Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 38 of 38

Thread: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

  1. #21

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Makrell View Post
    Well the faces look good and scandinavian but the hair ticks me off. This was before the dominant brown and black haircolour was in full dominance in scandinavia so most people should have blonde hair. Both family members and units.
    How do you know?
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  2. #22
    Makrell's Avatar The first of all fish
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    10,346

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Well i cant recall atm but i have read it. +Blonde is quite common even today. And seeing as brown is the dominant gentype/haircolour it is safe to assume there was more blondehaired people before, or blondehair would be seen to a much lesser extent than it is today. It isnt the immigrants who brings blonde hair to scandinavia afterall

  3. #23

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Makrell View Post
    Well i cant recall atm but i have read it. +Blonde is quite common even today. And seeing as brown is the dominant gentype/haircolour it is safe to assume there was more blondehaired people before, or blondehair would be seen to a much lesser extent than it is today. It isnt the immigrants who brings blonde hair to scandinavia afterall
    Seems like a logical assumption to me, just wondering if there is evidence to support the assumption. Three of those head models actually look like shades of blond in the game. The lighting and gamma correction are different from in Milkshape.

    The models are all based on real people from the region of origin for each of the units but as far ratios of light to dark hair I tend to go by this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  4. #24

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    I have a question: What programs do you use for this, and where do you find the material?

    Also, if some of those programs aren't free, are there good substitutes? I assume that I have all the programs I would need, even if I have to make substitutions.
    FREE THE NIPPLE!!!

  5. #25
    Makrell's Avatar The first of all fish
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    10,346

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    Seems like a logical assumption to me, just wondering if there is evidence to support the assumption. Three of those head models actually look like shades of blond in the game. The lighting and gamma correction are different from in Milkshape.

    The models are all based on real people from the region of origin for each of the units but as far ratios of light to dark hair I tend to go by this:

    Cant say i see anything in that map that doesnt support my stratement. It is natural to believe that the blondehair(being a recessive gene) Was quite a lot bigger before, so that belt in norway sweden and finland would probably go far more south.
    And could be my norwegian giving me a bit here, cause being scandinavian blondes are defined much harder here
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    this is blonde

    this is not blonde

    im guessing most southern people define it a bit differently. So i would say atleeast one of the faces should be with the hair like the fuy in pic one

  6. #26

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Makrell View Post
    im guessing most southern people define it a bit differently. So i would say atleeast one of the faces should be with the hair like the fuy in pic one
    Sure, I don't disagree with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slaytaninc View Post
    I have a question: What programs do you use for this, and where do you find the material?

    Also, if some of those programs aren't free, are there good substitutes? I assume that I have all the programs I would need, even if I have to make substitutions.
    None of the programs I use are free but all you really need is the ability to create models, UV map, and create textures. I base the textures and the models off of pictures which I take myself, get from TWC members, or find on the internet. You don't need special tools but they can save you time.
    Last edited by sumskilz; May 24, 2011 at 08:18 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  7. #27
    Makrell's Avatar The first of all fish
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    10,346

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    neat

  8. #28

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    Sure, I don't disagree with that.

    None of the programs I use are free but all you really need is the ability to create models, UV map, and create textures. I base the textures and the models off of pictures which I take myself, get from TWC members, or find on the internet. You don't need special tools but they can save you time.
    Do you directly adapt photos to create your textures, or are the photos just used as models?

    Also, are the vanilla heads adequate for faces to match, or do you have to adjust them?

    As for tools, I have GIMP, Milkshape, and LithUnwrap.
    FREE THE NIPPLE!!!

  9. #29

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Slaytaninc View Post
    Do you directly adapt photos to create your textures, or are the photos just used as models?
    I make the photo into template that matches the UV map. The final texture is a combination of this template made from the photo and other layers which I draw over it. Just using the photo to make the texture looks bad. I'm not certain why; I guess it has something to do with the mechanics of game lighting. On the other hand, the painted textures I create over them look a bit synthetic, so I get the best result by combining the layers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slaytaninc View Post
    Also, are the vanilla heads adequate for faces to match, or do you have to adjust them?
    Vanilla heads are terrible. I use my own models, though I used to use modified versions of those made by the Rusichi team

    Quote Originally Posted by Slaytaninc View Post
    As for tools, I have GIMP, Milkshape, and LithUnwrap.
    That's all you need. I used to use Photoshop, Milkshape, and Lithunwrap. I now use Facegen and Facegen Customizer as well. I don't like what Facegen creates on its own so I used Customizer to integrate my own model set which are UV mapped so that I can draw on them easily. I also use Ultimate Unwrap which is better than Lithunwrap, but made by the same guy so has similar controls.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  10. #30

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Well, the heads are what's going to kill me the most then. I'm having enough trouble with the miniscule changes I'm already making.
    FREE THE NIPPLE!!!

  11. #31
    Auto-Nabishtam's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hotest Erea In The World
    Posts
    167

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    sumskilz here two European faces I draw them few weeks ago, freel free to use them in your mod.
    faces.psd - 1.55MB


  12. #32
    Hengest's Avatar It's a joke
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    7,523

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Makrell View Post
    Cant say i see anything in that map that doesnt support my stratement. It is natural to believe that the blondehair(being a recessive gene) Was quite a lot bigger before, so that belt in norway sweden and finland would probably go far more south.
    It's a misconception that recessive genes means that it is dying out or on the way out. It has been proven that the idea bandied about by racists that 'there will be no blonde women left in 100 years' is absolute crap. So there is little evidence to suggest that ratios of fair hair have changed that much in northern Europe in 500 years. Unless the plague and the World Wars have drastically effected the gene pool.

    I do think that what Scandinavians call fair hair and what non-Nordic people call fair hair is very different. I am blonde and English and I live in Sweden, so I think that qualifies me to make that call. England for instance has a lot of 'mousey' haired people or apparently darkhaired people that magically turn very obviously blonde in summer. You have to think that medieval people were constantly outdoors too, so fair hair would have been quite common generally. Our Iberian researcher has adamantly defended the theory that northern Hispanics were actually quite fairhaired in the Middle Ages (more so than today), there is some good evidence for this too. Catherine of Aragon springs to mind. Also you can see from Italian portraits that many people women in particular were very fairhaired. Possibly due to the Langobardic ancestry and perhaps also the Norman influx too. Yet clearly the majority were very recognisable as modern Italians. I've been collecting a lot of medieval portraits for the mod, so I'm fairly familiar with this.

  13. #33
    Makrell's Avatar The first of all fish
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    10,346

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    which is why i say we make them more blonder

  14. #34

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Hross View Post
    It's a misconception that recessive genes means that it is dying out or on the way out. It has been proven that the idea bandied about by racists that 'there will be no blonde women left in 100 years' is absolute crap. So there is little evidence to suggest that ratios of fair hair have changed that much in northern Europe in 500 years. Unless the plague and the World Wars have drastically effected the gene pool.
    Can you cite a reference for this Hross?

    Just because i have always thought that was true and i'm quite interested now, i've even seen it mentioned in afew historical documentaries, this sort of thing usualy comes up when talking about the Mongol expansion or Muslim control of Iberia etc.

    PIPA and SOPA are “the equivalent of being angry and trying to take action against Ford just because a Mustang was used in a bank robbery.” - Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian

  15. #35

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Mighty_Matt View Post
    Can you cite a reference for this Hross?

    Just because i have always thought that was true and i'm quite interested now, i've even seen it mentioned in afew historical documentaries, this sort of thing usualy comes up when talking about the Mongol expansion or Muslim control of Iberia etc.
    You can find the information yourself easy enough. Just because a gene is recessive does not mean that it is receding. Hair color is a polygeneic trait, but it's easier to understand the concept by looking up Mendelian traits. Blond is a phenotype, meaning a description of the trait you actually see. Genotype is a description of the actual genes you carry. Many dark-haired people carry blond genes. A recessive gene is simply one you need to have two copies of in order for it to be reflected in your phenotype.

    For example, say you have ten people with genotypes like this:

    D-r, D-r, D-D, D-D, D-r, D-r, D-r, r-r, D-r, D-r (D=dominate, r=recessive)

    You can see the recessive trait in only 10% of these individuals, yet 80% of them have the recessive trait.

    EDIT:
    Quote Originally Posted by Mighty_Matt View Post
    Muslim control of Iberia etc.
    I'll address this issue with some references when I have time to find some studies. In most cases, invasions of highly populated regions do not leave a significant genetic record (there are some exceptions). If you look at the genetic data from Spain you can justify it to some degree with the history, if we assume that a lot of Muslims in Spain were decended mostly from converts, but if we didn't know the history, it could just as easily be explained by normal gene flow between populations which have trade relations.
    Last edited by sumskilz; August 10, 2011 at 01:12 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  16. #36

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Thanks for taking the time Sumskilz That has nicely broadened my understanding!



    Would it be correct to say though that heavy trasmission of the Dominant gene into a population where the majority display the recessive phenotype, lets say blonde people in scandinavia as the obvious stereotype mentioned previously (r-r therefore) would start to cause an overall drop in % blonde people as r-r is less likely to occur than D-r and D-D?

    PIPA and SOPA are “the equivalent of being angry and trying to take action against Ford just because a Mustang was used in a bank robbery.” - Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian

  17. #37

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Mighty_Matt View Post
    Would it be correct to say though that heavy trasmission of the Dominant gene into a population where the majority display the recessive phenotype, lets say blonde people in scandinavia as the obvious stereotype mentioned previously (r-r therefore) would start to cause an overall drop in % blonde people as r-r is less likely to occur than D-r and D-D?
    Yes it is true that if you had an incredibly heavy transmission of the dominant gene into a mainly recessive population you would slowly see some sort of effect. But, it would be VERY slow. This is because there are the four combinations rr, rD, Dr and DD and only one translates to being blonde. However, if your parents are both Dr (dark haired for example) you still get the following possible genotypes: DD, Dr, rD and rr (one allele from each parent). This means that there are still plenty of chances for the gene to show up again later on (possibly many generations later) as it is possible to be a carrier (someone who has an instance of the recessive gene but doesn't show it, for example Dr).


    EDIT: just for knowledge sake I would like to point out the two alleles coding for a single trait should actaully be the same letter just one capital for dominant and one lower case for recessive. However, I did the Dr thing to keep it clear as it is what the discussion started with.
    Last edited by SeekerAfterTruth; August 11, 2011 at 12:56 AM.


    Proudly Editing Borissomeone's Fan Fiction (here)






  18. #38

    Default Re: Sumskilz's Faces of DotS

    Quote Originally Posted by Mighty_Matt View Post
    Would it be correct to say though that heavy trasmission of the Dominant gene into a population where the majority display the recessive phenotype, lets say blonde people in scandinavia as the obvious stereotype mentioned previously (r-r therefore) would start to cause an overall drop in % blonde people as r-r is less likely to occur than D-r and D-D?
    Well yeah as SeekerAfterTruth explained, but there has always been geneflow between populations so in the case of Northern Europe we would have to know if it is more significant recently than it has been over time. Obviously due to modern transportation, the number of immigrants is higher today, but how does that compare to the past as a percentage of the existing population. Take the British Isles for example, today there are about 66 million people. A thousand years ago, there were about 2 million so at that time each new person represented a larger potential contribution to the local gene pool percentage-wise. The Indo-European languages were brought to Northern Europe by immigrants yet the genetic evidence appears to show that the most common haplotypes (Y-chromosome or mitochondrial DNA markers) in Europe today predate that. Also, geneflow happens naturally without any dramatric invasion or migration. Basically Northern Europe hasn't been closed off from the outside world, yet blond hair is still relatively common.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •