Since I didn't get a response at the DAZ forum, I figured I'd see if FaceShop users here can help provide me some info on the program. FaceShop is a "maybe" program for me. I'm seeing some incredible results and some not so impressive results. I've read a lot of complaints and a lot of compliments. I'm left with a bunch of questions.

1. What are the differences between the Pro and Basic versions? It appears that the main differences are usability for all figures (Basic is V4 & M3) and support for larger textures.

2. Is there an upgrade path from Basic to Pro? I'm more willing to take a chance with Basic because it's half the price. If i finally decide I'm happy enough to go to the Pro version, I won't want to pay for a whole new application as if I hadn't ever bought the program.

3. Has anybody tried using Pro with different figures such as creatures and animals? Most of what I've seen has been with V4 and M3.

4. Has anybody tried creature morphs? It would seem that it ought to be possible to use this program to do some very drastic morphs using images from comic drawings, personal drawings, photos of Halloween masks, etc. This could make the program an excellent resource for creating a variety of fantasy and science fiction characters.

5. Will future upgrades be free to owners? That leaves me with a buy now or wait till it's better and when I have more free time to use it.

6. What is the average time to get a decent morph?

1. You have the right answer. Basic only works with V4 and M3 and only with DS, unless you want to dick around with resizing. Now that was what I remember from the original threads at Daz. The Pro works with pretty much any figure and Poser. You do have to export the figure's head that you want to use without the eyes to use in Facshop first for poser use. The larger textures make for better textures but you will still need to use your favorite paint app to do some post for better results.

2. I would think so but buy at Daz and I think it's 40% off there and you have the 30 day moneyback garantee. You don't get that here.

3/4. No I have not tried animal heads, yet. But I have tried using V3 with an animal image and it worked to a point. Again,I would chalk that up to learning some tricks. I have tested 2d/Anime images to see how that works with good results. So it is a matter of the learning curve again.

1. I can't say but They  keep pointing out how the SR1 is Free, that I have a feeling that the new version will cost. So it is your choice if you buy now or not. But as I stated earlier, buying from Daz is like having a demo for 30 days.

2. This one took about 20 minutes total, with post and P7 Morph Brush to smooth some of the morph out. Not purfect but looks good all the same.

Thanks for the examples, beryld.  As someone who's considering this software as well, I appreciate the information.

This is the first hint / indication that I've heard that there's supposed to be a new version in the works after SR1.

Quote - Thanks for the examples, beryld.  As someone who's considering this software as well, I appreciate the information.

This is the first hint / indication that I've heard that there's supposed to be a new version in the works after SR1.

Yep,

there will be a new version (and upgrade to it) but not before the Fall.
We have taken a lot of good suggestions from our beta testers on how to improve the product further and we are working on it.
Laslo

Thanks for that information, Laslo.

This program provides a functionality which I've wanted for a long time.  I've been impressed by some of the results that I've seen.

If the software does what it's keyed to do -- then it'll be an excellent tool.  WELL worth the money.

I have bought it a few days ago.  First impressions:

• incredible technology, uses any existing mesh and UVmap. far superior to the faceroom in poser
• good support. They promptly answered my e-mail questions
• simple use model
• cheap

• horrible and primitive use interface (am I using the SR1 version? The about screen is not accessible)
• mega buggy software. I may have done around 20 morphs and it crashed on around 10 of them
• it doesn't like iconising
• the control points disappear when the left ear point is entered
• immature, the results are too distorted to be useful without postprocessing
• it really needs a few more sliders to split the overall morph into:
    headshape, eyeshape, ears etc It really needs the facility to cope with a second shot (in profile) when available
• very annoying: you have to enter the control points on imported OBJ meshes EVERY TIME.
  That's half the work per morph and unnecessary

Thanks for that information, too xen.

I think that overall -- the app will be useful to me.  Although it appears to be..........'not yet perfected'.

Well, I'm considering to get the application, but it is a certain amount of money and I would love to see a full critical review. So I thank you all for the information here. As I see from the comments the main concerns are stability and distortion of the mesh. Hope they get that fixed, as well as the annoying interface bugs. In general this tool can be very handy.

I agree with XEN with his predominantly negative assessment absolutely.

The program holds in no way that what promises it wholehearted.

The acquisition is thrown away money. I have tried to complain to DAZ the purchase, but also on 3 e-mails no answer got.

The update on version 3.15 is a superficial cosmetics, in the inadequacy of the program nothing has changed.

I will keep it.

If it doesn't crash it still gets you to a starting point for a morph and texture, but I hope these guys in Hungary are motivated by their sales to redo the user interface.

By the way: How can you see that you have v 3.15?

... only in the Help file, this announces itself with version 3.15.

The user's interface reminds of the beginnings of the PC graphic arts.

I also do not understand, why one cannot edit and correct the curves and positions in the right part.

Yes you can adjust and correct the curves. You have to finish the curves first, then you can move them and move the nodes or even add or delet the nodes. This can be done with the points at the start also. 

Distortion of the mesh is mainly caused by not using enough nodes but there is a bit of a problem in the mirroring but if you have P7, it is a matter of using the morph brush set to soften.

I don't know how anyone can say this is a waste of money for the price and what it gives you to work with. Sure it's not FaceGen, but it is only about a 20th the price. The interface could do with some work.

As I stated earlier, there is a learning curve and not a very hard one at that. Do I think it's perfect, NO, not even close. Do I think it has it's use as another tool to help get the end results of what I'm doing, YES.

... this is not correct.

I can not correct neither the position points nor the curves in right picture half.

Extinguish merely everything and from the front begin.

This is not satisfactory a programming from the beginnings of the computer-graphic and for a price of 80 dollars.

Then your not doing it right or maybe some of us have a rare version.

No Sir, Version 3.15 Pro

I haven't been all that impressed with what I've seen of FaceGen.  It's an awful lot of money for a mono-use 3D app.  Sure, you can generate some great virtual duplicates of people......but at a very high price.  If a relatively low-cost app comes along which does the same thing as FaceGen for a reasonable price, then FaceGen might just find itself out of business.

Could FaceShop Pro be that app.........?  Maybe.

TrueSpace has a built-in face generating function -- and at least with TS, you are getting a full-blown modeling app for the money: not just a restricted-use face creation software package.  On top of which, FaceGen isn't Poser-friendly, either.  You've got to jump through a lot of hoops to create a workable face for V4 -- or any other Poser figure -- using FaceGen.

If they can smooth the wrinkles out of FaceShop Pro (no pun intended): then they'll have an advocate for the program in me.

BTW - I am not going to slam the creators of FaceShop.  At least they've taken a genuine stab at providing something that Poserdom has needed for a long, long time.  And some people have clearly been able to make it all work for them.

So, it's possible to achieve good results.  Even if it takes a little doing.

And some people don't seem to think that it's all that hard.............:sneaky:

XENOPHONZ wrote:  "BTW - I am not going to slam the creators of FaceShop.  At least they've taken a genuine stab at providing something that Poserdom has needed for a long, long time.  And some people have clearly been able to make it all work for them."

Yep, many of us have complained that there was no faceroom use for the Daz figures. Now we have one for pretty much any figure we want to use.

XENOPHONZ wrote:  "And some people don't seem to think that it's all that hard............."

That must be the " software that is easy for one person, is hair lose for others."  I can relate to that. I tried TrueSpace once and decided that setting my head on fire would be less painful. LOL

It really is in taking the time to learn it, before bashing it. As has been shown, human error can make it look bad even when it is not the program.

BTW, I don't think FaceGen is worh that kind of money either from what I have seen.

Quote - I haven't been all that impressed with what I've seen of FaceGen.  It's an awful lot of money for a mono-use 3D app.  Sure, you can generate some great virtual duplicates of people......but at a very high price.  If a relatively low-cost app comes along which does the same thing as FaceGen for a reasonable price, then FaceGen might just find itself out of business.

Could FaceShop Pro be that app.........?  Maybe.

TrueSpace has a built-in face generating function -- and at least with TS, you are getting a full-blown modeling app for the money: not just a restricted-use face creation software package.  On top of which, FaceGen isn't Poser-friendly, either.  You've got to jump through a lot of hoops to create a workable face for V4 -- or any other Poser figure -- using FaceGen.

If they can smooth the wrinkles out of FaceShop Pro (no pun intended): then they'll have an advocate for the program in me.

Hi XENOPHONZ
I love your pun (smooth the wrinkles out of FaceShop Pro ), it shows humor and a generous spirit, something that is not shared by a few here.
Yes, indeed, we are smoothing. I hope we can smooth a lot and add a few useful features to 3.5 (due out in the Fall). 
One of the new features I am thinking of is the abilty to create a head, trun it to a new angle AND then go back and re-iterate it again. This woulod be a process where you could refine the intial results using new angles.
Of course I also agree with idea of adding sliders to controll deformity (as applied to specific items).
Pls. sign up for 3.5 beta when it is time:-)
Laslo

Laslo, this sounds exciting. I hope the work goes well!

Excellent! I am happy to hear that improvements are in the works.

Is this a good place to post improvement suggestions?

Thanks for the beta-test offer, Laslo.  You've got my interest.  And I like the ideas that you've listed for 3.5.

I believe that y'all need to be encouraged in what you are doing.  It is an extremely useful and needed functionality for Poser.

My issues with Faceshop Pro are that they are charging way too much money for what is essentially, a BetaTest piece of Software! I find charging your beta testers a full software package price to be at best a slip shode way of getting a decent software package to market at worst, slightly unethical. Just my opinion. I returned it and got my money back. Feel free to let me know when you guy's are completely done beta-testing it.

Hej Spaceman, I appreciate your point of view and I swear when the darn thing crashes, but when it doesn't, it still does the job of converting a picture into a morph much better than the faceroom in P5, P6 and P7.

shrug

IMO, I've yet to see a new software released which didn't experience........unanticipated difficulties.  Ever.

I get the feeling that these guys are working on it.  That fact alone makes them better than some.  And worthy of at least a nod to their efforts in that direction.

Quote - My issues with Faceshop Pro are that they are charging way too much money for what is essentially, a BetaTest piece of Software! I find charging your beta testers a full software package price to be at best a slip shode way of getting a decent software package to market at worst, slightly unethical. Just my opinion. I returned it and got my money back. Feel free to let me know when you guy's are completely done beta-testing it.

The product ISN'T in Beta. It's complete software. Now if you had said it was simply something you couldn't learn within what you consider a reasonable amount of time, then fine, but don't call it Beta software. It's giving some people the results they expected.

If you expected to scan a picture from a magazine cover, and in 10 minutes be working with a replica of Jessica Alba, then you paid a few hundred bucks too little for your "Beta."

Anyway, Laslo, would it be possible for me to get into the Beta for the next version? I'd love to be involved. I've got previous Beta experience on a high level. I'd love to help be a part of making this an even better product! (Is there somewhere we should watch for an announcement of the Beta opening up?)

Quote - Excellent! I am happy to hear that improvements are in the works.

Is this a good place to post improvement suggestions?

Yes, yes and yes.
Laslo

Quote - > Quote - My issues with Faceshop Pro are that they are charging way too much money for what is essentially, a BetaTest piece of Software! I find charging your beta testers a full software package price to be at best a slip shode way of getting a decent software package to market at worst, slightly unethical. Just my opinion. I returned it and got my money back. Feel free to let me know when you guy's are completely done beta-testing it.

 

The product ISN'T in Beta. It's complete software. Now if you had said it was simply something you couldn't learn within what you consider a reasonable amount of time, then fine, but don't call it Beta software. It's giving some people the results they expected.

If you expected to scan a picture from a magazine cover, and in 10 minutes be working with a replica of Jessica Alba, then you paid a few hundred bucks too little for your "Beta."

Anyway, Laslo, would it be possible for me to get into the Beta for the next version? I'd love to be involved. I've got previous Beta experience on a high level. I'd love to help be a part of making this an even better product! (Is there somewhere we should watch for an announcement of the Beta opening up?)

Positvely. Pls. e-mail me to info@abalonellc.com and I'll place you on the beta list.
And yes, we are very interested in suggestions to fixes and new features.
Laslo

Has anybody tried FaceGen? It looks like it is what  FaceShop is trying to be. Does anyone know if it’s possible to export a DAZ or Poser face and alter it using a photo and import it back into Poser again so he looks like John Wayne or Marylyn Monroe or me! And then would it have all the morphs in place just like it was before I exported it? I would pay $300 for that. Of course I wouldn’t expect perfection because I would still have to get the hair and the texture right but if it would be recognizable and animatable I would consider it money well spent. 
Steve

Quote - > Quote - My issues with Faceshop Pro are that they are charging way too much money for what is essentially, a BetaTest piece of Software! I find charging your beta testers a full software package price to be at best a slip shode way of getting a decent software package to market at worst, slightly unethical. Just my opinion. I returned it and got my money back. Feel free to let me know when you guy's are completely done beta-testing it.

 

The product ISN'T in Beta. It's complete software. Now if you had said it was simply something you couldn't learn within what you consider a reasonable amount of time, then fine, but don't call it Beta software. It's giving some people the results they expected.

If you expected to scan a picture from a magazine cover, and in 10 minutes be working with a replica of Jessica Alba, then you paid a few hundred bucks too little for your "Beta."

Definition of BetaTest Software found via Google:
Before a commercial software program is released to the public, it usually goes through a "beta" phase. During this stage, the software is tested for bugs, crashes, errors, inconsistencies, and any other problems. Though beta versions of software used to be made available only to developers, they are now sometimes made available for the general public to test, usually through the software company's Web site. However, because beta software is free, the programs usually expire after a period of time. If you choose to test a beta software program, don't be surprised if it has multiple problems and causes your computer to repeatedly crash. After all, it is the beta version. You can tell if a program is still in beta by checking the program's properties. If there is a "b" in the version number (i.e. Version: 1.2 b3) that means it's a beta version.- end def

The first commercial release of this software had many serious crash issues which should have been caught in beta but were unleashed on the public to discover and report. Crashes during simple windows operations such as browsing to the directories where textures and OBJ's for import were located caused crashes to desktops. Trying to move points on the meshes didn't work as advertised and caused crashes to desktop. Not restarting the software when starting a new project caused crashes to desktop. Those are just three of the crashes I experienced when I bought it. All three of which should have been caught by real beta testers! 

My opinion was based on the Software's actual inability to perform as expected and had nothing to do with the results I was able to achieve in it. Regardless, it was and remains my opinion of the initial release. I got my money back and I'm happy they're improving it. When it get's out of Beta, I'll be glad to give it another try.  Yes I still call it a Beta piece of software based on Laslo posting that they're still accepting BetaTesters for the software. Feel free to disagree.

Quote - Has anybody tried FaceGen? It looks like it is what  FaceShop is trying to be. Does anyone know if it’s possible to export a DAZ or Poser face and alter it using a photo and import it back into Poser again so he looks like John Wayne or Marylyn Monroe or me! And then would it have all the morphs in place just like it was before I exported it? I would pay $300 for that. Of course I wouldn’t expect perfection because I would still have to get the hair and the texture right but if it would be recognizable and animatable I would consider it money well spent. 
Steve

No -- it's no where near that easy to do with FaceGen.  The last time that I checked, to get a face into Poser out of FaceGen requires about 3 times more than $300 -- as there are several different components that you have to buy.  And then once you've created your head, what you've got isn't anywhere near being Poser-ready.  No morphs -- no expressions -- no body -- no nuthin'.  You've got a lot of work to do between generating a FaceGen head and getting it to be anything like usable in Poser.  What you've got is only an .obj file -- which in its raw form will load into Poser like a static prop.  shrug  If all that you want is an expressionless or one-expression head, then it might be OK.  But if you want to use it on top of a V4 figure -- complete with expressions and so forth -- then you'll have many hoops to jump through first.

There used to be some tutorials online, plus a yahoo group started by someone who specialized in getting FaceGen heads into Poser.  But that was over 3 years ago.  I don't have any links, and I don't know if they are still on the air now.

There was a better program called 3DMeNow.  But that piece of software would have set you back something like $3000.  I say "would have", because I believe that the company which made that program -- biovirtual -- went belly-up some 2-3 years ago.  Before they did, they had been working on a companion body-creation program to go along with their face-generating 3DMeNow program.  But they went kaput instead.

If you are used to doing heavy organic modeling in Lightwave, Maya, or XSI -- then FaceGen might work for you.  But I wouldn't recommend it for the average Poser user.  Not unless if that 'average Poser user' happens to know a lot about high-end organic modeling.  In which case they might be able to make it work for them.

BTW - you might already know this: the Poser Face Room is a severely cut-down version of FaceGen technology.

Singular Inversions itself tells you in their FAQ's that FG's interface with Poser is extremely limited, at best.

http://www.facegen.com/faq.htm#poser

So, no.  I wouldn't recommend FaceGen for use with Poser.  You'd be better off learning how to twiddle morph dials to create clones.

But FaceShop?  I see some real potential for Poser with that program -- that much less expensive program.

I should add that IMO, the Face Room is Poser's weakest (and perhaps least-used) feature.  Which is too bad........because I think that the Face Room has great potential, if it were done better.

"Yes I still call it a Beta piece of software based on Laslo posting that they're still accepting BetaTesters for the software."

You mean selecting beta testers. All the promoting I have done and has made a point to ask others in every thread I have posted in.

Think it was something I said? LOL.

Poser faceroom lost a lot of use being restricted to EF figures.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - My issues with Faceshop Pro are that they are charging way too much money for what is essentially, a BetaTest piece of Software! I find charging your beta testers a full software package price to be at best a slip shode way of getting a decent software package to market at worst, slightly unethical. Just my opinion. I returned it and got my money back. Feel free to let me know when you guy's are completely done beta-testing it.

 

The product ISN'T in Beta. It's complete software. Now if you had said it was simply something you couldn't learn within what you consider a reasonable amount of time, then fine, but don't call it Beta software. It's giving some people the results they expected.

If you expected to scan a picture from a magazine cover, and in 10 minutes be working with a replica of Jessica Alba, then you paid a few hundred bucks too little for your "Beta."

 

Definition of BetaTest Software found via Google:
Before a commercial software program is released to the public, it usually goes through a "beta" phase. During this stage, the software is tested for bugs, crashes, errors, inconsistencies, and any other problems. Though beta versions of software used to be made available only to developers, they are now sometimes made available for the general public to test, usually through the software company's Web site. However, because beta software is free, the programs usually expire after a period of time. If you choose to test a beta software program, don't be surprised if it has multiple problems and causes your computer to repeatedly crash. After all, it is the beta version. You can tell if a program is still in beta by checking the program's properties. If there is a "b" in the version number (i.e. Version: 1.2 b3) that means it's a beta version.- end def

The first commercial release of this software had many serious crash issues which should have been caught in beta but were unleashed on the public to discover and report. Crashes during simple windows operations such as browsing to the directories where textures and OBJ's for import were located caused crashes to desktops. Trying to move points on the meshes didn't work as advertised and caused crashes to desktop. Not restarting the software when starting a new project caused crashes to desktop. Those are just three of the crashes I experienced when I bought it. All three of which should have been caught by real beta testers! 

My opinion was based on the Software's actual inability to perform as expected and had nothing to do with the results I was able to achieve in it. Regardless, it was and remains my opinion of the initial release. I got my money back and I'm happy they're improving it. When it get's out of Beta, I'll be glad to give it another try.  Yes I still call it a Beta piece of software based on Laslo posting that they're still accepting BetaTesters for the software. Feel free to disagree.

Well, I do disagree. I have yet to experience one crash, and I purchased it right after the first public release.

I don't understand the opinion that it does not perform as expected. It does exactly what I expect it to do.

Ripping apart a product in a public forum, simply because it doesn't do something you feel it "should" is where I'm finding issue with your argument. I don't understand where your issue comes from. What does the software not do that is advertised? You begin with an image, you select points on the face, and eventually it transfers that image to the OBJ.

It's not FaceGen, but then, they never claimed it was. FaceGen is hundreds of dollars. FaceShop is 60-80, depending on whether you get it on sale or not. Arguing this is akin, at least to me, to arguing that Poser doesn't do everything 3DS Max does.

Quote - > Quote - Excellent! I am happy to hear that improvements are in the works.

Is this a good place to post improvement suggestions?

Yes, yes and yes.
Laslo

Oh good.

The general use model of importing an existing obj head is fantastic.
Much better than having it only work with custom meshes.

As clever as the morphing technology is as clunky is the interface.
Not only that, but buggy too. For example I found that I must select the screenarea after loading the target head in the first step. If I do it in another order it replaces my selection with a random rectangle.

Also after clicking on the left ear makes the other points disappear. Both these bugs happen consistently which seems to indicate that not much care was taken testing the software before shipping. Maybe this is what some of the buyers are objecting too. This is a shame because I would have thought that the user interface was much easier to do and fix than the clever algorithms underneath.

There are several uses for the program, you may want to clone a famous person and you may be interested in the morph, the texture, or both.

I would like to use it for making characters with facial animation (for a game). I would like to import a mesh (free or custom) and then use a live model to make the morph as well as phoneme morphs and expressions.

This is also useful for the general poser world, because each person need unique expression morphs to be realistic, not just the standard ones shipped with model.

I have tried it with an open mouth morph and the results was not too bad already!

Here is a tip for people who want to make clones:
premorph the figure into approximately the right shape before exporting the obj from poser, if FaceShop Pro only has subtle changes to make the distortions are smaller.

Some suggestions:

Calibrating the target head should only happen once, best in wireframe with snapping to vertices.
I.e. you click on all the key vertices and edges of the head mesh and then save it in a FaceShop format, so you never have to do that step for this head again.

What is the purpose of clicking on the ears, eyes etc of the reference picture? If it is just to rotate the target head into the same angle it would be nice to have the option to do that directly (or tweak the suggested angle). Lopsides smiles for example seem to cause the target head to be not at the right angle, it is easier to see by eye which one is right.

Drawing the reference lines on the the picture is essential of course, but not on the target head. Why do we need to outline the target head, the program should know where the outline is already.

I agree that the flow needs to be iterative. Here is a suggestion about this.
You could have any number of tabs on the left window, each showing a different reference picture. (Of the same object but from a different angle).

Clicking a button makes a morph (the step that takes a long time) then you can see the result on the right hand window and blend the morphs and textures from the other tabs on the left, by facial feature (so you can dial 70% of the nose of tab1 and 50% of the eyes in tab2 etc) Moving the sliders is wysiwyg because the expensive morphing step is already done.

If the results for one tab are distorted, you can go back and move the control points a bit and recalculate.

Hope this is useful. Good luck.

Quote - "Yes I still call it a Beta piece of software based on Laslo posting that they're still accepting BetaTesters for the software."

You mean selecting beta testers. All the promoting I have done and has made a point to ask others in every thread I have posted in.

Think it was something I said? LOL.

Poser faceroom lost a lot of use being restricted to EF figures.

Laslo answers:
Just for clarification:
FaceShop 3.15 is final and shipping. It is not beta!!!
I am asking for beta testers to sign up for FUTURE releases (3.5 and beyond).
Laslo

Quote - Well, I do disagree. I have yet to experience one crash, and I purchased it right after the first public release. I don't understand the opinion that it does not perform as expected. It does exactly what I expect it to do.

Ripping apart a product in a public forum, simply because it doesn't do something you feel it "should" is where I'm finding issue with your argument. I don't understand where your issue comes from. What does the software not do that is advertised? You begin with an image, you select points on the face, and eventually it transfers that image to the OBJ.

Well let me explain it for you then shall I? First off, I haven't "Ripped it apart"! I've pointed out three of the many instances where the software crashed on me repeatedly when I too bought it fresh out of the public release gates. All three of those instances and many others could have been avoided with proper error trapping routines. Things that should have been put in the program before a public release of the software. If proper beta testing had been done they would have caught most of those bugs and done so. 

Second, you ask what it doesn't do as advertised, well since I no longer own the most current program I can't speak to the current release, but as I've already stated, I was completely unable to "Move" dot's once placed on the mesh as advertised to make them work better with the first public release. The program crashed repeatedly on me when I tried. You just happen to be one of the lucky ones it didn't do that to I guess. This lack of use for one of the main advertised features that could and should have been avoided by having proper error trapping tells me the release was premature. Especially since it was complained about by so many others besides myself. 

Thirdly they released it to the public KNOWING that there were bugs like the blackface issue and they said as much at the time of release! That was just inexcusable for a public release package! You don't do that to your customers if you expect to keep them! They released it with many faults that they were aware of and could have prevented if they had gone through proper beta testing phases instead of rushing it to market

My last point is that they advertised it's ability to also create textures to go with the morphs and we all know that what the program produced was crap that was unusable without serious postwork in a 3rd party application if you wanted to end up with a usable texture. I'm sure there are many other issues that other's had as they've all been posted about in the forums. These were my issues and my reasons for believing that they released what was essentially beta quality software on the public.

Since you experienced none of them while so many others did, consider yourself lucky for having a machine specced so closely to one of the few betatest machines where the problems sneaked by on. Many others were not so lucky. 

You state you don't understand the "Opinion" that it doesn't perform as expected. Let me just point out to you that that wasn't an opinion at all. It was verifiable and repeatable FACT as publically shown by so many people who posted all the complaints and issues they had with the software's initial release! 

My "opinion" was that they charged too much money for the betatest quality of their first public release, a different matter all together and just my opinion in the end. It is also my opinion that the program was released with too many known crash and inoperability issues to be anything other than a piece of software that should have remained in BetaTesting or fixed. I don't mind if you disagree with those two opinions, but the facts remain true regardless of it all.

Quote - Well let me explain it for you then shall I? First off, I haven't "Ripped it apart"! I've pointed out three of the many instances where the software crashed on me repeatedly when I too bought it fresh out of the public release gates. All three of those instances and many others could have been avoided with proper error trapping routines. Things that should have been put in the program before a public release of the software. If proper beta testing had been done they would have caught most of those bugs and done so.

Eh, you ripped on the software. And you assume that it was the fault of the programmers for your shortcomings with the program. What you are referring to as "bugs" aren't necessarily that. A bug is consistently repeatable across multiple systems. As I've said, I've yet to experience ANY of the issues you've brought up. There goes the consistency.

Quote - Second, you ask what it doesn't do as advertised, well since I no longer own the most current program I can't speak to the current release, but as I've already stated, I was completely unable to "Move" dot's once placed on the mesh as advertised to make them work better with the first public release. The program crashed repeatedly on me when I tried. You just happen to be one of the lucky ones it didn't do that to I guess. This lack of use for one of the main advertised features that could and should have been avoided by having proper error trapping tells me the release was premature. Especially since it was complained about by so many others besides myself.

I wasn't discussing the newest release. I am aware you don't have the current version, since you've stated as much.

But now you're referring to me as "lucky," and expecting that catchall to make up for the fact that I'm not having, nor have had, the experience you have. So if I wrote off you and the few others that have complained about the software as "unlucky," I guess it would be all even, correct?

Quote - Thirdly they released it to the public KNOWING that there were bugs like the blackface issue and they said as much at the time of release! That was just inexcusable for a public release package! You don't do that to your customers if you expect to keep them! They released it with many faults that they were aware of and could have prevented if they had gone through proper beta testing phases instead of rushing it to market

I didn't scour the problem threads, so I have no idea whatsoever regarding this "blackface" issue.

"Many faults" is a pretty loose term. Microsoft Vista could be said to have "many faults," but nevertheless, it's on the market, and it has sold.

And there are many people who think it's wonderful.

Quote - My last point is that they advertised it's ability to also create textures to go with the morphs and we all know that what the program produced was crap that was unusable without serious postwork in a 3rd party application if you wanted to end up with a usable texture. I'm sure there are many other issues that other's had as they've all been posted about in the forums. These were my issues and my reasons for believing that they released what was essentially beta quality software on the public.

And therein is my issue with your ripping the software. You are pretending to represent the feelings of the majority, when in fact, you haven't the slightest clue what the majority thinks. "We all know" is a flat out lie, and you're putting words into my mouth. I've had no issues with the resulting textures so far. Any postwork I've done has been because that was my choice.

Quote - Since you experienced none of them while so many others did, consider yourself lucky for having a machine specced so closely to one of the few betatest machines where the problems sneaked by on. Many others were not so lucky.

Again, if you consider me "lucky," then I have to write off your experience as simply "unlucky."

Quote - You state you don't understand the "Opinion" that it doesn't perform as expected. Let me just point out to you that that wasn't an opinion at all. It was verifiable and repeatable FACT as publically shown by so many people who posted all the complaints and issues they had with the software's initial release!

Ummm, people "publicly" stating their opinion on the internet does not qualify something as fact. Actually, quite the contrary. Wikipedia has the ability to correct people's posting of misinformation. If you think a bunch of anger-filled posts on the internet allows something to be qualified as factual, perhaps you should take a hop over to MySpace and see just how much stupidity there is in this world.

Quote - My "opinion" was that they charged too much money for the betatest quality of their first public release, a different matter all together and just my opinion in the end. It is also my opinion that the program was released with too many known crash and inoperability issues to be anything other than a piece of software that should have remained in BetaTesting or fixed. I don't mind if you disagree with those two opinions, but the facts remain true regardless of it all.

Fair enough, now you're representing your opinion for what it is. Opinion only. You believe, that based on your own user experience, this software did not live up to your expectations. That's your opinion. Well, your experience sucked, and I'm sorry you had to go through that. However, it does not change the fact that there are at least as many people out there with wholly positive experiences as have had poor ones. The only difference is, those who are having a good time aren't sitting around the message boards complaining. That's why you didn't see us.

It's obvious:  I need to buy this software.

Quote - > Quote - Well let me explain it for you then shall I? First off, I haven't "Ripped it apart"! I've pointed out three of the many instances where the software crashed on me repeatedly when I too bought it fresh out of the public release gates. All three of those instances and many others could have been avoided with proper error trapping routines. Things that should have been put in the program before a public release of the software. If proper beta testing had been done they would have caught most of those bugs and done so.

Eh, you ripped on the software. And you assume that it was the fault of the programmers for your shortcomings with the program. What you are referring to as "bugs" aren't necessarily that. A bug is consistently repeatable across multiple systems. As I've said, I've yet to experience ANY of the issues you've brought up. There goes the consistency.

Dude! You assume something here that you have no facts to base it upon. You assume, I only had these problems on ONE computer setup. You assume WRONG! I happen to have tried the software on 4 completely different desktop computers and 1 laptop. All completely different manufacturer's and was able to verify the exact same errors on each machine! 

When an error can be verified and repeated. It's a bug! That's not bad luck or a shortcoming on my part. That's the software. Plain and simple! Just because your expeirience was good doesn't negate the bugs I and many others found and reported!

I was scouring the forums for others experiences while I was having my own and I witnessed MANY other repeatable and verifiable bugs from others experienceing the exact same issues and more that I wasn't having. The bugs I reported are factual bugs and were even acknowledged as bugs by the people who wrote the software whom I reported them to. Reporting known bugs on the forums is not "Ripping" on the software. It's sharing your experiences with the software and finding others who do or do not share that experience. Nothing more nothign less.

I don't have anything personal against the software writers and am not making any personal slurs against them. I'm merely pointing out what happened in my experience and stated my opinion on it. I look forward to them getting it right so that I can eventually join you in your bliss once they have the bugs worked out. You don't like that and that's fine. That's your right. 

You accuse me of putting words in your mouth when I used teh words "all", "we" and "us", ok, so I painted with a broad brush based on the experiences of many others that I read in public and it doesn't happen to include your experience. Oh well, I obviously don't speak for everyone, but I do speak for the vocal many who shared in my experiences and publically posted as much. 

I'm not out to stop anyone from buying the software. In fact, I look forward to a stable and viable version and I will spend my hardbacks on it again at that time. I don't however feel like betatesting anyone elses software at my expense. I've been a betatester and a programmer. I don't care to do that job on an unpaid basis again. Thanks!

I think there must be a big difference between the Basic and Pro versions.  It appears to me that in every forum on this software that most users are using the basic version in DAZ Studio with the Vicky and Mike figures, and getting better results.  The Pro version, which requires importing OBJ files for other figures, is more complex and the program cannot adequately generate a decent map or OBJ with something "foreign" to it.  It also seems that selecting Mike or Vicky within FaceShop Pro (FSP) is flawed.

One improvement I mentioned in another thread is the ability to select a figure from a drop-down list.  Of course, you would have to be in possession of that model and have the OBJ file on your hard drive.  Having to export from Poser, import into FSP, then export again is just a P.I.T.A.

Also I've noticed that sometimes your imported figure in the right panel changes from face-front to face-down for no apparent reason.  This makes the dots and curves adjustments nearly impossible to obtain good results.  I didn't find anything in the poor documentation about changing the figure's position.

This is what Poser's Face Room should have been, but with more improvements.  Back to the drawing board with this one.

There are now four videos showing how the process of working with Poser and FaceShop works. It also deals with the issue whbos brought up:
How to place dots and curves effectively.
The videos are at:
http://www.abalonellc.com/watchdemovideo.html
Laslo

... the File P2ww.avi is corrupted.
I download it 3 times with the same result. Windows-Mediaplayer 11 can not open this file.

Quote - Well, I've experienced only one crash, out of perhaps 12-15 trials (pro version, latest update), but I'd love to see more info on tricks and workarounds. (like how to deal with open mouthed photos).  Has anyone started a Wishlist thread anywhere for new features?

The open moth thingy is easy (well, almost easy):-)
Before you export a head out of Poser or Studio, you open the mouth by twisting dials. Once the mouth is like you want, export the head (see manual or watch-me videos at http://www.abalonellc.com/watchdemovideo.html
In FaceShop, use the extra lines to outline both the lower edge of the upper lip and the upper edge of the lower lip.
You'll get the hang of it! Fact, I will post a couple of images here shrtly to show the process.
Laslo

"The open moth thingy is easy (well, almost easy):-)
Before you export a head out of Poser or Studio, you open the mouth by twisting dials. Once the mouth is like you want, export the head (see manual or watch-me videos at http://www.abalonellc.com/watchdemovideo.html In FaceShop, use the extra lines to outline both the lower edge of the upper lip and the upper edge of the lower lip.
You'll get the hang of it! Fact, I will post a couple of images here shortly to show the process.
Laslo"

Cool - I hadn't tried importing a head, yet - I've been using the 2 included meshes exclusively.
The smile is the most important element of identification for many characters, and not being able to use smiles has been a problem for me - limits the photos that can be used, too. Thank you for pointing that out.  
Couple Question/suggestions for future updates/features - how about incorporating an optional sham tooth/gum insert in a future update to the program? Just a plain curved strip to cover the existing teeth with that accepts textures - the tooth arrangement and gums are a big part of the distinctive appearance of many people. - The example that springs to mind is the asymmetric teeth of Alyson Hannigan or Terry-Thomas.  I realize work could be done with the existing teeth, but a textured sham would save a lot of time and trouble for the morph-challenged like me.
That, plus an option to generate a plain sham body texture based on averaging the color values in a user selected area of the original photo, would also be a real time-saver!  (I'm thinking, just select a small area on a cheek, neck, or forehead of the photo, and the program averages the color values into a large square that could be used as a basis for a body texture to go with the head texture.)
Plus more extra lines, , , ;-]

1. Exported out of Poser with smile (as OBJ morph target)