The Missing Link

Half human half ape.


Please tell me what you think. It is edited in photoshop afterwards.

Its all very cool except the mouth i think that you need more details on it and a better texturing o that, the shading is not to be realistic as I see its more like a cartoony look , and for that Is very well done.

Give it a fair shake. Improve the lighting. A nice soft lamp to illuminate the eyes.

Thanks guys. Yes it is ment to look a bit cartoony
@sundialsvc4 what do you mean with the first part of your comment? I am trying to give it a bit of a styled look and so the harsh lighting is on purpose.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3LiCZ1UHeQY/TpbO-HlaUXI/AAAAAAAAAoE/ivNbNcH4Qy0/s320/ape6.png
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-AKf566zrbcs/TpbO-wjjx_I/AAAAAAAAAoM/1Xj_yST9xyc/s320/ape7.png
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RlUAEc4I7Q0/TpbO_gpCAPI/AAAAAAAAAoU/SLhKptkkOqw/s320/ape8.png
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-STFVvccVxtU/TpbPAOflkbI/AAAAAAAAAoc/VjzQCmDzI2U/s320/ape9.png

Some fun lighting set ups

There is no such thing as a “Half human half ape”, because Humans ARE apes.

The concept of a “missing link” is terribly outdated if you’re talking anthropology, but as a comic construct, still alive and kicking, usually as an expression of humanity’s less noteworthy traits. In this particular case, I think a lot more “cartoon” and a lot less “gonzo anthropology” might be in order, particularly given the initial lighting scheme (rather foreboding), if the idea is to communicate a style that is “a bit cartoony.” Going halfway with that kind of stylization can just lead to confusion about what the intent is.

I like the sculpt, and think it closer to anthropology than cartoon, you should do some research into the subject of human evolution and try a truly accurate variation of an early hominid. Probably sounds dry as toast but could end up being quite an interesting challenge as a sculptor.

Haha, this guy kind of reminds of the boxer Nikolai Walujev. That means that you’ve done a decent job, because on a German comedy show, Walujev was called “Übergangsmensch”, which means about as much as “transition man” :smiley:

@freemind speak for yourself :stuck_out_tongue:
Just to clarify I do not believe in evolution. This sculpt was the result of me starting with a human base mesh and trying to make him look ape like… I only put 2 or 3 hours into sculpting him. I do like making stuff like this though so you will probably see more of these types of sculpts in the future.

Of course, everyone has the right of their own opinion, but everytime I hear someone say that he or she doesn’t “believe” in evolution, it makes me really angry. The word “believe” alone is completely inappropriate, because one can only believe in things which are not provable (God, Santa Clause, The Flying Spaghetti Monster etc.), otherwise it’s a matter of “knowing”. The concept of evolution has been proved thousands of times, every single aspect in biology wouldn’t make any sense without it.
I don’t want to flame, but as a graduated biologist I often react very sensitively to such matters. That’s all I’ll say about it, because this really it not the place for such pointless discussions…:wink:

Lol… dont worry my friend… I mean no offence. I do not “believe” in evolution but this really is not the place to discuss things like this :slight_smile:

I think that the subject of “belief” or “acceptance” or “recognition” or whatever is very relevant here, because you’ve chosen to depict something that is key to evolutionary theory, that there are intermediate forms between species that represent a progression, an evolutionary progression. Why, as an artist, choose to depict that concept, even in a “cartoonish” way, if you feel it has no validity at all? Do you want to deride the concept by making fun of it? Unfortunately that doesn’t work, because making fun of something implies there is something (an evolutionary track for the human species) to be made fun of. Do you wish to shock your audience by implying some form of sexual congress between a human and an ape that produced this hybrid? That seems even less respectable than lampooning a subject, let alone being biological unsound (the species are too far differentiated – one of those evolutionary things, y’know?).

It just strikes me as odd that you choose a subject for your art that supports something you say you do not believe in. Maybe you think it the same as depicting a fantasy subject like elves or hobbits or the loch ness monster, but to label it a “missing link” kind of denies that approach, since that its a term once respected in scientific circles, before evolution was more fully understood. It is not a term from fantasy. It evokes a more serious consideration of the subject.

I dig everything about it expect the lips that lack of any texturing work on it

@chipmasque I created this thinking the same kind of thing that an atheist would think while creating an angel. Please don’t take this too far.

@tyrant Thank you! I have had very bad experience with lip sculpting and texturing :stuck_out_tongue: I will have to give it a better try on my next project.

I doubt an atheist would spend much time doing angels unless commissioned (and how likely is that?), but if so, undoubtedly the subject would be treated as fantasy, like dragons, unicorns and manticores, all of which have certain features that are expected, but which can be interpreted broadly at the discretion of the artist. An atheist might use an angel as part of a lampoon of religion, but if the point of the barb isn’t very sharp, it’ll fail.

I’m just trying to get a handle on your motivation for this work, since it really doesn’t suggest “cartoon” very strongly, and does suggest (unless told otherwise) an attempt to portray an actual “missing link,” or in more modern terms one of the hominid species that predated homo sapiens. Do a Google image search for “early hominids” and see how many of the scientific interpretations (by folks who do believe in evolution) resemble what you’ve done. If your intent was to show how silly the idea of a “man-ape” is, it’s a bit of a fail because the evidence indicates that’s pretty much what they looked like. That’s why I suggested trying a more scientifically accurate piece, before I knew your thoughts on the matter.

You might say that this is a “fantasy” piece, but the difference is that there is no tangible evidence of any sort for the existence of such creatures as dragons, unicorns, manticores, or angels, for that matter. Nor gods, nor devils. Hobbits, now, may be another matter, though not the Bag-End variety. But there is a great deal of evidence for the existence of non-human primates that were precursors of homo sapiens, or which took parallel but dead-ended evolutionary paths, such as the neanderthals, species once only hypothesized as the “missing link” between higher apes and man, but now known to have existed.

So I’d like to put the sculpt into a more understandable context, given your statement about evolution. I think that makes for a greater appreciation of a piece of art.

This chipmasque is often a pain on the threads, jezz.
Man work on a model or something useful.

@chipmasque The reason that I would want to model this like i might model some fantasy creature… i just like the way that it looked… now please stop trying to argue…

@leonnn ye…

because he is unlike most people who are just praise singers. this is the one site why I often see way too many wow! amazing! been uttered for complete crap.

He is offering a very detailed critique so grow up and learn to listen, if you clicked on any of the links below his name you would see that the man knows what he is talking about.

I thing the sculpting is pretty good, one of the problems I have from a strictly artistic viewpoint is the space between the nostrils, where there’s an unsightly “bulge”. The lips feel really cartoony, which is what I think you were aiming for. Also, the ears don’t really feel like ears, mostly because there’s a weird protrusion in there.