RorrKonn opened this issue on Apr 18, 2007 ยท 266 posts
Zarat posted Tue, 24 April 2007 at 10:16 AM
Quote - You obviously don't really know what you're talking about:
MorphBrush morphs load BEFORE the joint parameters so that they make the mesh directly manipulable.
This makes them completely unique compared to any other rigging method.
There is no need to export, and so far I neither used more than a few minutes to make them.
(A lot faster than having to do postwork)Besides, noone says that you have to do morphbrush correction morphs over and over again.
Like V3's JCM morphs or V2's correction morphs they can be used over and over again over a whole range of poses.
Oh well... It would have been better to use the biggest font size for the word excessively and put its definition right after it. Excessively means what it means and nothing else.
Further I can not see the need to point out the obvious. Maybe I start with the fact that the computer must be turned on before the OS can load and after this is done I can start Poser at some point. But this is obvious...
Just as it obvious that joint params can not be loaded before the morph brush data to get this result.
I really have not the slightest idea what I'm talking about and thus I was stating clearly that modifications via morph brush are the same as other morphs. And as a logical conclusion of lacking knowledge and my aversion of morph brush I was saying that it's totally crap and that it should be fixed/patched out of the software.
Oh wait... Actually I wrote:
Quote - A character with more bones sounds great.
It would help a lot in fixing the weird look that figures often get after doing rather normal posing with them.
Right now the only things that help after adjusting of the bones (and related settings) is to take the figure to a modeling app or to play around with this morph brush of Poser 7. The morph brush is great but it screws up the mesh somehow if used excessively.
Let me explain this part for you:
"...modeling app or to play around with this morph brush of Poser 7. The morph brush is great but it screws up the mesh somehow if used excessively..."
I have loaded a figure and applied some pose to it.
The mesh bends and the result looks odd or unrealistic or even ugly.
Now I can export the odd looking parts and fix them in Shade or Maya and reimport them as morph target to Poser.
OR
I can use the morph brush of Poser 7 and fix these parts with it.
Then I don't have to do any export-import action, but often I keep a copy of the modifications in case I need something similar again. But that again is obvious.
...
Are you still with me? Shouldn't be to hard to grasp til yet, right?
Ok, now the screwed mesh part.
While I know that the morph tool does not replace a true modeling app nor does it have much in common with said apps, except that one can move single vertices, I like it a lot.Because I like it a lot I wrote that the morph brush is great.
No, I don't look down at Poser or the morph brush just because I have all the other oh so great and professional apps installed. - In case that was what you read out of that line.
All that stands there is that the morph brush tends to fuck up the mesh if used excessively.
There is absolutely nothing that one can get wrong.
It's the same as saying that Windows 2003 DCS R2 tends to crash if one starts many apps which require much resources and if this is done over a couple of days.
This says only that said Windows doesn't like it if you start said apps very often and this over some days. It does not say that this Windows is crap and it does not say that it is the right way to use this Windows.
Actually I like said Windows version (for SMP, RAM support and virtualization) and I can live with the fact that I have to restart the computers once a week or at least all 2 weeks.
The same way I like the morph brush and while knowing how to use it I have to look what are its limits before using it in the way it is thought to be used. Easy, heh?
My wording may be different as for me there's no emotional link to any of the named Software, but we basically say the same.