In aesthetics, the uncanny valley is a hypothesized relationship between the degree of an object's resemblance to a human being and the emotional response to such an object. The concept of the uncanny valley suggests humanoid objects which appear almost, but not exactly, like real human beings elicit uncanny, or strangely familiar, feelings of eeriness and revulsion in observers. Valley denotes a dip in the human observer's affinity for the replica, a relation that otherwise increases with the replica's human likeness.Examples can be found in robotics, 3D computer animations, and lifelike dolls among others. With the increasing prevalence of virtual reality, augmented reality, and photorealistic computer animation, the 'valley' has been cited in the popular press in reaction to the verisimilitude of the creation as it approaches indistinguishability from reality. The uncanny valley hypothesis predicts an entity appearing almost human risks eliciting cold, eerie feelings in viewers.Post examples.
>>659118Almost out.Human skin texture + shaders massive hardAnimation very hard.
>>659120damn that's almost too detailed
>>659118heres a good example of uncanny
>>659169That's obviously not real, how is that uncanny? Looks like a game model.>>659175Nice model
>>659195Your brain is still gonna try to associate that with a real girl. Im not going to look at that and think it's trying to be anything else. There's no intentional effort to make it not realistic. It only looks "stylized" because of the lack of skill of the artist.
>>659196I must have played too much video games, no characters I've ever seen have elicited that feeling. Some realdolls did though, but they're almost literal corpses.
The eyes usually make or break a model.So far never got closer than like 85% to reality in terms of eyes.
>>659169Oh hey, its that creeepy as fuck uncanny model again
>>659846There's nothing uncanny about it; it's obviously CGI. The arms even go into the body, ffs.
>>659118To me it seems what people call the uncanny valley is mainly caused when an object reaches a degree of fidelity where you could imagine it being alive but it moves/behaves in ways that look alien.It's not so much wheter your models looks real or not, it's when you mix signals indicating the presence of a conscience with indicators of a lack thereof it happens.I used to have a girlfriend that had this flaw in her eyelids causing her eyes to come half open sometimes while she was asleep. Waking up and looking at her face like that was more uncanny than any creepy jap-o-botics or daztistic renders I've seen.I bet if on one hand we had a shitty rubbery looking poser android that we animated perfectly so all it's joints moved just like a regular persons.And on the other had a real living person who somehow could move and twist about at these odd motor rates with no feeling of discomfort in their jointscausing them to subtly shift and relax their posture naturally as living creatures do. When compared which was the most uncanny I'd be very surprised if the android lost.The idea that this valley happens as a function of approaching realism in terms of geometry and texure/shading but not quite getting there seem very flawed to me.It's other factors that comes into play which if unaddressed means you are approaching the creation of a highly life-like corpse.
>>659169That model scores very low on uncanniness for me. What's super creepy is someone made a model of what appears to be a 10 year old girl that has the body of a young teenager.You simply don't give that much ass to a kid unless you are one depraved kiddiefiddler of a artist.
>>659855Obviously its a stylization and not a representation of an actual human. You can tell by looking at the skin texture and how smooth it is. (100% this is what the creator would say if I didn't post this)
>>659855Looks can be deceiving
>>659856there's no style to that model. Its an amateur attempt at realism with stylization being the excuse for incompetence.
>>659943Yep, but the guy also uses game assets in his work then tries to say that hes better than other people because he thinks they use Daz morphs.
>>659943You probably think pic related is attempting realism too. You clearly are confused in your definitions.
>>659946Wow. How can you aim for your own style if you don't even use your own assets?>>659947Its a realistic version of young ellen page. What style would you call this? When did this art style become popular? When did your brain fall out?
>>659950It's not even Ellen Page you dummy. You do understand that in video games the style is not just in the modelling, right? Shading and texturing plays a much greater part in the style of a game.Can't see beyond the artistic term of "stylized", it's your brain that's stuck on the same gear.
>>659954you still havent told me what style this model is supposed to look like. Who are you to decide it would be a good idea to redefine "style" when talking about game art?
>>659954>he still thinks that style as it relates to art doesn't have anything to do with thisGuys nobody would think this was supposed to represent an actual human! I mean look at it. Its obviously made out of marble.
>>659960Fortnite characters are meant to represent humans. Are you really this thick?
>>659960That same human bust can be done in many different styles, all of which depict a human. You're really confused.
>>659963fortnight characters are humans modeled with cartoon/anime style as a primary goal. Is this difficult to understand?I just wanna test if you're retareded real quick but what are left 4 dead characters styled after?
>>659169OH my.Stiff to all
>>659966You keep moving the goalposts, it's pointless answering to someone this simple minded.First it's about depicting humans, then it's about realism, then it's about depicting humans in a way that suits your tastes, etc.
>>659966>fortnite>animemust be the shit kind of anime they take inspiration from, you know the kind that is produced in Canada or France and isn't Anime at all.
>>659963>>659964But you don't understand the goal of the artist, beyond the "i fucked up therefore its stylized" that you can see a lot.Cartoon characters are not reprentations of actual humans they are a rough representations of a "human".Heres a stylized sculpture. Notice how it still is a human but is it an ACTUAL HUMAN?An important thing that you don't understand is some of the stuff you have pointed out is CG that was not at all bad at the time, but due to advancements and how much we are exposed to CG dated CG looks very CG. I still remember ps2 pre rendered weebshit cutscenes in more detail than they had because they just seemed so spectacular at the time.>>659972Not him, but you don't understand. Realism in human depiction based on the means at the time and artist intention are what defines stylization.
>>659975(responding to myself)What I mean with intention and means is this:If an artist in current year with current technology goes out and says "i'm going to draw a realistic human" and they draw an cartoon character, they have failed.If >>659169 was made with the intention of being a non realistic style you have failed and it would be incredibly obvious. Using any argument that its inherently not realistic because its not real, like you have done before, is an inability to handle critique. IE "its obviously CG"Humans don't look like pic related, but our brains see them as human. It is more or less human caricature or an exaggerated depiction of a human. Not an ACTUAL HUMAN. Know the difference it might just save your life one day.
>>659975The problem here is the juxtaposition of positions and debates.First, it's about the "Uncanny" claim.And then the whole stylization question.When a model is so close and so well done, yet not quite. It's 99% there, but something is missing and it's throwing off the entire illusion. That's the unease.
>>659978I was just baiting the artist out by making fun of him like the guy that posted it in this thread because i'm pretty sure the artist also made the thread and is responsible for most of the posts therein.The model, however, does have the uncanny effect to me. Uncanny factors are added when you put the model under animation. Most notably its creepy eyes constantly staring at the viewer. If you haven't noticed the eyes its because you're a pedophile who only stared at the models "assets"
>>659972I keep having to move it because you can't name any of the "styles" you're showing people. What style is Elle from the last of us representing? Are you the artist of the pedo model? Because you're acting just as dellusuonal.
>>65997799%+ of any renders, game model, CG shots, you know right away it's fake, but depicts a real human. Even stylized humans are seen as depictions of humans. >>659120 is probably the first model i've seen that isn't glaringly obvious CGI
>>659980The eyes are staring sure, what I notice the most is some kind of weird moments where the head seems to be still and the body rotates under it.I still don't get an uncanny feeling, it's just a tween rotating weirdly.
>>659947Same model, different end result
>>659120this is fucking stellar work though
>>659990Both going for realism style. This one is shit.
>>660065So now it's clear now, all you care about is lighting. You care more about the surroundings and what makes a scene than the assets used.
>>660093You rigged her eyes like shit, put her in an awkward pose, and now you're somehow proud of your shitty lighting. If you dont think lighting doesn't contribute to uncannyness, you're hopeless.
>>659990That is going for realism, falling short, and staying obviously CGI.
>>660129Uncanny does not mean "looks fake". Eyes are rigged fine, and she's just standing there, how's that awkward? Realism comes from lighting a lot more than from materials and meshes. That was the point. >>660130Game model going for realism will always remain obvious CGI
>>660131>Game model going for realism will always remain obvious CGI
>>660131Eyelids should move with the eyeball slightly when moving. Otherwise there's an unnatural looking stress on the eyelids.Who stands like that for a photo? Is that how you look in photographs?
>>659118Any Daz Renderhttps://www.artstation.com/artwork/QzK9DrVs>>659120https://www.artstation.com/artwork/rRll1e
>>659990she looks malnourished
Anyone here seen the new DMC5 trailer?the males look fine while the females look off.Is it a scanning fuck up or something else?
>>660396I think the emotes are probably just shit, the men all have straight faces and those smiles on the ladies are creepy.
>>660399Is it because the mo cap actors arent the same as the face model?or is it because they didn't scan deformation for the emotes?
>>660396>>660399This. Smiles are notoriously difficult to reproduce in 3D because of all the odd little facial minutiae that's really hard to capture. And without them the entire thing just slams into Uncanny.
>>659120Autor now had twitter account and short videohttps://www.artstation.com/artwork/GX1XnVhttps://www.twitter.com/Yokohara_h
>>661292https://www.artstation.com/artwork/VzGOghttps://youtu.be/189hDdb_nYI>this is all 3dfuckin npr
>>659125this one is good
>>659120Damn, great render, wonky anatomyIts so close, but that doll face and unifrom texture ruins it
>>659169Need better resolution
>>659120>All that effort and technological progress to give 3d women beardsWhat timeline are we in lads?
What is X? What is the best realism before dropping into the valley?
>>659120>>659118>Animation very hardAnimation is the key to overcoming the uncanny valley, not the fidelity of the render or the model. Humans have incredible ability to discern whether a something is alive or dead. If the animation is not perfect, then it just looks like a cadaver being moved around by a puppeteer.If you can have authentic movements, constraints, etc., especially if you can authentically mimic a person you recognize, people can forgive shitty lighting and textures.Whoever gets this completely right will be the next big tech company. These guys are getting pretty close:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vo_FALeUc8c
>>664258It's not possible to portray it correctly with only still images. The uncanny valley thing only really kicks in when you animate models.
>>664258Think the uncanny valley is something that happens but also a bit of a myth as a concept for how we interpret and understand the phenomenon. As you approach reality you add more and more details to your model, which means there is more and more things for you to potentially get wrong. This simply means the potential for making an uncanny faces is at the maximum where you attempt to display all the features present on a real face but end up making a mockery out of every single one of them.If an artist capable of making a 99% real face built intermediate models going from realistic to cartoon I doubt we'd see any magical dip between 'real face' and their 'Ciri in Witcher' type face.Thus the 'uncanny valley' effect is a myth skilled artist will tell themselves as an excuse when they outstretch their capacity to account for the increasingly subtle nuances.Instead of owing up to the fact they can't play on that level yet they attribute the failure to being on the downward slope of this make-belief valley.For people on the side the valley will look real as you will have all this clearly skilled artists turn out creepy looking faces as they are attempting to learn how to make them.But notice how it's never the case that these people can actually make reality already and just aren't using enough of it, they are pushing their own extremes and failing.
>>660396Don't forget you're dealing with dev's who are often now women and they put their own touch on the women to uglify them just in with the newest mass effect and other modern games.They take those hot ass super models and just shit on them post scan because it's all about stepping away from idealized female beauty. (bitches be jealous)
>>659120Why she has pubes in her chin?
>>663125Just the hair is off, and her face looks oily as fuck. otherwise it looks amazing to me
>>666120This is peach fuzz, also called vellus hair. Everyone has it to a varying degree and it's generally more visible if you don't shave or depilate closely. Visibility also depends on light conditions.
>>659855It's not uncommon for 10-11 year old pubescent girls to have bodies like this. What you are saying is just a stupid meme that lolicons throw around as a defense mechanism. "haha i cant be a pedo because little girls cant have an ass like that"
>>663125>>666203The subsurface scattering is way overdone aswell, looks like her head is made out of wax.
>>666469>https://www.artstation.com/artwork/nQ4eAeIs that a Daz model?
>>659856>stylizationStylized has just become a word shitty artists use to justify their shitty art.
>>667858The customer is also to blame. They eat it up like the thirsty mofos they are. All that Fortnite plastic garbage works so well with the kiddies, no wonder people make more of it.
Did someone say "uncanny valley"?
>>668041Looks like all these indistinguishable Victoria 4 variants over the years.
>>667858stylized art is actually harder than realistic art, yknow? :^
>>668161Not from a technical point. Nothing is more complex than replicating nature itself. This is why the old masters painted years on single pieces and were still never satisfied.
>>668041first off i don't anything against eastern european woman but that's not what i think should be the standard of beauty.half of them look like meth addicts that haven't slept for a week. its interesting how everyone is pushing for diversity in work but when it comes to this no one fucking peeps
>>659118https://www.artstation.com/artwork/4blaqleveryday gets better
>>671033As attractive as a wax apple
>>666120Do you know what pubes look like?
>>671058So... is it a fraud, then? Just some decent sculpting and the magic of projection painting? With such a model I would expect a turnaround with different lighting setups.
>>659118Using Arnold SSS random walkhttps://www.artstation.com/artwork/gJO3qQ
>>659118How is that uncanny valley when I've legitimately seen retards that look like this?
>>659919how does he unrip his pants like that?also how can you be attracted to a knock-off anime girl? why not just get the real deal
>>673345most of his pieces are better than this one
Dany from gothttps://www.artstation.com/artwork/rR0rk2https://vimeo.com/328624967?from=outro-embed
>>668041Bar Refaeli is easily the best one.The rest of them look like their face was being pulled out
http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?175202-Bond-James-Bond/page10Very close to being indistinguishable from a real life photo
>>679685Yup. Now let's make it in a neutral pose, add a facial rig, and have it animate believably.
>>668041the lense used for this is awful
>>679685Can't wait to see more Hollywood trash, now with dead people in it
>>668041Natasha "Poly" Lol.
>>679691Some of them have a diamond shaped/fetal alcohol syndrome face. Not related to lens difference.
>>660396This: >>665941Bitches wreck females in games nowadays on purpose.
>>665941>>681303There def some of that going on tho I doubt that is the reason why.The few female artists and quite a few female gamers I know all like to make their fem characters look cool, which means they go for beauty.What looks cool to them somewhat tend to differ from what a horny male might've chosen (more tastefully dressed, subtler make-up, less over-sexed proportions)But they def not trying to make their characters look weird or ugly or less beautiful than they themselves are.It's just fucking weird developers are heading down that street. I believe the outrage over female depictions in games (if there even is any)must originate with people with mostly blue hair that doesn't even play videogames but spend a lot of time and effort making noises on social media.Based on the people I know it just seems insane to think female gamers would like to look ugly.
>>668041A thousand times this >>679691 You wanna make someone look really flattering in a headshot take it with a 135mm lens from 4-5m away.Even a true goddess will look all tarded if you take her headshot with what appears to be a 15mm lens at a metre distance.You know this is some kind of "This is what we look like everyday, heu hah" they put in some magazine to make some insecure bitches think beauty products can be sprinkled like fairy dust onto their wonky faces altering their entire facial geometry to something catwalk ready.If i was a lady reading one of them mags and came across this shit my vagina would turn inside out to form a furious rage boner at them thinking I can't see what they're doing. And it's not just the lens either they really use the most awful lighting they can get away with to really shrekify their stable of models.
>>675802uncanney valley seems to stem from not introducing enough subtle imperfections. CG looks too clean.like picture shown, the face is 100% symetrically just the texture isnt.-no bumps/pimples on the face-all the hair looks like its just sprouting from the skin no hair bumps-no creasing/mini wrinking around the eye folds and lipsyou know what they say...God is in the details