Sebastian Deredas: The most difficult part is making the viewer believe that it’s not yet one more computer-generated character, but that there is a story behind it. I try to give this the highest priority when creating a character, even higher than the technical aspects. Of course, it is important for shading to behave properly, for light to spread nicely over the character, and to be able to feel that each of the materials created can exist in the real world. But it won’t be a success if the viewer from the very beginning believes that there’s something off about the character, that it is generic or boring. The most difficult photorealistic characters to create are the ones that are clean, neat and have very little elements specific to themselves. In such cases, the smallest details matter, every single thread on a material. It’s much easier to create characters that went through a lot, have a bit of dirt or bruises. Then at the beginning we already have a lot more details and it’s easier to cover the flaws.

SD: For me, it’s one of the most important aspects when working with a character. With today’s technology it’s fairly easy to create a generic 3D character, but it’s more difficult to make it credible. I try to create characters in such a way that each element carries a story. When a character has a scar and I’m given the information on what caused it to form, I try to look up references for this given kind of a scar. Because it may be a scar after a burn, a dog bite, or a knife stab. And after all, each one of them will look different, so it’s good to recreate it accordingly. When I rip the clothes of a character, I wonder what caused the tear—whether it’s because the person caught on the nail in the door running out of a shed or rather fell over and dragged their bum on asphalt. Same goes for dirt, I try to add it as little generically as possible, because generality quickly reveals that something is wrong. For example I wonder whether this farmer that I’m currently working on walked the field yesterday in the same shoes as today. If yes, he will have yesterday’s mud dried up on the shoes and another wet layer from today. But maybe on the way to his cottage he also went through the barn and now he has pieces of straw stuck on his shoes? Such considerations may seem funny, but each of these details brings us one step closer to realism. And even though later the viewers might not notice the straw at all, it’s what it’s about—they subconsciously assume that the straw should be there. It won’t catch their eye, but if it was missing, they would notice.

SD: My university professor once said that 3D is a deceit. It’s hard to disagree, because when trying to achieve photorealism in 3D, we are trying to trick the viewer into thinking what they see is real. I believe it’s easier to achieve it with a photorealistic weapon rather than with a photorealistic character. Behind every object and character there is a story—a marker inscription on a weapon has one just like the scar on a character’s face. But what differentiates these for me is the level of complexity. There are weapons that are made of just two or three materials of medium-level of complexity. It’s fairly easy to investigate what the materials are, how they behave in real world, what their special features are, and to then recreate them in the 3D world. With characters it’s a bit more difficult—shading of the skin is a complex topic and the human brain very easily picks up things that are not real. I think eyes give it away the fastest. It is not without a reason that we refer to eyes as the “windows to the soul.” The artist must somehow create the soul in order for the viewer to see it - and it’s not a simple task to do with the eyes of a computer-generated character.

SD: The most challenging part is creating a photorealistic face. Of course it is now possible to scan a real person, generate the skin texture and apply it onto the 3D character and it doesn’t seem difficult with today’s technology. However it’s just a drop in the ocean and in fact just the beginning of fun. A face has many details, each part of it reflects light in a slightly different way. Skin has various shades, is of different age, has veins and lines. There might be wrinkles, freckles or pigmentation disorders. Melanin partially absorbs visible light, which can cause hyperpigmentation and uneven skin tone. And it all must be reflected in 3D. The level of complexity can be overwhelming, but I believe it is what pushes me forward. I constantly see the space for growth, development and being one step closer to achieving realism. What I like the most is how the perspective changes when you look back on old works which just a while ago seemed realistic and they no longer do. It’s because you made this one step forward, learned something new, changed up a few things in your shader, added two veins in the right place. This shows how we constantly develop. I believe that by these baby steps we will eventually reach the top, the photorealism beyond reach. Currently we already swap out characters in movies for ones that are computer-generated and the technology is still moving forward.

SD: I wanted to work in the film industry ever since I was I child, but at the time I didn’t know exactly what job it could be. I attribute this idea to my “movie-themed upbringing” in the early years of my childhood. At home we often used to watch more “challenging” movies so I came across names like Jarmusch, Bergman or Buñuel quite quickly. It led me into different corners of the history of cinema—I found the beginnings of stop motion animation and watched The Beautiful Leukanida by Wladyslaw Starewicz. It wasn’t a long way from stop motion animation to Pixar. But who didn’t love Toy Story? I thought this could be my career, to work with animations that are both fun and educational. Maybe deep down there is still a part of me that would like to do it, but after working on a few game trailers and making a few characters I fell head over heels in love. Each character is different and has their own story, and you as an artist are trying to tell it. By painting textures and layering materials you are creating something out of nothing, bringing the gray model’s mass to life. At this point I’ve created dozens of characters, but I still see space for development and learning to get closer to achieving photorealism. I’ve always admired making digital copies of actors and replacing them in films, for example Rachel from Blade Runner 2049 or Peter Cushing, who was brought back to life in Star Wars: Rogue One. Has anyone ever dreamed of bringing actors back to life? With the help of 3D is it now somewhat possible.