Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

PacmanIncarnate t1_jdnay0f wrote

It would take a lot more work to use a mannequin than to use a real person, but it could be an option.

3

chisoph t1_jdnru7j wrote

Maybe a bit more work but a solid chunk less money. Plus the mannequin can model 24/7 365

5

Smellz_Of_Elderberry t1_jdpimoc wrote

Not a lot more... A lot less. You have to hire each person, woth this, u need one mannequin, then you can get an infinite amount of different people

2

PacmanIncarnate t1_jdpj2vw wrote

But you would need to dress and pose the mannequin, which isn’t going to be the easiest job. I would also guess that the model is the cheapest part of a photo shoot in most instances; photographers and studios are relatively expensive.

1

Smellz_Of_Elderberry t1_jdpkapd wrote

We aren't far away from just taking a photo of a shirt, and having generative image generators putting the shirt onto any model you want.

2

SgathTriallair t1_jdtzfm8 wrote

Not at all. My wife is a pattern maker. At her job they use a software that takes a pattern renders a 3D avatar, lays the pattern on it, sews the clothes, and allows the her to assess the fit and tweak the garment. Her company has gone from 4-5 fittings for a garment to 1 and that's just to get final tweaks and often results in no changes.

The company bought the software in 2019. There is zero reason to put real clothes on a real manikin.

1

KidKilobyte t1_jdovp2k wrote

Depends on the situation and the distance of the scene. In Gone With The Wind one of the huge injured battlefield scenes they had like 2 or 3 dummies per live person, and that person would secretly pull a couple of ropes to create movement in the dummies next to them. Seen from a distance it all looked quite real.

1

PacmanIncarnate t1_jdoylf0 wrote

Right, but that was from before computers even. From at least the early 90s they would at most film a small cluster of people and replicate them throughout the scene.

1