Hi.
Floral decorations.
Manifold mesh with 1,570 quads. Photographic texture. Render BI.
Sad, really. So much time spent on flowers, shoes, jewelry, furniture, cakes, champagne glasses… But no time to spend to fix the faces so that the models more closely resemble the actual people.
Tecna, your friends will be thrilled with the product, I am sure. In my experience, people who do not know how to do computer graphics are easily impressed with anything that even remotely resembles themselves, and to see those puppets actually moving around! well… there is no way your dear friends will not lavish you with praise for your efforts.
But here, on BlenderArtists, where we all deal with these issues and tradeoffs every day, watching how you spend your time has many of us shaking our heads sadly and thinking, “gosh, he could have been a contender…”
I hope your sale of the assets you are focusing on goes well.
I’m sorry if you don’t like my work. I respect your opinion but I have mine. I could have spent more time tweaking the models but they would be almost equal. And there will always be someone who says they do not look alike. I prefer the opinion of non-experts because they don’t suffer professional bias. Some so-called experts care only about the perfect proportions, texture and render time; they aren’t interested in the topology.
I prefer to use the time to make and learn many other things. I’m satisfied with the results. I have little time to spend on this, and they are the first models of this type that I do. Thus they are not perfect and couldn’t do better at the moment.
Anyway the models are realistic style but don’t need to be perfect. If I wanted them to be perfect I would have used other methods such as scanning. But for that already have a wedding photographer.
I understand why you had to move on with the project; it is after all a very big project. And obviously you must’ve learned a lot in the process…
But this is simply not true, any professional artist in the industry will and has to care about everything: proportions, details, lighting, textures and of course topology… Why would you say that? I don’t get it.
Good topology is useless if the model is not good visually or if it has bad proportions… Everything is connected, and EVERYTHING should be taken into account.
Also, when you say the characters are meant to be in a realistic style it implies they should be as close to the actual people as possible; if not then they’re not realistic, they’re caricatures.
The thing is, if you want to achieve something that looks realistic, then you are not there yet. But, if you decided for example to render everything with freestyle and give it a comic-book look then the entire project would look so much better!
It is about the visual quality of the final output. You’ve put a LOT of effort on this, and is frustrating to see people saying it doesn’t look good. I know, that sucks.
But you have made a poor choice for the final look of the whole thing, because it will not look realistic enough (specially if you’re rendering with the internal renderer), but it is already too complex to fit a cartoon like style.
As @orinoco said, your friends and the couple that’s getting married will be thrilled to see this, they will love you for such a great gift.
But artistically and technically, is still far behind from what you would call realistic.
Don’t take this and what others have said as an attack, and just take it as constructive criticism. 
Hi.
Thanks for the feedback. I’m sorry I took so long to answer.
I agree that everything is connected, but it is also true that people rarely mention the topology, or displays the mesh.
I think there is a wide range of styles between the cartoon and hyperrealism and photorealism of which you speak. My models are not photorealistic, for that is because the photographer has done a great story. The models are designed for animation and printing. If the grid had millions of hairs and definition enough to mark each skinfold, this would not be possible. Nor if I had to retouch each image postproduction.
Hi.
The bride shoes: purple high heeled shoes open at the heel.
The independent shoe is a manifold mesh of 1,950 quads. The shoe attached to the foot of the bride has 1,828 quads and also manifold. The texture is an image of the original. Render BI.
No one, NO ONE, suggested you need to add millions of vertices for a hyperrealistic model. The only suggestion you seem to have ignored or misinterpreted is to make minor, very minor, modifications to the models faces to mitigate the effects of following perspective reference photographs in orthographic modeling. These changes would NOT affect the number of vertices in the mesh, nor the topology of the mesh, and to suggest that you cannot find the time to make these changes because of those issues is disingenuous at best.
Your models’ heads have a proportion problem. The location of their features is off, in most cases by mere millimeters. But, since they are human faces, and the human eye is programmed by nature and nurture to be very sensitive to the location of features on human faces, those few millimeters are the difference between a good likeness and what you currently have.
But please don’t try to put the onus on the community, falsely claiming we want you to work in a different style or add enough verts to ‘mark each skinfold.’ This is YOUR decision. Man up and take responsibility for it.
I think I haven’t explained myself well enough, I hope it will be clear now.
I don’t suggest anything or put responsibilities on anyone. I have my own judgment and follow my own path. I like doing things by myself, in my own way. I have my own style, make my own decisions and stand by them, even if others don’t like.
I was just trying to explain how my model is and how I want it to be. My model is what it is because:
-
I have done it as I thought it was good. Looking towards my goal, which was to make animations and a figure for the cake, as a unique gift for the couple.
-
I don’t know better. I’ve put all my effort and enough time on this project. Even if I devote more time I couldn’t do better.
For thae same reasons, I will not change it. So please, do not insist.
I know it’s not perfect and many people like you will not like it. But that was not my goal, you can not please everyone. I am satisfied with my progress and everything I’ve learned.
The next project might work out better.
Yeah, and I gotta say it … “just go for your goal.” Don’t get immersed in “analysis paralysis” with respect to modeling, rigging, texturing or anything else. I like what I see in the man, the enthusiastic bride, the ring, the rose … in all of the components that have been shown so far. It’s gonna be a good show, and they’re sure to live happily ever after.
So … and without further ado … “on with The Show, this is it!” I want to see him pop the question. It’s gonna be good, no matter what.
I’m not much for the degree-of-effort that tries to say that “this is a real film.” It isn’t. 
It’s a form of somewhat caricatured expression, and that can be its unique strength. Play to those strengths. As long as your CG preparations are sufficient to let you realize the show, “the show” is what really matters most.
Also: more-basic matters … like cinematography, editing, pacing … are really what’s going to exert the most significant influences upon this show. Go straight for the OpenGL Preview renders, edit the show together, cut it as tight as you can.
Once you have “the show” … actual shot sequences, actual camera angles … then you will know what the show actually demands in terms of modeling, rigging, and everything else. The magical time will happen when, quite suddenly, “these are no longer ‘computer models.’” They are: “actors.” You’ll know what matters and what you can get away with. It’s not a productive use of time to try to perfect a model beyond what actually turns out to be the actual needs of the show in which they will appear.
Hi.
Thank you for your encouraging words and advice. I think making the animation will be more complicated. But as always, we will make every effort to make it as good as possible.
If interested, you can see more pictures in my g+ profile:
And more animations on my youtube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRbxB8zdlxgygXyOZvWwNoA
I have particular fondness for the animation of our mascot “The Vitri” modern Vitruvian man discovering 3D space, because it is one of the first things I did. Also, the Spirograph with skeleton arm and the robotic arm are interesting.
Hi.
The dress of the bride.
The dress is a manifold mesh of 5,350 quads. There is another version with all together in the same mesh (shoes, veil, dress and body) with 29,440 quads, also manifold and 100% quads. The textures are hand painted with Gimp, based on the original. Render BI.
Hi.
The hairstyle of the bride.
The hairstyle and the veil were made as a separate object with a single mesh manifold of 10,104 quads. Then it had been joined to the model of the bride with dress and shoes, giving a manifold mesh of 29,440 quads (100%). Hair texture is an image of bride hair. The texture of the veil is painted with Gimp. It also has a particle system to the hairline.
Hi.
The bride’s bouquet of roses and lisianthus.
Manifold mesh with 69.470 quads. Photographic texture. Render Blender Internal.
Beautiful work on the dress! I really love it. Great job overall- I’m sure the couple will be blown away
I’m really having fun with this because “it will be twenty-eight(!) years, this year,” for me. (Yeah, she’s still here … go figger.)
Anyhow:
(1) “First and foremost, go for the show.” The awkward groom, the equally awkward blushing bride, both of them exuding personality and stage-presence. They’re excited … this is the best day of their life … they’re sure they’re gonna make it (and, they will), even though they don’t quite know how, and so-on. These are the human things that, more than anything else, will sell the show. These CG characters are: real people.
(2) As soon as possible, do start thinking about the animation. Literally, a set of simple geometric shapes, to scale, will do the job very nicely, in an “OpenGL Preview” animation sequence. Your powers of imagination can do all the rest. But this will help you gauge where you do (and, where you don’t) need to spend your modeling time.
It might seriously surprise you … what actually justifies “serious modeling time,” and what doesn’t. Imagine that you are putting together a wedding-video DVD for this happy couple. After you’d trolled through the tapes that were gathered on the day, you’d somehow “put a show together.” But, since this is CG, you can “shoot” anything you like. Perhaps you should do just that (using “OpenGL Preview” renders), and then, try to “cut a show together,” initially using stand-in shape characters. Then, let your subsequent efforts revolve around that vision for the completed show.
You could, of course, come up with dozens of “shows.” (There are lots of great ways to shoot a wedding …) Each one of these shows would emphasize different things … would show some things with “extreme close-up slow-mo” while whizzing past other things … while the next version might be altogether different. Each version would have its own modeling-effort priorities.
Hi.
Thank you both for your kind comments and useful tips. There is still some detail modeling to finish but we are already working in animation. We want to be funny, as was the real wedding, and that reflects the joy of the couple, who could be seen on their faces. The beautiful smile is one of the qualities that identify the bride, and more on that special day. But it will not be identical to the original, there will be some surprises. We thought some scenes and binding element used between them.
PD. sundialsvc4, congratulations on your marriage to last many more years.
Hi.
Silver Purse.
The purse is formed by several manifold meshes with quads, 1,616 in total. The chain is another object of 2 manifold meshes, 32 quads each with an Array modifier, and a Curve modifier. The texture is painted with Gimp. The armature has 9 bones. Render Blender Internal. More images here https://plus.google.com/u/0/102613426144007140997/posts/JGLNPkwYie3
Hi.
Silver shoe open.
Manifold mesh with 1,828 quads. Texture painted with Gimp. Render Blender Internal.
Hi.
Segovia style roast suckling pig.
Model used for the scene of the ceremony from roast suckling pig, with a plate. Manifold mesh of 2,836 quads. Photographic textures. Render Blender Internal.
