I understand that Live face uses the iPhone (w/ARKit) while Faceware uses a webcam/camera with their proprietary plugin.

Does the Iclone version of faceware also use blend shapes similar to LiveFace? If yes, then what additional benefits does Faceware provide compared to the new LiveFace? I know that the stand alone version of Faceware uses its proprietary software to track points on the face and retarget the mocap to a 3d animation rig but the iClone version appears to use blend shapes in the end. Can you achieve more accurate facial expressions with faceware or will the new LiveFace achieve similar or even better results?

Faceware can't use the Ark stuff shapes -- it's proprietary to Apple (and thus only Live Face can do it).  They are FAR superior to anything Faceware can achieve.

Faceware can do one thing Live Face cannot - it can take an image sequence (not a video file, but a series of still frames of a sequence) and generate an animation from them.  The idea was that you could record a video and use that instead of a live person.  In practice it's pretty lousy because, as I said, you can't use a video file but need to write out all the individual frames, which is a PITA.  However, I found you could use a webcam broadcaster program (some of which are free) to "fool" Faceware into thinking it was seeing a live human when it was looking at a video instead.  This works fine.

Up until fairly recently I would have told you this last (using a video for Faceware) was something the iPhone could not do, but then I found even IT is possible with Live Face.  You just point your phone at a screen (even another phone screen, or your computer screen or TV) and it will recognize the face there.  It's kind of creepy, because it's a 2D image and yet the 3D camera thinks it's not.  But it does work.

So, no, there's nothing Faceware can do that Live Face cannot.  But not vice versa.  I don't even have Faceware installed on my system anymore, because Live Face is so much better.

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

As I Faceware user up to now I can chime in here.

I didn't want to get an iPhone (not an Apple fan) but sometimes you have to put practicality before principles.

After seeing the demo of the new Live Face, I got myself an unlocked refurbished iPhone XR ($465) and I am impressed with the results. 

One recommendation from Mike is to connect with a wired ethernet connection as it is the most reliable. Wireless did not work for me and others have had issues with a USB connection. 

---

So would I be correct in assuming that when you use the faceware plugin for facial mocap 
it doesn't use the arkit blendshapes even if you have added them to your CC3+ character?

Thanks,

Iwan

Yes, right. faceware=no Arkit blendshapes


     

They are proprietary (Apple owns the tech) so, yes, Live Face only (and reason enough NOT to go Faceware, although I gave up Faceware long before they were available, as Live Face is just that much better on its own).

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

Sorry, double post (because this forum just does that, sometimes).

---

Alienware Aurora R16, Win 11, i9-149000KF, 3.20GHz CPU, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090 (24GB), Samsung 870 Pro 8TB, Gen3 MVNe M-2 SSD, 4TBx2, 39" Alienware Widescreen Monitor
Mike "ex-genius" Kelley

I have both. Best results with liveFace. Faceware need a good lighting of your face , not with live face.