Free 3D
3D Print Models
3D Scans
Animation & MoCap
Textures
Materials
Skin Reference
2D Game Assets
Sound Effects
Brushes & Tools
Reference Photos
Stock Images
HDR Images
3ds Max
Maya
Blender
Unreal Engine
Unity
ZBrush
Cinema 4D
LightWave
Marmoset
SketchUp
FBX
DAE
DXF
GLBAn Examination At The Increasing Similarity of Recent G9 Characters
506Thread Activity
Fire AngelFri, Apr 10
KlutzTue, Mar 10
MasterstrokeTue, Mar 10
MasterstrokeTue, Mar 10
Pushee-RiTue, Mar 10
TenserknotTue, Mar 10
Here are some of the latest Genesis 9 head morphs released between December 2024 and February 2026.
After studying them, a clear pattern emerges: many of these characters appear to rely on an almost identical base morph, with only minor proportional adjustments layered on top.
As you watch the next GIF, concentrate on just one feature during each loop: first the lips, then the nose, then the brow ridge...
The similarities become more and more obvious the longer you observe them.
Just by analyzing the first two heads in the GIFs, which are Sylvia and Valenia, the similarity is undeniable:
The comparison between Sylvia the Dryad (December 2024) and Valenia the "Dragoness" (November 2025) shows two characters separated by nearly a year of releases, yet structurally they are nearly indistinguishable. Bone structure, orbital shape, philtrum length, jaw taper, lip volume distribution... the underlying architecture is functionally the same.
This is not an isolated case. The same base structure appears to cycle through: Madison Haerin Audrey Brianna Leona
And again through: Cecelia Lyna Wendy Kayla Lauryn, in no particular order in any of both groups.
Despite different themes, skins, makeup, and marketing angles, the cranial proportions, facial planes, and soft tissue distribution repeatedly converge toward the same template. When someone says "yet another white girl", it's not hyperbole, the structural familiarity triggers recognition in the viewer's mind.
Then we have the Male characters:
The male releases show slightly more variation overall, but even there, the same Sylvia-Valenia phenomenon appears (e.g., Lucas, January 2025 > Charlie, March 2025 > Julian May 2025). The structural recycling is less aggressive, but still present.
When examining texture sets, the pattern continues.
In most cases, what is being sold as a new character primarily consists of:
You can verify this yourself.
Open the texture folder. Switch to "List with details." Check file creation and modification dates. The contents and the timeline tells its own story.
So the release pipeline is consistent:
Each release rebrands a familiar facial architecture with a new theme, perpetuating a design formula rationalized by the claim that it is what "sells the most."
The marketing changes. The geometry does not.
At a certain point, this can no longer be described as character development. It becomes systematic reuse.
When production volume takes precedence, originality declines. What we are witnessing is not iterative refinement. It is assembly line character design.
And this pattern is not limited to a handful of flagship characters, it reflects a broader production model increasingly visible across daily releases in general.
We are witnessing fast fashion applied to 3D assets.
After studying them, a clear pattern emerges: many of these characters appear to rely on an almost identical base morph, with only minor proportional adjustments layered on top.
As you watch the next GIF, concentrate on just one feature during each loop: first the lips, then the nose, then the brow ridge...
The similarities become more and more obvious the longer you observe them.
Just by analyzing the first two heads in the GIFs, which are Sylvia and Valenia, the similarity is undeniable:
The comparison between Sylvia the Dryad (December 2024) and Valenia the "Dragoness" (November 2025) shows two characters separated by nearly a year of releases, yet structurally they are nearly indistinguishable. Bone structure, orbital shape, philtrum length, jaw taper, lip volume distribution... the underlying architecture is functionally the same.
This is not an isolated case. The same base structure appears to cycle through: Madison Haerin Audrey Brianna Leona
And again through: Cecelia Lyna Wendy Kayla Lauryn, in no particular order in any of both groups.
Despite different themes, skins, makeup, and marketing angles, the cranial proportions, facial planes, and soft tissue distribution repeatedly converge toward the same template. When someone says "yet another white girl", it's not hyperbole, the structural familiarity triggers recognition in the viewer's mind.
Then we have the Male characters:
The male releases show slightly more variation overall, but even there, the same Sylvia-Valenia phenomenon appears (e.g., Lucas, January 2025 > Charlie, March 2025 > Julian May 2025). The structural recycling is less aggressive, but still present.
When examining texture sets, the pattern continues.
In most cases, what is being sold as a new character primarily consists of:
- A new Diffuse map with its SSS (sometimes highly detailed, sometimes noticeably soft and blurry).
- A Normal map that may add subtle detail, or none of significance (most releases are not even getting nipples or navels, relying on the 8K detail map from 2022).
- Roughness maps that are frequently reused from the original Genesis 9 2022 base release. (Some characters do include genuinely custom Roughness maps aligned with their Diffuse textures. But these are not the norm, they are the outliers.)
You can verify this yourself.
Open the texture folder. Switch to "List with details." Check file creation and modification dates. The contents and the timeline tells its own story.
So the release pipeline is consistent:
Each release rebrands a familiar facial architecture with a new theme, perpetuating a design formula rationalized by the claim that it is what "sells the most."
The marketing changes. The geometry does not.
At a certain point, this can no longer be described as character development. It becomes systematic reuse.
When production volume takes precedence, originality declines. What we are witnessing is not iterative refinement. It is assembly line character design.
And this pattern is not limited to a handful of flagship characters, it reflects a broader production model increasingly visible across daily releases in general.
We are witnessing fast fashion applied to 3D assets.
! REPORT
This is not new. My first few DAZ purchases (especially the males) were very similar to the base G8M model in it's entirety.. I would stack my new models in the same space as a base G8M. In many cases, the differences were subtle and visible as slight "bumps" to the base G8M. Honestly, based on the number of characters for sale, buyers appear happy to buy those subtle changes baked in instead of shopping for and fiddling with morphs. Personal preference I guess.
You have a point and you are correct in your analysis, all I'm pointing out is the same thing was happening in Genesis 8 too.
You have a point and you are correct in your analysis, all I'm pointing out is the same thing was happening in Genesis 8 too.
REPLY
! REPORT
There is a narrow range of what most people consider "traditionally attractive"in human faces in western culture.
So it makes sense that this range is going to show up over and over in the Daz Genesis character morphs.
Daz character artists have to work on volume to make it even economically viable.
So it is no surprise that as a matter of efficiency, they tend to fall back onto relatively limited number of preset base shapes.
So it makes sense that this range is going to show up over and over in the Daz Genesis character morphs.
Daz character artists have to work on volume to make it even economically viable.
So it is no surprise that as a matter of efficiency, they tend to fall back onto relatively limited number of preset base shapes.
REPLY
! REPORT
From my personal perspective as a CC, it is sometimes not easy to model/sculpt a new character that does NOT look like the base figure (G9, G8, etc.).
In addition, the further a face deviates from the base, the less it will work with standard morphs (facial expressions) later on. This means that in this case, you have to work with either JCM or your own facial expressions for this model. Both require more work to create than a model with a similar face.
In addition, the further a face deviates from the base, the less it will work with standard morphs (facial expressions) later on. This means that in this case, you have to work with either JCM or your own facial expressions for this model. Both require more work to create than a model with a similar face.
REPLY
! REPORT
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Thu, Feb 19Quote:
"From my personal perspective as a CC, it is sometimes not easy to model/sculpt a new character that does NOT look like the base figure (G9, G8, etc.)."
That is so true.
Being fully aware of that, I decided to focus on only one character with constant updates on a sometimes daily basis.
Not really a marketing advantage, but it doesn't have to be, for I am not a vendor.
On the other hand, there is that high profile DAZ-vendor, with female characters oscillating between Liv Tyler and Mila Millowitch with a remarkable exception of a Cameron Diat style character recently.
This vendor is basically selling the same character over and over again.
Quote:
"In addition, the further a face deviates from the base, the less it will work with standard morphs (facial expressions) later on. This means that in this case, you have to work with either JCM or your own facial expressions for this model. Both require more work to create than a model with a similar face."
OMG-True
Nail that on the front door of the DAZ store
"From my personal perspective as a CC, it is sometimes not easy to model/sculpt a new character that does NOT look like the base figure (G9, G8, etc.)."
That is so true.
Being fully aware of that, I decided to focus on only one character with constant updates on a sometimes daily basis.
Not really a marketing advantage, but it doesn't have to be, for I am not a vendor.
On the other hand, there is that high profile DAZ-vendor, with female characters oscillating between Liv Tyler and Mila Millowitch with a remarkable exception of a Cameron Diat style character recently.
This vendor is basically selling the same character over and over again.
Quote:
"In addition, the further a face deviates from the base, the less it will work with standard morphs (facial expressions) later on. This means that in this case, you have to work with either JCM or your own facial expressions for this model. Both require more work to create than a model with a similar face."
OMG-True
Nail that on the front door of the DAZ store
Bejaymac
Karma: 118
Tue, Feb 24Quote:
"In addition, the further a face deviates from the base, the less it will work with standard morphs (facial expressions) later on. This means that in this case, you have to work with either JCM or your own facial expressions for this model. Both require more work to create than a model with a similar face."
G8.1 and G9 don't use morph based expressions, they use the FACS system which is 100% facial rigging. If the expressions don't work with your custom shape that means the bones are in the wrong place.
Most think "adjust rigging to shape" is all they need to do with the rigging, wrong it's just the start, as it puts the bones into a gereralised position when they really need to be in an optimized position for your new shape.
Not even DAZ do it "right", they just slap correctives on everything to hide it, which adds bloat and in many cases LAG when posing.
"In addition, the further a face deviates from the base, the less it will work with standard morphs (facial expressions) later on. This means that in this case, you have to work with either JCM or your own facial expressions for this model. Both require more work to create than a model with a similar face."
G8.1 and G9 don't use morph based expressions, they use the FACS system which is 100% facial rigging. If the expressions don't work with your custom shape that means the bones are in the wrong place.
Most think "adjust rigging to shape" is all they need to do with the rigging, wrong it's just the start, as it puts the bones into a gereralised position when they really need to be in an optimized position for your new shape.
Not even DAZ do it "right", they just slap correctives on everything to hide it, which adds bloat and in many cases LAG when posing.
Aeon Soul
Karma: 3,490
Wed, Feb 25I wanted to say something along these lines.
The closer the facial features are to the base, the best the expressions will work and that is likely a priority for Daz own figures (honestly, it's hard to disagree, you have to make them as easy to use and look good as possible).
It would be interesting if they did something extremely unique along with a custom face rigging / expressions.
The closer the facial features are to the base, the best the expressions will work and that is likely a priority for Daz own figures (honestly, it's hard to disagree, you have to make them as easy to use and look good as possible).
It would be interesting if they did something extremely unique along with a custom face rigging / expressions.
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Wed, Feb 25Quote:
"
It would be interesting if they did something extremely unique along with a custom face rigging / expressions."
Top:
Custom smile with Genesis 8 Female
Bottom:
Custom smile with my own custom character
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/87677/smile-g8f-vs-roxy
"
It would be interesting if they did something extremely unique along with a custom face rigging / expressions."
Top:
Custom smile with Genesis 8 Female
Bottom:
Custom smile with my own custom character
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/87677/smile-g8f-vs-roxy
Aeon Soul
Karma: 3,490
Wed, Feb 25Yeah, exactly, we also have all custom expressions for our Alice characters. It just need to be done that way, but I understand why Daz tries to keep max compatibility.
On the other hand, since verious creators have demonstrated that there is a market for unique character with custom expression, it would be cool if they gave it a try themselves.
On the other hand, since verious creators have demonstrated that there is a market for unique character with custom expression, it would be cool if they gave it a try themselves.
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Thu, Feb 26Same is true for JCMs, BTW.
Custum characters need custom sets of JCMs.
Custum characters need custom sets of JCMs.
Bejaymac
Karma: 118
Mon, Mar 09If you just use "adjust rigging to shape" then ERC freeze, then yes you are going to need a crap load of "correctives" to make your morphed shape work.
But if you learn to use the Joint Editor to adjust the bones into a more optimized position you will find you don't need anywhere near as many "correctives" for your morphed shape.
Quick example: G8 has 3 bones on each eyelid, so if you use the eyes closed pose control on your morphed shape then odds are the eyelids closed wonky, that's because the bones need fine tuned for it work right.
With G8.1 you have two squint bones under each eye, the inner bones tend to wander to the nose while the outer bones start to move towards the side of the head, now those four bones are used in damn near every FACS expression, so if those bones are in the wrong place then guess who's morph looks like a "gurning chimp" when you use the FACS system.
But if you learn to use the Joint Editor to adjust the bones into a more optimized position you will find you don't need anywhere near as many "correctives" for your morphed shape.
Quick example: G8 has 3 bones on each eyelid, so if you use the eyes closed pose control on your morphed shape then odds are the eyelids closed wonky, that's because the bones need fine tuned for it work right.
With G8.1 you have two squint bones under each eye, the inner bones tend to wander to the nose while the outer bones start to move towards the side of the head, now those four bones are used in damn near every FACS expression, so if those bones are in the wrong place then guess who's morph looks like a "gurning chimp" when you use the FACS system.
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Tue, Mar 10Keep in mind, that even default DAZ figures, like G3, G8 and G9 have a ton of JCMs already implemented.
Why would DAZ do that, if it wasn't neccesary?
It cannot be solved by weight mapping alone.
Even the most likely advanced 3d character in all shops makes use of automatic joint corrections.
quote from the description:
"nearly 170 corrective blendshapes for each possible pose and more."
Sorry, I'm afraid, you have to prove your point, by showing me at least ONE figure or a character, that relies on weight mapping alone and still has realistic joint bendings.
https://www.renderhub.com/kingnewnew/female-advanced
Why would DAZ do that, if it wasn't neccesary?
It cannot be solved by weight mapping alone.
Even the most likely advanced 3d character in all shops makes use of automatic joint corrections.
quote from the description:
"nearly 170 corrective blendshapes for each possible pose and more."
Sorry, I'm afraid, you have to prove your point, by showing me at least ONE figure or a character, that relies on weight mapping alone and still has realistic joint bendings.
https://www.renderhub.com/kingnewnew/female-advanced
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Tue, Mar 10Sorry, I missed that part:
"But if you learn to use the Joint Editor to adjust the bones into a more optimized position you will find you don't need anywhere near as many "correctives" for your morphed shape."
I still stand by my point, that you DO need a lot of JCMs, no matter how skilled you are on weight painting.
"But if you learn to use the Joint Editor to adjust the bones into a more optimized position you will find you don't need anywhere near as many "correctives" for your morphed shape."
I still stand by my point, that you DO need a lot of JCMs, no matter how skilled you are on weight painting.
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Tue, Mar 10...and yes, even the most advanced Joint controlled morphs might fail, given the shear amount of posssible movements, that's why they have several rigs for the same character in proffesional productions ready.
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 45,584
Tue, Mar 10@Masterstroke
I don't think Bejaymac is referring to weight mapping (I wouldn't know what to do with that when creating a character anyway but rather the Joint Editing Tool (which is used in Rigging to Shape, for example). However, I'm not sure how many CCs do what Bejaymac says: even my characters from the DAZ Shop sometimes have slight (and in Jack's case, even severe) problems with facial expressions.
Unfortunately, there are no references from Bejaymac in the shop or gallery. Then the information would be a little easier to understand.
I don't think Bejaymac is referring to weight mapping (I wouldn't know what to do with that when creating a character anyway
but rather the Joint Editing Tool (which is used in Rigging to Shape, for example). However, I'm not sure how many CCs do what Bejaymac says: even my characters from the DAZ Shop sometimes have slight (and in Jack's case, even severe) problems with facial expressions.Unfortunately, there are no references from Bejaymac in the shop or gallery. Then the information would be a little easier to understand.
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Tue, Mar 10Maybe, I got something wrong here, but in the end, the problem is the same.
Be it about weight mapping or a rigging to shape.
My point is just, that there is no such thing as a carefree rigging to shape.
It just doesn't matter how skilled the rigging is corrected by hand.
Customized JCMs are always mandetory, if you want realistic Joint bendings.
(BTW: anybody noticed, that every rigging tutorial on YT is shown on toon characters? Good luck on finding tutorials for realistic joint bending results on hyper real figures.)
Be it about weight mapping or a rigging to shape.
My point is just, that there is no such thing as a carefree rigging to shape.
It just doesn't matter how skilled the rigging is corrected by hand.
Customized JCMs are always mandetory, if you want realistic Joint bendings.
(BTW: anybody noticed, that every rigging tutorial on YT is shown on toon characters? Good luck on finding tutorials for realistic joint bending results on hyper real figures.)
I found that there was much more real variety with Vicky Four. I have a few dozen V4 characters that see regular use. Gee-ate, maybe a dozen? I don't bother with Gee-damn-nine.
REPLY
! REPORT
Genesis 8 did a much better job of diversity. I think of Old Jeb, Tennesse, George, Floydd,
For the females, If you have one Mousso character, you basically have them all. Blue Jaunte's characters have a bit of uniqueness.
For the females, If you have one Mousso character, you basically have them all. Blue Jaunte's characters have a bit of uniqueness.
REPLY
! REPORT
My two cents are these:
1. The vertex count you work with does not vary.
2. The general topology of the human skeleton hasn't changed in millions of years, so yes, we humans all look alike, with variations within a relatively small spectrum.
3. The vertex count you work with (even with subdivisions) exacerbates point #2.
4. As someone else mentioned, pretty people don't have witch-like noses. Unless you are into witches, but that's another topic.
1. The vertex count you work with does not vary.
2. The general topology of the human skeleton hasn't changed in millions of years, so yes, we humans all look alike, with variations within a relatively small spectrum.
3. The vertex count you work with (even with subdivisions) exacerbates point #2.
4. As someone else mentioned, pretty people don't have witch-like noses. Unless you are into witches, but that's another topic.
REPLY
! REPORT
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Thu, Feb 19One more thing, you are also looking at very symmetrical shapes and the symmetry alone tips your brain.
guy91600
Karma: 17,262
Fri, Feb 20quote "you are also looking at very symmetrical shapes"
Good point for face designers; in reality, very few people have truly symmetrical faces. Those we find very beautiful tend to have perfectly symmetrical faces. So, to create characters that we might encounter on the street, it's important to design slightly asymmetrical faces.
Good point for face designers; in reality, very few people have truly symmetrical faces. Those we find very beautiful tend to have perfectly symmetrical faces. So, to create characters that we might encounter on the street, it's important to design slightly asymmetrical faces.
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Fri, Feb 20I Agree, Guy!
One thing to note is that asymmetrical characters take literally 2x the effort (especially if you make corrective morphs). Add that to the fact that users might go more for the symmetrical ones and is hard to justify making characters with significant asymmetry.
One thing to note is that asymmetrical characters take literally 2x the effort (especially if you make corrective morphs). Add that to the fact that users might go more for the symmetrical ones and is hard to justify making characters with significant asymmetry.
Bobb
Karma: 1,294
Fri, Feb 20"The general topology of the human skeleton hasn't changed in millions of years"
We've changed massively since this guy, https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils
There's been (so far) 29 species in our family tree during the past ~6 million years. We're constantly and slowly changing, evolution is an ongoing process. There's small differences between male and female, and differences between some ethnic groups. Musculature has also changed. Skilled researchers can tell the difference.
We've changed massively since this guy, https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils
There's been (so far) 29 species in our family tree during the past ~6 million years. We're constantly and slowly changing, evolution is an ongoing process. There's small differences between male and female, and differences between some ethnic groups. Musculature has also changed. Skilled researchers can tell the difference.
Masterstroke
Karma: 4,838
Fri, Feb 20Symmetry is important, for working on the character shape. Once the character is set, the next step is to add asymmetry as an extra parameter.
If you are absolutely sure, you won't change anything anymore on your character, you can bake the asymmetry into your shape, otherwise I'd keep the asymmetry seperate.
If you are absolutely sure, you won't change anything anymore on your character, you can bake the asymmetry into your shape, otherwise I'd keep the asymmetry seperate.
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Fri, Feb 20Oh yes, @Masterstroke. Adding asymmetry as the last step, especially on non-foldable areas, is the most efficient way to do it.
@Bobb, and Genesis is already on 9, hi, hi, hi. We still need more topology to drive variation, in my opinion. Textures, like MKDAWUSS said below this post, are really the best way to drive difference for non-HD Morphs.
@Bobb, and Genesis is already on 9, hi, hi, hi. We still need more topology to drive variation, in my opinion. Textures, like MKDAWUSS said below this post, are really the best way to drive difference for non-HD Morphs.
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Fri, Feb 20I myself love and appreciate symmetry, especially in my shoes 
Perhaps it is a conditioning thing. Symmetry generally signals health and quality. Also, symmetrical patterns are easier for our brains to process and recognize.
Perhaps it is a conditioning thing. Symmetry generally signals health and quality. Also, symmetrical patterns are easier for our brains to process and recognize.guy91600
Karma: 17,262
Fri, Feb 20Symmetry is a geometric invention; it doesn't exist in nature—that's the point I wanted to emphasize. But 3D characters don't exist in nature either, so it's up to 3D creators to do as they please and as best they can with their skills!
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Fri, Feb 20I beg to differ. The word or term symmetry as a descriptor might be ours, just like the color blue with the word "blue" as a descriptor; we made that up to communicate. But symmetry is a fundamental property that can be observed across biology, physics, and chemistry, my good friend. You can look for plenty of examples in nature: snowflakes, butterflies, crystal formations, molecular structures, and so on.
guy91600
Karma: 17,262
Fri, Feb 20You're absolutely right, I need to put my compass and set square back in the drawer 
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Fri, Feb 20Hi, hi, hi
I did understood what you mean, by the way, prior to my response. There is beauty in that sense of reality that imperfection brings to the table.
I did understood what you mean, by the way, prior to my response. There is beauty in that sense of reality that imperfection brings to the table.
Sometimes I wonder what makes the bigger difference: Morphs or Textures
REPLY
! REPORT
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Fri, Feb 20Good point, MKDAWUSS.
Shapes get you so far (HD father, but most of us don't have access). Therefore, all details are provided by textures (normals, bump, roughness, etc). You can make a character look entirely different just with textures.
The pictures below only change the tone, but details are the same, and even so, to me at least, she looks different.
Shapes get you so far (HD father, but most of us don't have access). Therefore, all details are provided by textures (normals, bump, roughness, etc). You can make a character look entirely different just with textures.
The pictures below only change the tone, but details are the same, and even so, to me at least, she looks different.
I've often chalked this phenomenon up to the individual preferences of the artist in question. Not even picking on any one in particular, but it's not uncommon to scroll an individual store and notice that the characters, while attractive, all look kind of... related. In some cases, you're quite visibly looking at multiple variations of the same chick.
And I don't say this to throw stones. As a "director," I have similar tendencies. While I strive for body type and ethnic variety in my silly, wacky adult comics, my leading ladies will almost always be thicc and extra curvy, often with full and sensual lips. I'm the director; I get to cast them how I like.
Anyway, for vendors it's also worth considering it may just be a matter of workflow efficiency. From a business perspective, if you're trying to iterate multiple products, you logically look for shortcuts and try to reduce friction. There's a risk in overdoing it, but again, that sounds to my ears more like being in a rush than anything shady.
And I don't say this to throw stones. As a "director," I have similar tendencies. While I strive for body type and ethnic variety in my silly, wacky adult comics, my leading ladies will almost always be thicc and extra curvy, often with full and sensual lips. I'm the director; I get to cast them how I like.
Anyway, for vendors it's also worth considering it may just be a matter of workflow efficiency. From a business perspective, if you're trying to iterate multiple products, you logically look for shortcuts and try to reduce friction. There's a risk in overdoing it, but again, that sounds to my ears more like being in a rush than anything shady.
REPLY
! REPORT
Luxe Muse
Karma: 7,085
Thu, Feb 26I think there are two types in that creator bucket (look-alikes), Brothervirgil. One is the assembly line type, which is obviously not composed of one person. And you can tell because they put up a bundle every one or two days with hair, clothing, and even a brand new environment (house, furniture, and so on). I'm not criticizing their efficiency, but there's a trade-off.
Then there are the ones that have a signature even across races and genders, although lately those have moved to an obvious assembly line workflow, and I don't blame them, really.
Then there are the ones that have a signature even across races and genders, although lately those have moved to an obvious assembly line workflow, and I don't blame them, really.
Interesting thread. And I agree with just about everything that's been said. Can't help but think that we're all looking for a solution, or desperately waiting for DAZ or whoever to come up with something new, something hot, something marketable. Hence you end up with Genesis 1 to 9. When you're working with just a handful of base figures and consequently the same rigging and workflow how can we expect something new or unique, when we're all using the same bases. There a a gazillion morph packs, that we eat up like candy, hoping that we can create something, new or different, when in fact, we're just pushing around a bunch of standardized set of vertices hoping to achieve the impossible. I think we have to ask ourselves, Do we want to make 'Art" or do we want to make money, and I think most are in it for the latter. Just my opinion.
REPLY
! REPORT
in the end, all the morph packs, meet the standard definition of "derivative" , original will not happen, because it can't.
REPLY
! REPORT
What has been said for the missing diversity of head shapes is also true for body shapes.
There are either minimal changes to the Base Feminin Shape or otherwise heavily stylized, toonish body shapes.
In my experience, purchasing characters is quite often disappointing.
There are either minimal changes to the Base Feminin Shape or otherwise heavily stylized, toonish body shapes.
In my experience, purchasing characters is quite often disappointing.
REPLY
! REPORT
Interesting so far.
My take on it is that character releases have always been very "samey" from many creators, but if you shop around you can find characters that are more varied. I don't know if G9 characters are less varied; I don't even have Genesis 9 installed because I see no reason for me to bother. There is plenty of content for the Genesis 8 figures and I have no desire to buy the same stuff all over again for a different figure. I have plenty of variety in my Genesis 8 characters and their clothing and accessories, and as time goes on I am buying less and less 3D stuff for them because of this.
Some creators do make variations on the same face over and over, though that face is not like the face that a different creator makes over and over. With such product lines it may make sense to buy one to get the characteristic "look" that they have if you like it, but once you have one of that creator's products you won't want more from them. This is what I have done sometimes. There have always been a few character creators that do better though, so if you shop around you absolutely can get some diversity. Plus for Genesis 8 using the morph packs can get you a fair number of characters that do look different. The problem then is finding skin textures that help make them even more diverse. Two characters that have significantly different face shapes but the same skin texture maps will not look as different as they should. For this reason I often download Genesis 3 free characters and I don't even install them. I just unzip and grab the skin textures to add variety to my Genesis 8 creations. So far I have not found any G3F skins that don't work on G8F.
For figures and clothing I have nearly stopped buying. There are a few such items on my wishlist but most of what I need in those lines I already have.
What I seek most nowadays is places; interiors, landscape assets, stuff like Stonemason's Urban Sprawl 3 and The Streets of Utopia. I also customise a lot of the sets I have, sometimes in a modest way and sometimes quite drastically.
I also don't use any of the DAZ Studio products I buy in DAZ Studio. They all get ported to Blender using Diffeomorphic, so I get the far better rendering and stability that Blender offers. Blender also allows me to very easily start customising stuff with the modelling and shading tools it has.
My take on it is that character releases have always been very "samey" from many creators, but if you shop around you can find characters that are more varied. I don't know if G9 characters are less varied; I don't even have Genesis 9 installed because I see no reason for me to bother. There is plenty of content for the Genesis 8 figures and I have no desire to buy the same stuff all over again for a different figure. I have plenty of variety in my Genesis 8 characters and their clothing and accessories, and as time goes on I am buying less and less 3D stuff for them because of this.
Some creators do make variations on the same face over and over, though that face is not like the face that a different creator makes over and over. With such product lines it may make sense to buy one to get the characteristic "look" that they have if you like it, but once you have one of that creator's products you won't want more from them. This is what I have done sometimes. There have always been a few character creators that do better though, so if you shop around you absolutely can get some diversity. Plus for Genesis 8 using the morph packs can get you a fair number of characters that do look different. The problem then is finding skin textures that help make them even more diverse. Two characters that have significantly different face shapes but the same skin texture maps will not look as different as they should. For this reason I often download Genesis 3 free characters and I don't even install them. I just unzip and grab the skin textures to add variety to my Genesis 8 creations. So far I have not found any G3F skins that don't work on G8F.
For figures and clothing I have nearly stopped buying. There are a few such items on my wishlist but most of what I need in those lines I already have.
What I seek most nowadays is places; interiors, landscape assets, stuff like Stonemason's Urban Sprawl 3 and The Streets of Utopia. I also customise a lot of the sets I have, sometimes in a modest way and sometimes quite drastically.
I also don't use any of the DAZ Studio products I buy in DAZ Studio. They all get ported to Blender using Diffeomorphic, so I get the far better rendering and stability that Blender offers. Blender also allows me to very easily start customising stuff with the modelling and shading tools it has.
REPLY
! REPORT