• This forum is specifically for the discussion of factual science and technology. When the topic moves to speculation, then it needs to also move to the parent forum, Science Fiction and Fantasy (SF/F).

    If the topic of a discussion becomes political, even remotely so, then it immediately does no longer belong here. Failure to comply with these simple and reasonable guidelines will result in one of the following.
    1. the thread will be moved to the appropriate forum
    2. the thread will be closed to further posts.
    3. the thread will remain, but the posts that deviate from the topic will be relocated or deleted.
    Thank you for understanding.​

This woman...

Ordinary_Guy

Industrial Strength
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
473
Reaction score
54
Location
Burbank, CA, USA
Website
www.facebook.com
Wild. Give it another 5 years and she'll be animateable... much to the consternation of every working actor on the planet...

...Which vaguely reminds me of that section from The Running Man (King/de Sauza) where they sup in Ah-nold's face over an unlucky live actor...
 

Pthom

Word butcher
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,013
Reaction score
1,207
Location
Oregon
Computer generated image or real picture?
Both. It is a digitally manipulated 3D render. The computer did not generate the image, it only assisted in manipulating one. Without the use of real textures and significant involvement on behalf of the artist (human, not computer), this image wouldn't exist.

As far as I am aware, there are no true computer generated images that look remotely as realistic as does this one. On the other hand, this is an amazing image that could not be produced without the assistance of a computer.
 

PeeDee

Where's my tea, please...?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
11,724
Reaction score
2,085
Website
peterdamien.com
There's a video game, whose name I can't remember (despite my twenty minutes of Googling) which released a trailer of a woman talking as an audition for a part. It was all in-game graphics. They were incredibly advanced.

And yet....the crowd responded negatively to it, because despite the really advanced graphics (and the near realism of it all) there was something abuot the near-realism and something about her eyes (lifeless, they were reported) that put the crowd off. The video game developers had backfired and made a game too realistic.

I'll keep trying to find the trailer. It's worth watching.
 

Shadow_Ferret

Court Jester
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
23,708
Reaction score
10,657
Location
In a world of my own making
Website
shadowferret.wordpress.com
The strands of hair hanging down around her head look fuzzy and out of focus. The rest of her looks real enough though.

well, except for her eyebrows.

And now that I look closely, there's something not quite right about her nose.

And the shadows on her face seems odd.

And gah! Her ear is just grody.
 

PeeDee

Where's my tea, please...?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
11,724
Reaction score
2,085
Website
peterdamien.com
I should also mention, the YouTube clip seems to have a bit of a sound problem. It's not syncing up properly. Be assured, that's YouTube and not the game.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
Both

Both would have been my guess. She looks real, but she also looks fake.
 

Jamesaritchie

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
27,863
Reaction score
2,311
Both. It is a digitally manipulated 3D render. The computer did not generate the image, it only assisted in manipulating one. Without the use of real textures and significant involvement on behalf of the artist (human, not computer), this image wouldn't exist.

As far as I am aware, there are no true computer generated images that look remotely as realistic as does this one. On the other hand, this is an amazing image that could not be produced without the assistance of a computer.

I don't know. I've met real women who looked every bit this good, and I've seen photos that were every bit this good, probably better, long before there was such a thing as computer manipulation. I don't really see anything all that special here.
 

WildScribe

Slave to the Wordcount
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
6,189
Reaction score
729
Location
Purgatory
Her hair and shirt look computer gen, but all in all it is scary.
 

WildScribe

Slave to the Wordcount
Poetry Book Collaborator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
6,189
Reaction score
729
Location
Purgatory

loquax

I verb nouns adverbly
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,064
Reaction score
165
CG has got to the point where it's hard to tell the difference between real and fake. But then again, so has photorealistic painting, which has been around a lot longer than CG.

The thing they've yet to crack is animation, which is why people don't take videogame screenshots that seriously any more. I remember a really positive reaction to the new Tiger Woods game - that the figure looked almost indistinguishable from the real guy. Unfortunately when he moved his face he looked like an android from a horror movie.
 

PeeDee

Where's my tea, please...?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
11,724
Reaction score
2,085
Website
peterdamien.com
The thing they've yet to crack is animation, which is why people don't take videogame screenshots that seriously any more. I remember a really positive reaction to the new Tiger Woods game - that the figure looked almost indistinguishable from the real guy. Unfortunately when he moved his face he looked like an android from a horror movie.

And yet, some of the animation is really, really good. For example, the Grand Theft Auto games have gorgeous animation, yet the graphics have always been shoddy.

(although the teaser trailer for GTA: IV looks gorgeous)
 

Lycius

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
221
Reaction score
9
Location
Seattle, WA
Website
brynsaar.com
I don't know. I've met real women who looked every bit this good, and I've seen photos that were every bit this good, probably better, long before there was such a thing as computer manipulation. I don't really see anything all that special here.

That would be because you apparently don't know anything about 3D modeling or animations.

You can't take a photograph and animate it. You CAN take that image and animate it because it's not a picture. It's a 3D model. Making a 3D rendering that you pretty much can't differentiate from an actual photograph takes incredible talent.
 

Nangleator

Rep Point Whore
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
408
Reaction score
59
Location
Dracut, Massachusetts
I am a 3D professional, and I visit sites daily that have similar works in progress from professionals and hobbyists. The quality doesn't surprise me, and sometimes it takes a very good eye to tell the difference between real and 3D.

With inanimate objects, give up. I've fooled myself with some of my own work. I wouldn't enter any 'guess the 3D picture' contests.

Check out this tutorial, if you like. It's a fantasy character, but the realism is right up there with the original post.
 

Nangleator

Rep Point Whore
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
408
Reaction score
59
Location
Dracut, Massachusetts
It's called "Heavy Rain."
That's some butt ugly animation.

In their defense, it looks like it's real-time rendered on game hardware, and in that case, developed under a tight deadline. That makes it far from cutting edge animation.

Steven Hagg Stahlberg did better stuff all alone back in the last millenium.