I have noticed more recently that many renders(especially with PBR game models) that they look like miniatures/action figures instead of real sized humans.
Why is that?(I cant be the only one noticing)
I think its because many modellers/artists make details like stitches, bevels and surface detail way too big because most say that you need bigger bevels than the real measurements because it gives better reflections or something.
While pic related is a really nice model it still looks kind of like a miniature(again it has huge stitches, the cloth looks too big and too thick)
Here is one of those high detailed miniature figures for comparison.
this happens because they choose to use a specific depth of field setting. It has nothing to do with clothing / details. For example you can take a flat shaded train model and make it look like it was part of a model train set or a real train depending on the depth of field alone.
>>514612
Whatever picture I look at of this model it looks like a miniature figure to me.
Maybe he uses the same FOV and DoF settings, but still the stitches on the shoulder strap are too big, both the leather material and the strap Webbing are too thick and the surface detail is too big scaled.
>>514612
You're talking about this, right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniature_faking
I don't know, OP's picture doesn't look like it's using those tricks, but it still looks like a miniature.
>>514613
Now that face looks like plastic.
It's because the face looks solid. We need translucency maps for ears and noses. I wonder when they will be incorporated into games.
chromatic abberation generally only occurs at high levels of zoom. Depth blur is usually at small scales.
Combine the two and it makes stills look microscopic.
>>514638
>not knowing what SSS shades are
What exactly do you need translucency for? You can't see through an ear or a nose.
>>514647
>>514647
>not knowing anything
Well, i think its because the PBR materials look more real, but then the faces are usually still stuck behind uncanny valley, so your brain tries to come up with an explanation and the best one it has is that of an Plastic Doll.
>>514610
It has to do with the resolution of the meshes, the textures and above all: the sampling.
Even if your calculations is entierly physically correct there is no way around the fact that your gemoetry isn't as detailed as a real world object consisting of atoms.
Just look at real world objects around you, notice where they catch highlights and where you see subtle differences in surface texture.
Those details are way way smaller than the resolution of what even a 8K+ texture map allows for, or even a multi million polygon model would allow for.
And even if you had all the detail to make a good approximation of a realstic geometry and surface, the sampling you would have to do to derive the final color value of a pixel
is just on another magnitude from what is possible to do in curret era real-time rendering. Such highquality sampling is only availible in time consuming offline renderings.
>>514638
SSS type effects is vastly overestimated when it comes to realistic looking skin.
The back scattering is such a subtle effect that it hardly comes into play in most light conditions.
What is the most crucial to get correct is the BRDF value of whatever surface you are trying to mimic.
If you nail the BRDF for skin your shader will look almost entirely correct unless your model is in lit in a way that the translucent effect comes heavily into play.
>>514673
you know nothing john snow
>>514673
Ya I'm not saying it's vital, it's ideal to just work with scan data. A lot of these tricks can help mitigate the uncanny valley look though. Most of the best head models I have seen use dermal, sub dermal, translucency maps etc.
http://www.marmoset.co-/toolbag/learn/character-setup
This is an excellent hand sculpted head but the hair kills it. So like the op said it's about a lot of things like scale and attention to detail coming together.
