Sorry I couldn't find the answer using search, but what's the reason behind V3's hip orientation being slightly tilted?  Of all the time I've been using V3, I just now realized that hip orientation of x,y,x rotation under joint editor is not zero.  The actual initial hip position itself is all zero (under the properties), but the orientation value under joint editor is not.  Because of this, when I rotate the hip along the y-axis, V3 rotates slightly tilted.  I've checked the other Daz figures but V3 seems to the only figure that has this issue.  I've even downloaded a brand new copy of V3 from the Daz and installed it but still the same thing.

I can easily fix this by manually changing the orientation to all zeroes, but why was it like this to begin with?

It is to help with IK I am pretty sure.

I think you are talking about figures default position not being zero to help with IK, no?  Because hip orientation only affects the figure when I rotate the hip.  Besides, V3 is only DAZ figure that I see having this issue, so I just wonder if it's just an error on their part.

Orientation is for aligning a joint with respect to the world coordinate system (where they start if the orientation is (0,0,0)).  This is usually used when the body part geometry is modeled off orientation with the world system.  Orientation is independent of the rotation dial values - think of it as a pre-rotation - and it does not change the body part geometry, just the joint of the body part.  It also does not change when rotating body parts - only if you change the orientation in the Joint Editor.
For V3's hip, this might be some sort of modeling of the real hip orientation.  The rotations are very small (less than 2d for any of them).  Could be that they didn't care about the slight orientation or it could have been intentional.  You'll need to talk to DAZ about that. :)

Personally don't think there is anything to worry about.  If you want to rotate the entire figure, best to use the BODY instead - which happens to have (0,0,0) orientation.

Robert

Would you show us how you noticed, or more over where you zero'd it?

kuroyume0161, that was very kind of you, I appreciate your help, thank you very much!

So, what do we think I, just stumbling into this, should do, indeed zero the setting, and save(I like things rounded and tidy at zero?)

What are these Joint Parameters for the hip intended to do; besides make her Rotate on the Y-Axis uneven, when I zero'd the setting I did'nt notice any other effects?

Any idea what that Align button is for?  I tried it, after I zero'd the figure, and it gave me a huge X-Rotate, which made the Body > Y-Rotate swing way off center.

:mellow:

Personally, I wouldn't zero the setting - although it shouldn't affect much.  Conforming figures will compensate and poses will be off so slightly as to be unnoticable.

Basically, Orientation determines the default (when the rotate dials are zero) axial system about which the body part will rotate.  For instance, if you set the Orientation xrot to 90d note the effect that it has on the rotation dials.  The thing that I abhor about Poser is that it only shows the Origin/Endpoint for the joint - the orientation can be very ambiguous.  So you change the orientation and there is no visual cue to show the new rotation system.  Well, it does, but orthogonal changes (90d/180d/270d) are indistinguishable because the cross-hairs are not shown axis-specific.

Align is sort of mysterious.  The manual says this:

Clicking the Align button aligns the joint with its underylying body part or group.

"Secrets of Figure Creation with Poser 5" puts it this way:

The "Align" button is a sort of auto-rotator.  If you move the cross-hairs around so they are no longer lined up, you can press this buttin to have them point at each other

So, basically, if you change the Origin/Endpoint of the body part, this button will fix the orientation so that the angles represent a vector from the Origin to the Endpoint (if you understand that).

Robert

Quote - The rotations are very small (less than 2d for any of them).  Could be that they didn't care about the slight orientation or it could have been intentional.  You'll need to talk to DAZ about that. :)

Thanks for all the explanation Robert.  Like I said, the tilt is only slight and could easily been unnoticeable.  I just only found out about it when I was using the symmetrical pose, where I had V3 on the ground with her arm spread out touching the floor.  One hand was positioned evenly with the ground but the other was completely below it.  Of course, I could easily fix this by repositioning the arm, but it was still annoying nonetheless and shouldn't have been needed to in the first place.

Quote - Personally don't think there is anything to worry about.  If you want to rotate the entire figure, best to use the BODY instead - which happens to have (0,0,0) orientation.

I do use rotate using the Body to rotate the entire figure.  However, I use the hip rotation when I use IK, so that I can position the legs better, a must when doing the animation.  Also, I believe the Body parameter is not saved when the pose is saved to the library.  Having said all that, again, the tilt is only minimal and is virtually unnoticeable in just about every pose.  It's just that, when using the symmetrical pose, I could easily tell the figure is unbalanced and has to be compensated for.  I mean, for it being such a minor detail, and for it to be so obvious, I just figure there had to be a specific reason why Daz left it like that, when they obviously zeroed the orientation for all of their other figures.  Oh well, I'll just move on I guess.

Thanks guys, I'll go ahead and clean house a little..