No copyrights on any content (NSFW)

[lilboiluvr69]

This is an interesting site but perhaps the title of the link should be updated? When I clicked on it I thought it would direct me to an article arguing against the existence of copyright law.

[mayhemchaos]

Heh, yes, I tried a more useful link, but no one looked at it. :/

[noxer]

I dont think this website convinced me that we are all beautiful. Saw some things I definitely did not consider beautiful. Maybe instead of "forcing" everyone into accepting that everyone is beautiful we should just accept that taste is personal and there is nothing wrong with finding something/someone not beautiful.

[okkdev]

Sure, but something you don't like someone else might like. Thus making everyone beautiful.

[DoreenMichele]

FYI:

We create 3D models of human genitals with the aim to:

break taboos

educate at a global level

improve body self-image for all users

We aim to enable educators to do the same by making the 3D models freely available for viewing online and for downloading and printing under the CC0 license.

[jMyles]

Is the idea here that these 3D models can be used by educators to build their own visual aids, which will have proper colors and shading, etc?

Because, as it stands, I'm not sure the benefit of having a bunch of purple penises. They certainly don't look realistic.

[loa_in_]

A 3D model is just a mesh of points in 3D space. These here provide only a shaded single color render to... illustrate this mesh. It can be rendered with any modern technique when used in conjunction with a rendering engine.

[robbedpeter]

"Thanos goes to a sauna"

[mayhemchaos]

We really wanted to release the textures that go with the models in order to make them more realistic. However, that would likely put us into the pornography realm and make the site even harder to share with others. And also, printing these models with such color resolution just isn't possible yet -- we've got a long way to go in 3D printing for that to be workable.

[eyelidlessness]

What are “proper” colors to represent genitals?

[yreg]

Link to the website: https://wearebeautiful.info/

[pontifier]

It's interesting and feels like a step in the right direction. I wonder about MRI or CT scans as an alternative to photogrammetry in order to more fully capture hidden details.

I'm also interested in simulation and movement. How SHOULD one capture the default shape and characteristics of a complicated soft structure in order to properly simulate it under gravity or other forces? Creating realistic stretching that takes into account the internal differences between ligaments and flesh for instance, could be an entire field of study.

I'm excited to see where this leads in the future.

[Edu4all]

Interesting thought. But CTs are pretty hard to read. The reasons why drawings or simplified models are used in sex ed, is that they can be understood easily. An actual model derived from a CT scan usually needs some explanations and a certain base knowledge of the matter. Regular organs do not look as “nice” as they do in drawings.

But if you are interested in the shifting of the skin/genitals in different positions, then take a close look at the models and especially their “code” (the model names encode body alignment during the scan).

There is also a comparison of a flaccid and an erected penis. Or different stages of a pregnancy. And a vulva comparison that shows arousal and the “relaxed” state.

[mayhemchaos]

Good questions, but I have no answers now. The only vaguely scientific thing we accomplished was creating compound models that show the sexual arousal of a vulva. I was told that it "became puffy/engorged", but couldn't ever really see that in action. Until we made of model of a woman before arousal and just prior to orgasm.

Our compound models are truly the most interesting ones:

- https://wearebeautiful.info/model/426060-VLNP-2 - https://wearebeautiful.info/model/426060-VLNP - https://wearebeautiful.info/model/746625-VLNP-2

Sadly, this project doesn't have a future. This HN post has gathered the most interest in the project yet. A clickbait headline got people to look, nothing else. :(

[darkcha0s]

Why are like 70% of the models vaginas?

[crtasm]

Are they? I only looked at https://wearebeautiful.info/browse/by-part

Also "If you're wondering why we have the collection of models we have, see our model diversity statement for more details. " https://wearebeautiful.info/docs/model-diversity

[mayhemchaos]

pope_meat is right -- even in the age of unsolicited dick pics, mostly women were interested in participating in this project. Men were very hesitant. Also, more models of women than men worked out, since photogrammetry is very sensitive to movement. Any body parts further from the core where more subjected to movement from heartbeats and breaths. Vulvas are closer to the body and thus less affected.

[pope_meat]

Probably because it's a lot easier to recruit women in to a body positivity project than men.

That's my guess.

[utf_8x]

Because we're all beautiful but some are more beautiful than others

/s