Tue, Nov 26, 10:45 PM CST

Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL



Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum

Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom

Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Nov 26 1:43 pm)



Subject: Morphing Skirts - totally and utterly confused please help!


Leonardis ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 5:57 AM · edited Tue, 26 November 2024 at 9:10 PM

I'm a subscriber to Poserworld and I picked up their excellent Morphing Skirt. But I just can't make it follow the body poses. It just stays completely static. I must admit I'm not an experienced Poser 4 user, but I do understand the basics. I read the alternate usage tips in the readme and followed them to the letter, trying all three methods. I cannot "conform" this skirt to Vicky's figure, so I tried setting various parts of the body as the parent to the skirt, and even tried setting the skirt as parent to the body. But although I can get the skirt to fit the body exactly whilst static, as soon as I move the body, or the skirt, the other one stays still. I tried "locking" the skirt but then nothing moves. Forgive me if I have misunderstood this but I just don't understand, and in fact almost all addons I've tried present various problems like this. There seem to be such complexity of setups I just don't understand how to get Poser to do anything easily. I must emphasis I have read the manual, and several tutorials, but they all assume everything will work without fuss! In fact I'm finding that with nearly all the addons from some excellent source, here and elsewhere, the whole process of making them work is a nightmare. I am not generally known has having a paucity of brain cells but in this case I feel totally stupid. Do I assume that the reason for this skirt being a "morphing" object is because it cannot in fact move with the torso, and that one has to setup each and every pose, render and then setup another pose? In that case I assume this skirt cannot be used for animation, unless one laboriously refits the skirt for each and every frame! But in the readme it states that among other things this skirt can be used in published animations. This totally confuses me! I would be ever so grateful for some advice about what I'm doing wrong. Kind Regards, Leonardis


sebastel ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 7:31 AM

AFAIK there is a problem with the need of "body"parts moving differently than the related parent body parts, especially the "hip". so it is kind of easier to make a skirt with morphs that control the skirt's actual "movement" instead of the conforming to the parent body / body parts. look into the morphs for the skirt, you will find special channels to conform to forward left leg, forward right leg and the like. hope this helps!


steveshanks ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 7:45 AM

The problem is skirts just don't work properley in poser if you make them the right way....well if there is a right way ;o).....as an example try sitting the p4 woman with a p4 skirt.......i must confess to not being an imdediate fan of the morphing skirt but all attempts to do one that conforms (in the true sense) and allows true full movement without spiltting or texture messing has failed so this was my first attempt into this....to use it you need to parent it to Vickys hip.....The newer ones use like the classic dress use conforming combined with morphs and a handle but i'm afraid still a pain for animating....in theory i guess it could be used for animations but as you say you need to work it frame by frame, the reference to animation in the readme means you can use it copyright wise, in an animation...if your animating best use an old type skirt like the one off the business suit on page 8.......Steve


sebastel ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 7:53 AM

maybe changing the special leg movement morphs to joint controlled morphs would help? (actually not just kidding... i think i have a clear idea what i am proposing...)


Leonardis ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 7:54 AM

Ah...OK I understand now. SO...morphing skirts, unless they have specific channels to sort of conform them to a specific movement, are not suitable for animation? I understand the point about parenting to the hip in order that basic poses can be changed (twist, lean etc) but not more than that, and I see you have included various different morph positions to suit various STATIC poses. Thing is, when you are new to Poser, you are relying almost entirely on the enlightenment of the readme, and have to take everything in them at face value. I am slowly learning that everyone else is having trouble doing the things I'm trying to do...the difference being that they know the limitations and I am still discovering. Anyway thanks for making the skirt and for posting it at the site! Cheers, Leonardis


sebastel ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 8:34 AM

leonardis, it is still POSSIBLE to do animation, but since you need to do it frame-by-frame it is really a LOT of work... ...


EnglishBob ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 10:37 AM

file_93242.jpg

Here it is in action - I like this one a lot. Victoria 3, texture by Ilona & Tamela, Hair by Kozaburo, jacket and blouse by PhilC, jacket texture by Queri, skirt by Steve Shanks, shoes by Danae, graffiti wall by Steven Heyse.


barriephillips ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 12:36 PM

Just wanted to say that thats a great scene , but for some reason my focus is on the wall :( ... I was wondering if it was a concious decision to make the wall do that (bricks getting bigger as they go up) and how do you get it to do that or not (Im sure Im gonnna run into that problem some time soon).. Best wishes, Barrie.


sebastel ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 12:57 PM

it's a matter of the geometry of the wall as well as the actual mapping of the texture.


barriephillips ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 1:57 PM

thanx for the response but I cant say I understand why the geometry and UV maps would do that .. I thought it may of been a camera thing (something I know very little about F-stops, field of vision etc) ? Best wishes.


EnglishBob ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 3:46 PM

I rendered this in two stages - Vicki, the pavement and the lamp-post were done with a "long" lens (100mm), but the wall was done with a "fisheye" (about 3mm if I recall) and the two were composited together. I did do it on purpose to make the surroundings seem to be looming menacingly - didn't quite work as well as I'd expected, but congratulations Barrie - you were right, and you're the first to notice. :-)


barriephillips ( ) posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 3:58 PM

thanks for the explaination EnglishBob :) ... It does work since I took a few looks at the picture and the effect is that the wall is coming toward you .. I think if it was a bit more subtle I wouldnt of noticed at all apart from some subliminal tension in the picture .. its a nice effect and one for me to remember .. Thank you :) Barrie. ( I really need to study these camera properties, they seem to be a very essential part of the picture .. in thirds even .. Subject, Lights , Camera. .. hmm or "lights, camera , action" )


Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.