Morph styles..... what catches your eye?

Pacman · « **Reply #15 on:** December 29, 2001, 11:11:00 AM »

That's a who's who list of the guys that made me want to learn to morph.

Several were even the guys who helped me get better (my obi-wan and qui-gon's if you will)..

It's amazing. I miss so many of them. I know some have left for better things in life and so on, but the saddest thing about that list is that surely a few have been lost due to the way people around here act.

Too bad...

Pacman · « **Reply #16 on:** December 30, 2001, 01:10:00 AM »

Oh! And Sable, I finally found some pics of you I can work with...

I shall send new morphs of you your way in the near future.

Sable Holiday · « **Reply #17 on:** December 29, 2001, 02:06:00 PM »

DARLING'S..............

and PACMAN,hey let me know when where how what why, and if you need stuff, I have lots of stuff lol but some of my stuff I dont want morphed and some of it I dont care , and I have been busy with complete design to my site,hopefully ready by 1-1-02. doing a complete FENG Shwei thing, ya know , organizing, re- grouping,etc. Planning on a new morph section,and if anyone would like to make me a lil moving morph a me, gif I can use on that page, I would be very much appreciative, black background if possible. Also, I will be glad to use your link, provided you don't offer pop-up's. I HATE HATE HATE pop ups, and refuse to put them anywhere on MY website. Seems the whole internet is full of those damn things anymore.

**DONOTDELETE** · « **Reply #18 on:** December 29, 2001, 04:16:00 PM »

sable, i'm sure just visiting your site will cause many, many "pop-ups".

back to pac's original question and related digressions...

i always favored the more realistic morphs, and i always limited the amount of expansion of a particular image to what i felt i could do semi-realistically. i preferred the SHRINK-THE-GIRL technique --because it yields the HIGHEST QUALITY IMAGES-- but i'd use any technique at all as long as it achieved THE RESULTS I WAS TRYING TO GET.

when deciding how large i would expand the breasts, i also took a few other factors into account: the pose, the model's general build, and what the expanded tits were going to do to the composition of the image. i always tried to leave the model's waist visible, because we're all accustomed to using the BUST-TO-WAIST RATIO to judge bust size.

in my case, a morph could take anywhere from 10 MINUTES to 10 HOURS. like pac, i had "quick" and "careful" folders, but i signed all my quick morphs with a different alias (who didn't make imaginos's list, which isn't surprising because i was usually pretty sloppy with the quick ones).
_____
gonZo
(lurking hard, or hardly lurking?)

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: gonZo ]

sheber · « **Reply #19 on:** December 29, 2001, 05:45:00 PM »

I guess my preferences lie with "creating something from nothing". Especially if it is done well. I love seeing a flat **29** morphed into a voluptuous vixen because we all know what she used to look like. On another note, a completely crappy digital file can yield spectacular results with skill and a little luck, so file size isn't as important as composition. Don't make me even bring up edges, balance, (implied)movement, blending, and lighting (or is it shading?). Gonzo & Pac, I love your work, and hope to see it for years to come.

sheb "I'm my own worst critic" sheber

jayjay88 · « **Reply #20 on:** December 29, 2001, 05:49:00 PM »

For me it starts with 'the look', the pose, the atmosphere...engagement. I have to be 'grabbed' to want to work on a morf. I like the exotic, ravishing colors, but mainly its the look the model has. I like eye contact...again...engagement. I don't to quickies...i don't find it satisfying. I can take 2 to 5 or 6 hours on a morf...the overall proportions are decided, then the technique is chosen to get the effect i want...the rest of the time is spent in the detail...to get it as best i can. if you take your time, the model kind of whispers to you how she would like to be. I almost always chose a good scan, but i'll clean up a photo if i really like it.
I tend toward realistic looking morfs...but there are times i've seen morfs 'cartoon' large which are just awesome...so as has been said, quality is always the key consideration.
jayjay

jayjay88 · « **Reply #21 on:** December 29, 2001, 06:11:00 PM »

For me it starts with 'the look', the pose, the atmosphere...engagement. I have to be 'grabbed' to want to work on a morf. I like the exotic, ravishing colors, but mainly its the look the model has. I like eye contact...again...engagement. I don't to quickies...i don't find it satisfying. I can take 2 to 5 or 6 hours on a morf...the overall proportions are decided, then the technique is chosen to get the effect i want...the rest of the time is spent in the detail...to get it as best i can. if you take your time, the model kind of whispers to you how she would like to be. I almost always chose a good scan, but i'll clean up a photo if i really like it.
I tend toward realistic looking morfs...but there are times i've seen morfs 'cartoon' large which are just awesome...so as has been said, quality is always the key consideration.
jayjay

**DONOTDELETE** · « **Reply #22 on:** December 29, 2001, 07:47:00 PM »

I don't know much about morphing images. I've tried it a few times on Photoshop, but I couldn't do much inflationg wise, but I could really mess up a persons face. Also I could do some wicked stuff with anime and cartoon characters.

But I prefer them big, round and has realistic looking has possiable. I happen to like asian chicks being morphed...long has it's not minka, but other models, like the good looking ones at Tokyo Topless.

**DONOTDELETE** · « **Reply #23 on:** December 30, 2001, 04:55:00 AM »

i think it's probably on topic in this thread to write about a morpher who doesn't come around here anymore...

i worked with Franz75 at BEhavior for a couple of years, and i would describe him as the most creative morpher who has ever posted work at BEA. Franz didn't just morph the tits: he created angels, devils, mermaids, and aliens... a whole pantheon of huge-breasted demigoddesses. he had a restless, vivid imagination, and it showed in his work.

perhaps it was because he lived in Venice, but Franz's morphs always had a manner and palette that you'd expect to find in hand-made paintings rather than digital manipulations. his more fantastic morphs had the warmth and brilliant colors of Renaissance paintings, while his realistic morphs often had the cool solidity of pink marble statuary.

to me, the most striking thing about Franz's morphs was that he had somehow figured out how to make the boobs as big as he wanted (which was usually very big) without any blurring, distortion, or other expansion artifacts. i wondered if it was some special software he was using, but eventually i realized that Franz just had a lot of talent, and worked very hard.

one of the unusual things about morphing is that the technology became available to regular folks rather suddenly, catching us all at different stages of our lives. i was about 44 when i started morphing. Franz, on the other hand, was probably about 18, and most of his work at BEA was done while he was attending university. when we last heard from him, he had received an advanced degree and was doing a couple of years of mandatory government service. he was an extremely intelligent and talented man, and he had great plans for his future. somewhere in all that, he lost interest in morphing, or simply ran out of the spare time in which to do it, and we lost touch with him.

i miss him a lot.
_
g

Imaginos · « **Reply #24 on:** December 30, 2001, 09:10:00 AM »

gonZo i too miss franz a great deal. From what i recall he solved one of the "unsolvable" mathemitical problems that exists and was or had become a professor at a college. T

here was some mandatory government work that he was doing last i talked to him and he just didn't have time left to do alot of morphing.

I saw him in the Loft about half a year ago or so.

As to that list, its about 20% of all the morphers names i have that came and went or are still here. I am sure others have greater lists then i do...like Chili.

I find it irksome that morphers keep changing thier nicknames. Pick one and stick to it I do understand the "i'm slapping out fast work so another nick gets the credit "

I recently e-mailed Monkeyboy but have recieved no reply back. He probably doesn't even remmeber me.

Does anyone miss the Art Technique/Discussion forum?

EDIT: I also agree that giving a flat actress an impressive rack is to die for, Callista flockheart or Milla Jovovich spring to mind

Imaginos.

BTW the userdatabase has been updated and soon the accounts will be made active and the patiently waiting artists will have galleries here soon.

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Imaginos ]

Dick_Woods · « **Reply #25 on:** December 30, 2001, 09:25:00 AM »

Well, we like anything thats done well...which means that we LOVE anything Pac does. However my favorites are the candid shots of the non **28**, and to a "reasonable" size as to maintain a sense of realism. Jane however likes the "over-enhanced" look, along with anything with either Julia Roberts or Catherine Zeta Jones. So there is our two cents.

-D&J

3deroticer · « **Reply #26 on:** December 31, 2001, 01:03:00 AM »

I actually prefer working with a flat chested model for morhing for 2 reason, one) the nipple size is small that it expand really well with my 3D program and, two) When using the 3D program for expanding it creates more work for me to deal with rounded out edge and shadowing that already exist on the breast. I usually have to bring it in to photo shop to get rid of the edge.
One of the reason that I like using Hash animation master for expanding is that it handles enlarge pixelation that you get with photoshop real well and automatically smooth out the pixellation noises(no large square grid for overdoing it) the reason why people like to start with a large picture first and then shrink the model but leave boobs intact.
I also can do realistic shadow correctly, which in my opinion is the biggest element of realism

Imaginos · « **Reply #27 on:** December 30, 2001, 02:18:00 PM »

Shadows are an important key to a good morph. They dont have to be harsh, even just a slight shadow you can barely see leaves an impression on the viewer.

For you Photoshoppies instead of expanding the breasts, or having to shrink the girl, cut the breasts out and increase the dpi by about 2x and then paste the new breasts into your current work. they will redownsize to standard 72 dpi and be huge without losing any quality.

Imaginos

**DONOTDELETE** · « **Reply #28 on:** December 30, 2001, 03:51:00 PM »

What catches my eye?

Well, first off, she's got to start out looking good to begin with. Ideally, a drop dead gorgeous woman who just needs that little extra to be perfect.

Second, I like the morphs where you can't really be sure they're morphs. Where you can entertain in the back of your mind the possibility that there's actually a woman who looks like that walking around somewhere.

That means realism in execution AND proportion.

Finally, quite aside from the morphing, it should be a well composed and attractive photo.

The ideal morph is a tasteful, well executed cheesecake photo, of a model who doesn't really exist, but in a better world would.

**DONOTDELETE** · « **Reply #29 on:** December 30, 2001, 06:45:00 PM »

while i'm digging through the archives, here's an old Catherine Zeta Jones for Jane.
(this one started out as a shrink-the-girl morph, but that didn't work very well, so i had to do a lot of painting on it.)