of negative criticism, whether it's from moderators or not? You can hardly say we're being unfair as we've praised your other work plenty of times. Coen's criticism of posting images of purely imported geometry is valid- this is an SU site, so geometry created solely in other software is not really relevant here. Of course we all import and export stuff, floor plans, topography, figures, etc, but when the entire featured geometry wasn't in any way modelled in SU then this isn't really the place for it.

Like "Stinkie" you seem to have misread my post and assumed I have some issue with "too much nude"- it's nothing to do with "too much nude"; if I must spell it out I felt there was too much focus on the perineum in the 1st image and on the vulva in that 4th to be tasteful.

@kwistenbiebel said:

if people would find this last image to be offensive I'll kindly remove it. (I hope not though).
So why the threat of "You're pushing me away here." when I post some criticism of it? I didn't even ask you to remove it!

Seriously, this shouldn't turn into a big deal, it's simply a minor reminder from one moderator that posted work should be SU based and a criticism from me (in a non-moderator role) regarding the camera angle in a couple of renders.