Quote - Again, missing the point.

You don't like being corrected, do you.

In Modo, vertex maps is a category that includes several subcategories, one of which is morphs. Modo is identical to Lightwave in this respect, except that Lightwave calls morphs “endomorphs.”

Leave it to Lightwave to overcomplicate a workflow.

Leave it to Lightwave to overcomplicate a workflow. By categorizing morphs as vertex maps? Not terribly complicated in my book.

Quote - By categorizing morphs as vertex maps? Not terribly complicated in my book.

Not complicated, just unorthodox in my book.

I don't mind being corrected.

Paloth, not to surprising with Lightwave and Modo made by some of the same programers.

Paloth, not to surprising with Lightwave and Modo made by some of the same programmers. Yeah. I'm not sure whether Modo is the easiest to learn modeler ever created or if it's just the similarity to Lightwave that made it second nature.

I'm finding it fairy easy to learn, a lot of it to learn, which seems to be the volume of what it does to be more the learning curve than how hard it is to understand. I can't remember having as much fun learning a new software as much as I have had with Modo.

Quote -  

Modo is a wicked modeler and has a automatic Mapper that rocks.

I would buy Modo just for the Mapper alone.

 

Would be nothing to model, map a girl in Modo.

Throw the mesh in a app that has automatic rigs and the basic mesh is done.

Slap some dynamic hair and a dynamic dress on her bang it's done 8 hours easy, seriously.

 

....IIRC, um, the big deal made over at DAZ with Modo was...uh, wasn't V4 modelled in Modo?  Because, I think that's what the hype was all about with Modo.  Not to add to an argument that has me, again, rolling my eyes. 

Every time this argument comes up, I'm reminded of art teams at the big studios.  Modellers do their things, riggers do theirs, texture artists do theirs, lighting artists do theirs, animators do theirs and renderers do theirs.
Rarely, if ever, is ANYONE on the team more than one type of artist for the project.  So, why is it SUCH a stigma for Poser users to not have modelled, textured, or lit what they're creating as artwork? 
These "mine's bigger than yours" contests with software are absolutely ridiculous.

....IIRC, um, the big deal made over at DAZ with Modo was...uh, wasn't V4 modeled in Modo? Because, I think that's what the hype was all about with Modo. Not to add to an argument that has me, again, rolling my eyes. I'm not sure what excited them over at Daz, but Pixar uses Modo for character modeling, which is more significant than V4's origin, in my opinion. Plus you can uv map, 3d paint, design buildings, interiors or just about anything. It's really good--when it doesn't crash. Hopefully the next version will be more stable.

Quote -
....IIRC, um, the big deal made over at DAZ with Modo was...uh, wasn't V4 modelled in Modo? 

Modo is one of the tools used on V4; nowhere near all of them, though - not even the only Modeler - since more than one person worked w/ it.  Some folks there love it (I know of at least two who would have sex with a rabid wolverine before they gave up Modo), while others have their own prefs.

Quote - Rarely, if ever, is ANYONE on the team more than one type of artist for the project.  So, why is it SUCH a stigma for Poser users to not have modelled, textured, or lit what they're creating as artwork? 

I think the big stink in some cases has to do with what's being passed off, skill-wise. Posting a Poser mesh render in CGTalk w/o specifying that you're only working on lights, animation, or etc. skills tends to lead people on.

/P

Modo is an app about which I've heard almost nothing but good things coming from its users -- including new users.  The issue which Paloth has mentioned concerning crashes is the first negative that I've heard, anywhere.

I can count on less than one hand the apps that I've seen get talked about by 95%(?) of the users in such a positive way over the years.  Modo gets high praise for its intuitive nature, and for its excellent UV capabilities.  I've heard several Maya / Max users comment on the fact that they've come to use Modo as their "go-to" first modeler of choice.  And in my book, that's saying something.

There might have been some "hype" going on with the recent DAZ deal for Modo (a deal which I took advantage of).  But it's been one of the few "hype campaigns" where the end users -- after actually trying Modo -- have ended up agreeing with the hype.

JenX

I was just talking, not ragging Poser.

I'm a Poser user my self.

So why would I rag Poser artist.

RorrKonn
http://www.Atomic-3D.com 

If we could hire a programmer to develope custom 3d apps like ILM or Dreamworks do,  poser would still hold the base position in the pipeline.  It's from the base that mesh, textures and procedurals,  rigging and animaton,  lighting and cinemagraphics are visualized and refined.  In this function,  even given it's limitations,  Poser is a very powerful tool.

As an example,  here's Jane with just basic Poser rigging;  no bulges,  scaling,  magnets, or JCM's.  After each phase in the modeling of Jane,  we rigged her in Poser to verify and correct mesh deformation.   The purpose this serves is to reduce the number of corrective morphs by refining the mesh with spiral edgeloops.  The reasons Poser is used is time and organization.  For us rigging in Poser is quicker and provides us with a solid base outline from which to expand.

As for the figure creation process,  the director's cut of the "Hulk" and "The Mummy",  hold a wealth of information.

Cheers
Patorak