Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

I read in the production blog how Grievous had to be modeled entirely in the computer as the first step, because obviously his parts are too mechanical to be shaped by hand. I have also read that the sculptors at Sideshow use a wax medium to sculpt their human heads. While the sculpts are impressive to say the least, do you think the likeness of an actor's face could be better developed if drawn in the computer first, like the PF Grievous?

That way, the model could be continually compared to archive photos of the actor taken at various angles. (Harrison Ford and the profile shot in the other thread comes to mind) Would it be easier to tweak the individual facial proportions to come closer to the real actor's face?

Sideshow and everyone else, what do you guys think?

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better acheived through computer modeling first?

I am torn about this. There's a lot of discussion about scanning vs. sculpting by freehand and although companies like gentle giant "cheat" and does computer scanning, I think the sculpting is what makes sideshow the company that it is. Their sculptors are some of the best and frankly, I think 90% of time it even closer in likeness to the computer scanned toys and collectibles we get. Grievous is a different kind of sculpt, more technical with lots of parts. I'm not sure I understand the computer modeling issue, but I am quite happy with the results of the sculpts so far. The Star Wars line has been 8/10 across the board in terms of likeness. Good sculpts are not just ones with good likeness, but ones with some character features that show through with their expression or look. Some scanned stuff looks... scanned and not as animated. GG's C3PO looks very scanned because it is. I don't know if the Lurtz 1/4 PF scanned version would come close to that menacing look that emanates from a freehand sculpt.

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

Perhaps a computer sculpt first and then a touch up by a sclpter to improve it would be the best? So far, I'm thrilled with the likenesses of the Star Wars figures. Afterall, I was used to the crap Hasbro was putting out.

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

I think it's a point of pride for Sideshow that they achieve the results that they do without the aid of computers, and rightly so, in my opinion. I prefer the hand sculpted figures. It feels more like I am purchasing a hand crafted piece of art rather than a computer rendered piece of merchandise. There seems to be little room for artistic expression when capturing someone's likeness involves nothing more than pressing the "scan" button. An artist makes choices in sculpting--a computer crunches numbers. I guess it comes down to a matter of preference: Do you want an exact duplication of the actor, or an artist's interpretation and unique expression? Both have their own advantages and disadvantages.

I'm not talking about scanning at all. I'm talking about working out the correct proportions of a character's face by drawing it in computer software. I can imagine that sculpting correctly proportioned faces in 1/6 or 1/4 scale is rather difficult because of the small area to work with. But with computer modeling software, the face can be zoomed in to be as large as the artist wants while they create the model. I admit that I am naive when it comes to this subject, but I do know that there are machines that can produce 3-D plastic molds of objects directly from models drawn in software. I have seen these machines first-hand at a college campus.

I am in no way saying hand sculpts are bad. I'm just saying that maybe the facial proportions can be more accurately achieved if they are drawn in a computer modeler first so that the artist can better capture these proportions in the final sculpt.

Again, I want to emphasize that I was never talking about scanning faces. I, myself, would not want that either.

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

JustinLuck said:

I read in the production blog how Grievous had to be modeled entirely in the computer as the first step, because obviously his parts are too mechanical to be shaped by hand. I have also read that the sculptors at Sideshow use a wax medium to sculpt their human heads. While the sculpts are impressive to say the least, do you think the likeness of an actor's face could be better developed if drawn in the computer first, like the PF Grievous?

That way, the model could be continually compared to archive photos of the actor taken at various angles. (Harrison Ford and the profile shot in the other thread comes to mind) Would it be easier to tweak the individual facial proportions to come closer to the real actor's face?

Sideshow and everyone else, what do you guys think?

Click to expand...

To Start with.............GRIEVOUS from the begining was a Computer Model there was never a "REAL" Prototipe there was never a prop from him in the set he was a COMPLETE CGI creature...................so he was not SCAN........

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

if the computer generated sculpt isnt going to be output in any 3D form I think it would be a waste of production time since the 3D file would just be used for reference photos which would serve the same purpose as the real photos.
Although if real reference photos were difficult to obtain, it may be worthwhile to do this.
Im sure it would bite in to SS's profit margin also for a set-up to output 3D sculpts

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

Again, I want to emphasize that I was never talking about scanning faces. I, myself, would not want that either.

Click to expand...

I see now. Well, if using a computer helped a sculptor to create their version from scratch, then it would be up to them whether or not to take advantage of it. If the CG image was being created from scratch as well, then the usefulness would depend upon the accuracy of the created computer model.

If it was accurate, then it might be helpful, but if not then it might send the artist off in the wrong direction. I suppose that basing a sculpt off of a live scan would be basically the same thing as looking at hundreds of pictures from all angles. Using computers as a resource to aid the sculptor is different from using computers to create the sculpt. Sorry if I misread your idea.

Spenk...once again...I never mentioned scanning. Please read my post before replying.
Thanks.

Occulum, yes I agree with you, and that is why I mentioned the machines that can produce plastic molds from 3-D rendered drawings.

I guess the whole point of this thread was to say:

First, Andy and all of the other sculptors at Sideshow are obviously extremely talented artists. I am more than impressed with the majority of prototype heads I have seen on Sideshow's website.

But I also realize that it must be very difficult to sculpt accurately proportioned faces at such small scales (1/4 and 1/6). Otherwise, all of us would be looking at the Han Solo PF and saying "OMG, that is a miniature 1977 Harrison Ford!" I think the profile comparison pic clearly shows that improvements could be made. Especially in his eyes, nose, and jawline.



So, I am just thinking of ways that could help Sideshow's artists better achieve these difficult facial attributes at these relatively small 1/4 and 1/6 scales.

JustinLuck said:

Occulum, yes I agree with you, and that is why I mentioned the machines that can produce plastic molds from 3-D rendered drawings.

I guess the whole point of this thread was to say:

First, Andy and all of the other sculptors at Sideshow are obviously extremely talented artists. I am more than impressed with the majority of prototype heads I have seen on Sideshow's website.

But I also realize that it must be very difficult to sculpt accurately proportioned faces at such small scales (1/4 and 1/6). Otherwise, all of us would be looking at the Han Solo PF and saying "OMG, that is a miniature 1977 Harrison Ford!" I think the profile comparison pic clearly shows that improvements could be made. Especially in his eyes, nose, and jawline.

So, I am just thinking of ways that could help Sideshow's artists better achieve these difficult facial attributes at these relatively small 1/4 and 1/6 scales.

Click to expand...

You are completly right you could make corrections based on the pic.........But Sculpting is a very dificult task............. ..........

SpenK said:

You are completly right you could make corrections based on the pic.........But Sculpting is a very dificult task............. ..........

Click to expand...

Yes, especially when sculpting at such small scales (when the face is barely larger than your thumb). That is why I am suggesting drawn computer models of the faces, to help escape the physical limits of the 1/4 and 1/6 scales.

This isn't a good example, because I'd say that 90% of the reaction to the Han PF has been "that's '77 Harrison Ford!".

As to the question, I can't imagine that a computer created likeness that ISN'T a scan would be of any use to a sculptor that they couldn't get from reference pics. It's not an exact science. Otherwise they'd call it "science" instead of "art."

But that said, SSC does occasionally use scans for likenesses if they are available.

JustinLuck said:

First, Andy and all of the other sculptors at Sideshow are obviously extremely talented artists. I am more than impressed with the majority of prototype heads I have seen on Sideshow's website.

Click to expand...

I'd like to be a fly on the wall at some of the meetings Im sure happen frequently over these issues.
Im sure its tough to satisfy the customers in a way that also meets the likeness license holder's standards.

As far as the talent goes, I think it obvious SS recruits the best. I mean Im not even a big fan of Deadwood or busts, but I've wanted one of Andy's Al Swearengen's since I set eyes on it.
Andy's sculpts always look awesome ......... and then the factory puts paint on them and things change.
If it were only as easy to apply a good paint job repetitively as it is to pour a cast and replicate the quality of the original sculpt repetitively

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

If it were only as easy to apply a good paint job repetitively as it is to pour a cast and replicate the quality of the original sculpt repetitively.

Click to expand...

We have GOT to buy this gal a more comfortable chair. That might help... She could also try just holding one brush at a time.

Darklord Dave said:

This isn't a good example, because I'd say that 90% of the reaction to the Han PF has been "that's '77 Harrison Ford!".

As to the question, I can't imagine that a computer created likeness that ISN'T a scan would be of any use to a sculptor that they couldn't get from reference pics. It's not an exact science. Otherwise they'd call it "science" instead of "art."

But that said, SSC does occasionally use scans for likenesses if they are available.

Click to expand...

Yes, that is why I am guessing they can't get closer proportioned faces because of the limits of the medium. 1/4 and 1/6 are so small, it takes incredible eye-hand coordination to get them right. Drawing the figure in the computer with unlimited scale might be easier than having to hand sculpt such a small, diminutive face.

I guess it's possible to do a computer model of the face and then a 3D prototype of that model, but that's what's scans are for. It'd probably be easier to just use a current scan of the actor and de-age it. Ford has done enough films that he must have been scanned at some point.

But this also sounds wildy expensive and a really involved process.

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

Yikes! Stop posting that profile comparison will ya? It makes me sick to my stomach! Honestly, there is no excuse for the vast differences in those profiles other than the fact that it's just not a perfect sculpt, plain and simple (I'm the first to admit that). That was one of my earlier portraits w/ Sideshow, particularly in 1/4 scale.... I far from the best Ford likeness out there. I REALLY hope for a chance to revisit Ford's likeness at some point so I can apply what I've learned about portraiture to a new sculpt, hopefully I'll get to do that sometime soon.

As for the idea of creating a portrait digitally as JustinLuck suggests... Heck, it's really not a bad idea! However, it's not entirely different to some techniques that we already use, such as photographing the sculptures in-progress and zooming/cropping certain angles for comparison to the photo reference (in photoshop). Many of the advantages of the system that Justin suggests are easily available without the use of a 3D modeling program. BUT, it's not as much of a stretch as you might think. In fact, I believe Oluf has used this exact technique in the past for some of his portraits (the Capt. Kirk bust from the Star Trek line comes to mind). There are certain advantages to that technique that are indeed VERY helpful, much more so than the photoshop method I mentioned. For example, you can achieve perfect symmetry on your portrait in the computer, which is nearly impossible to achieve by hand.

Overall, the line between 'art' and 'science' has become extremely blurry within this industry over the past decade, which is not a bad thing.

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

I guess I'm the trouble maker... didn't quite understand the issue. Looking at the results so far, I would say unnecessary until the sculptor thinks it is. I agree that it should be the sculptor's choice... that's where art departs from science. Good judgment based on the inherent demands of the project.

Re: Could the likeness of an actor be better achieved through computer modeling first?

Sideshow Andy said:

Yikes! Stop posting that profile comparison will ya? It makes me sick to my stomach! Honestly, there is no excuse for the vast differences in those profiles other than the fact that it's just not a perfect sculpt, plain and simple (I'm the first to admit that). That was one of my earlier portraits w/ Sideshow, particularly in 1/4 scale.... I far from the best Ford likeness out there. I REALLY hope for a chance to revisit Ford's likeness at some point so I can apply what I've learned about portraiture to a new sculpt, hopefully I'll get to do that sometime soon.

Click to expand...

Artist's are always most critical of their own work than anyone else. This Han statue is still, by far, the best "Han" likeness released, and you should at least feel good about that. And, while I'd like for you to have your second shot at sculpting this character, I honestly cannot think of another version of Han I'd like to see made. There are just too many other character's I'd like to see before another Han. Maybe you'll get to do an Indy at some point.