I just read a recent thread called "Poser's Demise...." and there was too much in that topic to really address this plus it has a different topic that sort of goes in-hand with this one.

This topic about Poser's future got me thinking about what I have always wanted for at least 2+ years now. There's no way Poser will die due to the thousands of custom items you can buy for it from Daz, Renderosity, etc. You can spend thousands alone just on add-ons for V4.

But I got into the mode of thinking about the current trend of computers and software like Poser. We now have a new version of Poser "Poser Pro" released which I bought. I really does help some with render times and other light based areas for figures and some additional minor tweaks. The price is $400 or so unless you are upgrading or a Poser 7 user. I was able to buy it for $200 since I had registered Poser 7. Why mention this, for price. Some people claim Poser Pro is pricing themselves out of the base market and they may be correct to a certain point. However, that is exactly what I want to see happen and I think others will too in a certain market.

It's just like computers, there are "power users" that use programs like Dreamweaver CS3, Photoshop CS3, Poser Pro ($400), Vue 6 ultimate ($700), etc. Using programs like that REQUIRES the most powerful computers. Those computers are not "main stream" just as some of those solftware programs are not. So, why not divide the market into two areas, those that use "main stream" systems looking to play with some 3D software and start out and those that want the most cutting edge software available?

Look at it this way, most every professional computer user I know has or is making the switch to Apple Mac computers. All software that is new, like the ones mentioned above will work excellent with the current Mac OS. Plus, everyone knows about the fact you can now use "boot camp" to literally use both Windows and Mac OS on the same computer since they are now Intel based. I am NOT turning this into a Mac Vs PC thread, only to say look at the hardware and OS compared and a loaded Mac Pro will blow you away. 

So, let's say you want to take the plunge and go high-end all the way. Buy a Mac Pro, load it up with 2 Terabytes of storage, get at least 8GB or more RAM and watch what you can do. Yes, spending $6,000 on a PC alone plus 24 inch monitors is not "main stream" but that's still my point about this thread and splitting the user base for hardware/software in the future.

NOTE: despite what some vendors say, most all their items work just fine on both Mac and Windows for add-ons in the market place. It is generic for their use and I won't go into this in detail but it works just fine because that's what I am doing now.

You may be thinking people like that would be using a design studio or at least programs like 3dsMax or ZBrush to do most the work. But that's wrong. A lot work from home now days and it's either a hobby or something that make money with. Plus take into account all of the content for Daz figures like V4 and there is a need to continue using this for the foreseeable future. In other words it's not going anywhere.

What I would LOVE to see is HIGH-END splits for the Daz figures and Poser software. The "entry" versions like current Daz figures and Poser going for average prices. Poser at $200-300 and Daz figures for $30-75. Make the software like Daz studio and Poser compatible with those items so entry level users can use them or high-end users can access them as well. But, make FULL HIGH-END versions of the software and figures for those with the software and hardware to use it (i.e. Poser X Pro $600-1000, Daz VX and MX figures $100-$150).

Imagine the future like this:

1. A FULL 64 bitt, multi-render farm CPU version of Poser that takes advantage of as much memory as you throw at it and CPUs. Use advanced shaders and lighting for near photo real features.

1. Make the HIGH-END versions of Daz figures at least 3-4X the number of vertices and polygons as the current V4 with full realistic features including genitals advanced rigging for human replication, etc. Remember, the Poser software will take advantage of all memory available so having 10-30GB of RAM for these figures is not an issue.

1. Require at least 6-8GB of memory to use the Poser software and farm out the renders as described in step 1 to multiple CPUs and/or additional computers on your server farm.

I hope you think some about this and I am sorry about the long post. However, I think it would be nice to hear from those that want cutting-edge type Daz/Poser software and see what others think about a future split like this. I know the mass won't go for it because it's not "mainstream" but others with HIGH-END gear will want this soon because the technology is there now to do this.

Happy rendering,

um, high end apps generally have much LOWER poly countsfor figures in my limited experiance . Thats because they use subdivision surfaces (Lightwave) or whatever the same thing is called in the others . So for me loading a 68,498 VERTEX  V4 in Lightwave is not that helpful, except that the figure is cheap compared to a fully rigged Lightwave figure . there are also some biggish hurdles to getting a poser figure fully rigged and textured into Lightwave. PoserPro doesnt have a plugin yet and the main available plugin for Lightwave  requires work on the joints , particularly with V4 because the built in magnets dont transfer .

*um, high end apps generally have much LOWER poly countsfor figures in my limited experiance . Thats because they use subdivision surfaces (Lightwave) or whatever the same thing is called in the others . So for me loading a 68,498 VERTEX  V4 in Lightwave is not that helpful, except that the figure is cheap compared to a fully rigged Lightwave figure . there are also some biggish hurdles to getting a poser figure fully rigged and textured into Lightwave. PoserPro doesnt have a plugin yet and the main available plugin for Lightwave  requires work on the joints , particularly with V4 because the built in magnets dont transfer .

I agree.  I also think Poser figures are a waist of time in Lightwave. 

I'll throw another one against a high end Poser appliaction. I use Vue6Infinite for rendering which is already 64 bit and Quad core enabled, in other words a reasonably high end application. The good thing with it is that it imports Poser figures and props effortlessly so why would I need a high end Poser??
I didn't upgrade to Poser Pro for this very reason!!

There's also a fact that is often overlooked in fora.

PoserPro was not aimed at the Poser hobbyist who wanted the next version of their favourite program - that'll be Poser 8, whenver it comes out. PoserPro was aimed at helping professional, high-end users of 3d programs who wish to use Poser figures within their own workflow.  Now, whether its acheived its aim or not is debatable - but that is what the intended aim of the program was.

Implicit in PoserPro's workflow of "pose in render, export to program of choice for rendering and so on", is the fact the base functionality of Poser is not going to change and become higher-end. The only way Poser is going to go 'high-end' is for you to take your Poser work into another program and finish it there, in other words.

As other posters have said, high polycount isn't the key to great realism. The ideal weould be a low poly character, with high levels of SD at render time, with a great material setup - much lighter on resources, able to be used within the UI of the program in its 'naked' state very quickly due to its low resource overhead. This is not something that's going to happen in Poser until they change their method of smoothing and subdivision (not likely in my opinion).

JonTheCelt

*As other posters have said, high polycount isn't the key to great realism. The ideal weould be a low poly character, with high levels of SD at render time, with a great material setup - much lighter on resources, able to be used within the UI of the program in its 'naked' state very quickly due to its low resource overhead. This is not something that's going to happen in Poser until they change their method of smoothing and subdivision (not likely in my opinion).

Yep!  Co-planar polys and lack of essential morphs too.

I'll third (or fourth) the whole Low Poly / Subdivision surface observation. It has made my workflow go alot smoother (no pun intended) especially in the area of rigging. 

I have also observed that "high end animation rigs" tend to have three levels of geometry: (1) a super-duper low poly mesh with no joint articulation - think animatable bounding boxes for forearm, shoulder, thigh, shin, torso, head, etc, (2) a mid-res mesh to get a better idea of what the finished product will look like and (3) a high-poly / subdivided "render" mesh whose visibility is switched off until the final render is performed.

Edit: also, for your full 64-bit Poser / ease of use / stable powerful number cruncher: Perhaps you have outgrown Poser, which I liken to a 3D gateway drug. There's a lot of great apps that are proportionately a lot easier to use if you're not afraid to roll up your sleeves.

Quote - I'll throw another one against a high end Poser appliaction. I use Vue6Infinite for rendering which is already 64 bit and Quad core enabled, in other words a reasonably high end application. The good thing with it is that it imports Poser figures and props effortlessly so why would I need a high end Poser??
I didn't upgrade to Poser Pro for this very reason!!

Same here!
Between Vue and Cararra, I'm quite happy with high end selection. I'm not likely to purchase a third one.

A $6000 Mac Pro is out of my financial reach.
A $1500 quad core PC clone with a fast nVidia graphics card, 8 GB of RAM and 1.5 T of storage is not. And it performs almost as well as the $6000 Mac.

 I am going to have to disagree with most of the posts so far based on the following.

1. I was not aiming for the "main stream" user as mentioned in my OP. From what I have read so far about the reasons for believing something like this may not be viable appears to be based upon either other software like Vue or the disagreement about the need for 3-4X the number of polys, verticies, etc. for a HIGH-END Daz figure of VX and MX. As mentioned in my OP, I was not referring to beginners or main stream but rather pushing the limits of modern technology. 

That said, based upon response, you can do everything you want with a typical $1,500-2500 computer with 4GB of memory. What I was saying is that I think there is a REAL market for high-end Poser with a lower entry level Poser in two different price rages and markets. Something that goes beyond what Vue 6 does now of course since Vue 6 does nothing for added rigging or characters. It does give better, faster renders and some will say even better lighting. I LOVE Vue 6 as much as the next guy but they go hand-in-hand with Poser, it is not a Poser character program nor does it do what Poser does. It compliments Poser very well indeed but that is why I think a high-end Poser program should exist.

1. Remember,  I'm not talking about price here or trying to get on other subjects of Macs VS PC performance VS cost discussion. I also pointed out specifically I was not referring to main stream computer users about pricing as pricing was NOT a factor in my discussion. I believe there has been a market for a long time now for those wanting to push the envelope.

2. I will debate the subject of those saying:

"As other posters have said, high polycount isn't the key to great realism. The ideal weould be a low poly character, with high levels of SD at render time, with a great material setup - much lighter on resources, able to be used within the UI of the program in its 'naked' state very quickly due to its low resource overhead. This is not something that's going to happen in Poser until they change their method of smoothing and subdivision (not likely in my opinion)."

We are not talking about something that is light on resources here. What I said in the OP is I think there is a real market for those wanting to push the envelope and that means high-end resources that take advantage of full current computer technology. 

While I understand what those saying this are getting at, I must fully disagree to an extent. Just look at V4 compared to V3. Some say that V4 has even more problems and nothing was fixed and is even worse than V3 in some areas. Where, the hip and butt areas are known issues. Look at the verticies/polys and V4 has even fewer in those areas making it even more difficult to get human poses from her in certain positions and extreme action pose. Therefore, lower does not solve the realism issue. Also, why do artists like those that work on movies such as Shrek use such advanced and intensive work putting together all those polys, rigging, etc. for a movie like that? This is in addition to the advanced lighting and other uses they implement. 

Now, I was not talking about using millions of dollars worth of equipment least someone posts something about such extremes. Again, going back to my OP I am talking about doing this on a home scale use and we have the ability to do so now, just not the software or characters to do it with.

I love the discussion even though I disagree and debate the responses, it shows we are all very passionate about our Poser, Vue, etc. love of art. :)

I don't think I understand.

Poser and DAZ are ... but high-end is ... oh never mind.

What was the topic again?

ahh, put apps other than Poser dont have the same issues as Poser when bending or rigging figures , because they use a different rigging method ,or weightmaps (ugh) to do it .   V4 has attempted to fix rigging issues with built in magnets and that has been at least partially successful.  Cant blame Daz really, they are stuck with following Posers rigging method , or breaking with that market.

I can sort of see where you are coming from , certainly a quad core processor on a 64 bit OS with lots of memory is getting to a price a keen gamer or hobbiest could afford so heavy polygon models with huge textures and such are more practicable , but the very keen hobbiest could go with 3dsmax , lightwave or cinema4d and get better results if they are prepared to spend some time learning .

3DNeo, I think I understand what you are getting at and I will try to explain the low poly / V4 issue as best as I can in my inebriated state.

Sometimes throwing more brute force processing power won't solve the problem as effectively as streamlining the entire process. Said another way, sometimes less is more. Enter subdivision surfaces.

V4 has a slightly lower poly count than V3 - 68,000 polys verses 72,000 polys respectively or something like that. That many vertices are required for a polygon renderer to create "smooth" silouetted (sp) images (though if you viewed an alpha channel zoomed close enough you would still see facets). Several of these characters will kill your viewport's response and interactivity.

By contrast, take a 3000 poly character and subdivide it. Now you have a smoothly rendered, low weight character that refreshes very quickly in the viewport. This is the industry standard for feature films, and this is the high-end resource of which you speak, with local details provided by sophisticated displacement mapping.

When you are rigging using weightmaps, it is much easier to skin a 3,000 poly character and "wrap deform" it to a subdivision surface than to weight map a 70,000 poly character. There is no debate on this point.

Speaking with the utmost respect and humility, I think your heart is in the right place but your method is not fully realized.

Not to turn this into a mac windows debate but I doubt I will ever buy a mac. Taking Maya classes and the macs are always crashing left and right for whatever reason, thank goodness my pc's at home can handle everything I've thrown at them so far or I'd never get my homework done. I don't see any need for a super high end poser, they can't even get the versions they have out now right, what makes you think they could develop something high end. Poser needs to stay within the budget of the hobbyist. I bought the poser pro so I could use it with Maya and so far it isn't working. And I'm not the only one having problems. I don't think as a company they are able to correct the problems with poser, and I don't think they will put in the money to make it high end.

If your looking for more it's all ready out there
http://www.maxon.net/pages/dyn_files/dyn_htx/htx/welcome_e.html

My take here is that the OP thinks that if you increase Poser figures to one-billion polygons, then they will be able to suffice as professional figures.  But this is incorrect.  As replicand said very well, it isn't a matter of ever-increasing polygons for better approximation that makes PRO application (like Shrek) so amazing.  It is the PRO uses of better technologies.  Shrek doesn't have a billion polygons - it is probably a very low mesh (several thousand polygons) with subdivision, a good weight-mapped rig, and myriads of dynamic deformers to get that realism.

The problem with Poser figures in any professional use is that Poser is based strictly on polygonal-based meshes.  Hint: the studios and big CG movie productions use nothing based on polygonal meshes.  Most of their results are procedurals applied to very rudimentary polygonal meshes or more bleeding-edge methods with fully procedural geometries.

Poser is using, to be polite, archaic technology compared to the applications used for CG productions.  Games use virtually block polygons (maybe a thousand or two polygons for a figure) to create their complex characters.  The key for them is in utilizing the power of the GPU religiously to take that blocky cage and texture/smooth/tweak it to a point that almost shames Poser.  The reason is that games need realtime performance and feedback.  Poser remains where it is because it was written on cutting-edge technology twenty years ago and has not change one iota in those areas since.

Quote - My take here is that the OP thinks that if you increase Poser figures to one-billion polygons, then they will be able to suffice as professional figures.  But this is incorrect.  As replicand said very well, it isn't a matter of ever-increasing polygons for better approximation that makes PRO application (like Shrek) so amazing.  It is the PRO uses of better technologies.  Shrek doesn't have a billion polygons - it is probably a very low mesh (several thousand polygons) with subdivision, a good weight-mapped rig, and myriads of dynamic deformers to get that realism.

The problem with Poser figures in any professional use is that Poser is based strictly on polygonal-based meshes.  Hint: the studios and big CG movie productions use nothing based on polygonal meshes.  Most of their results are procedurals applied to very rudimentary polygonal meshes or more bleeding-edge methods with fully procedural geometries.

Poser is using, to be polite, archaic technology compared to the applications used for CG productions.  Games use virtually block polygons (maybe a thousand or two polygons for a figure) to create their complex characters.  The key for them is in utilizing the power of the GPU religiously to take that blocky cage and texture/smooth/tweak it to a point that almost shames Poser.  The reason is that games need realtime performance and feedback.  Poser remains where it is because it was written on cutting-edge technology twenty years ago and has not change one iota in those areas since.

Quoted for agreement !!!!

I think Helgard is on the right track though with his Vincent character.

Quote - Not to turn this into a mac windows debate but I doubt I will ever buy a mac. Taking Maya classes and the macs are always crashing left and right for whatever reason, thank goodness my pc's at home can handle everything I've thrown at them so far or I'd never get my homework done. I don't see any need for a super high end poser, they can't even get the versions they have out now right, what makes you think they could develop something high end. Poser needs to stay within the budget of the hobbyist. I bought the poser pro so I could use it with Maya and so far it isn't working. And I'm not the only one having problems. I don't think as a company they are able to correct the problems with poser, and I don't think they will put in the money to make it high end.

Just about everything in this post can be refuted. Not saying this to hurt your feelings but it is fact and I won't discuss the topic of Mac VS PC because that is not what this thread is about.

Please refer to my other detailed posts here. You will see that again the point is missed about Poser splitting. Think of it in some ways like Vue, you have the entry level and then the full bundle for $700. Poser can EASY do this if they put enough money and man power behind it. It is not aimed at the same market the "main stream" users would be in so you have two price levels as pointed out several times in prior posts.

Sorry, but you need to read the other posts more close. I do wish you the best in your art and studies as a young person. 

Quote - 3DNeo, I think I understand what you are getting at and I will try to explain the low poly / V4 issue as best as I can in my inebriated state.

Sometimes throwing more brute force processing power won't solve the problem as effectively as streamlining the entire process. Said another way, sometimes less is more. Enter subdivision surfaces.

V4 has a slightly lower poly count than V3 - 68,000 polys verses 72,000 polys respectively or something like that. That many vertices are required for a polygon renderer to create "smooth" silouetted (sp) images (though if you viewed an alpha channel zoomed close enough you would still see facets). Several of these characters will kill your viewport's response and interactivity.

By contrast, take a 3000 poly character and subdivide it. Now you have a smoothly rendered, low weight character that refreshes very quickly in the viewport. This is the industry standard for feature films, and this is the high-end resource of which you speak, with local details provided by sophisticated displacement mapping.

When you are rigging using weightmaps, it is much easier to skin a 3,000 poly character and "wrap deform" it to a subdivision surface than to weight map a 70,000 poly character. There is no debate on this point.

Speaking with the utmost respect and humility, I think your heart is in the right place but your method is not fully realized.

Thanks for your post, it is interesting to see your take on this and get your theories. I can see what you are saying in terms of how other software and such can do it to a better extent. However, can you tell me how Poser can do this WiTHOUT re-writing the entire program? As pointed out, Poser is poly based and thus unless you start over I don't see how the methods you mention are going to be implemented, at least to such an extent as what I was getting at in my prior posts. If you can maybe expand upon this it would nice to talk about this in greater detail, but I don't see how it can be done.

This was basically my point. Unless Poser starts over, which I doubt given the absolute mass amount of add-ons and Daz figures out there, then the only way I see of achieving a HIGH-END detailed renders with photo-realism is to split the software and figures into two distinct markets. Now, if you are talking starting over then yes, everything you say can be done with better means that are not so old. But, current technology with multiple CPUs and cores with HUGE amounts of memory from 8-30GB is no longer a holding point for doing this.

Again, thanks for your thoughts and take on this, I hope that I have maybe explained more of my talking points better with your post as a guide.

I get where your coming from.  I think if Renderdog2000 goes balls out on his app,  it will be what you're looking for.

Every new version or iteration of Poser that is released, there's always speculation in the forums about the new features and a small glimmer of hope that spherical falloff rigging paradigm will be dropped. The new features are often disappointing (or behind the curve) and the rigging remains the same.

I think there comes a time when users want more than what Poser can offer but don't want to lose access to the tons of content available for it. From what I have seen, software doesn't fundamentally change so you probably won't see the changes that you suggests, so it may be time to look at something else.

According to the forums, Cinema4D + Interposer Pro offers the best native support for Poser content. I personally can't wrap my mind around the interface but some people love it. I think the best intermediate solution is Carrara - you can import Poser content but it uses weightmaps (as of version 5), and when you see them in action you'll have a better appreciation for low poly figures. I didn't really like the material editor.

So then you've got the "hosting plugins" route ala PoserFusion. IMHO it's better to stick with Poser because everyone I've used (which is everyone except the Greenbrier plug and the new PoserPro Collada) [a] is a nightmare to set up and get working, [b] requires a trip back to Poser to make changes or [c] is merely an importer; which you can do by hand PLUS you'll still need to learn the inner workings of the new prog or [d] is really inefficient on system resources OR brings Poser's instabilities to an otherwise rock solid app.

So it was really difficult, but I had to leave the DAZ figures behind. Currently I'm using Quidam, MakeHuman and Dork / Dorkette, modelling my own props in Maya + Renderman Studio. Definitely out of Poser's price point but it really doesnt get more Pro than that. Not only is it a stable and fast workflow, but there are SOOOOOO many cool ways to squeeze the most out of a render. My current favorite is "rendertime geometry swapping" where has simple polygon cubes that stand-in for highly detailed / high poly models which are only loaded at rendertime.

-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-

BTW, I know we're not talking about hardware but I had to throw in the fact that I'm using Maya on an Intel IMac and I think I've crashed it once during the past year. Furthermore it has been 15 days, 11 hours and 39 minutes since I've last rebooted / restarted it. I'll never go back to Windows.

As for technology, Poser and D|S are more or less "end of life" applications. Polygonal is fine for hobbyists, but as has been noted several times before, high end professional apps use Sub-D.
By the way, the Shrek example could use some elaboration. "Shrek" was not a single multipurpose figure, like the Poser figures are, "Shrek" consists of multiple figures, each with a specific purpose in mind. One figure for closeup partial or full body shots, rigged and detailed, possibly with strand based hair and dynamic cloth. One figure for mid to long range animated shots, Sub-D based with a low poly control cage. One figure for head shots, highly detailed, loaded with morphs for expressions and phonemes. Possibly separate figures for separate camera angles.
In the high end CG industry, there's no "one size fits all" solution.

What does this mean Poser-wise? Simply this: Poser is NOT a high end application. It is NOT targeted at the high end CG industry. And frankly, there's no room for it either.
Poser's strength (and that of D|S) is the enormous amount of cheap content. The high end CG industry doesn't use prebuilt characters, for each production a new set of unique characters is developed. So the Poser content is of little value in the high end industry.
Animation? MotionBuilder and similar apps beats the crap out of Poser when it comes to animation. And why try for an animation suite as complete as MotionBuilder? Not that many market opportunities there, it's pretty well filled.

So, as far as I can see, there simply is no room for Poser in the high end market. That also means that creating a high end Poser would be a waste of time and money.

Poser and D|S (and the upcoming FAST project) are aimed at the hobbyist and low budget market. It doesn't benefit from the latest and greatest tech, but it would benefit from ease of use, decent capabilities, and integration with midrange products like Carrara and Vue.

Hope this isn't OT.  What about for morphsdon't you need the extra poly's?  svdl: that makes sense different figures for different purposes.  I have been working on a figure that has high rez face-neck, high rez hands-forearms, but low rez everything else. This would work well for clothed figures and I cannot think of a reason to have a poly heavy body with a clothed figure. And with a high rez face you still can have all the facial and expression morphs.  Thoughts?

*Hope this isn't OT.  What about for morphsdon't you need the extra poly's?

What app?  Poser or high end?

Sorry, for poser

*Sorry, for poser

I'd say a higher poly count is needed for Poser.  Specially,  like you said the morphs.  Poser Jane is 40k to 45k. 

Um,  I hate to say this but a 10k figure for Poser runs the risk of being swiped and placed in a video game.

it's somewhat OT, but I checked the modo gallery here last week and there were only 5 images.
is it a rather new app, e.g. only released 2 months ago?  then I checked the gallery modo gallery
here yesterday and there were only 4 images.  perhaps I'm using the gallery functions wrong.

p.s. daz has gradually increased polygon count on their vickies to make up for the deficiencies
of the poser renderer.  more expensive softwares using 21st-century renderers can make use
of  far lower polygon counts with far better results IMVHO.  whilst poser pro (poser 7.2) may
be useful to guys who are exporting to more expensive software, the main reason to get it out
there was to generate revenue in order to pay for the rewrite for poser 8 AFAIK.  I don't like saying
that, hence I'd encourage folks to support SM any way they can, so they have sufficient funds to
do a fabulous job on poser 8.

patorak: You're a Sub-D modeler yes?  How does that work exactly from the poly end? Do you edge loop at very low resolution in such a way that the end result when its devided is a fully functional mesh that can use morphs? I have the Sub-D dragon and I noticed that when you devide the mesh it comes out pretty smooth, and I was wondering if that is started from the very beginning at very low rez?

I think the comments I've read here are right too, Poser will never be a highend app unless they gutted it and started over. But for the general public who doesn't want to sink alot of cash into 3D Apps, it does very well. Its fairly quick and easy to learn(though that's still hard enough) And lots of premade content.

*patorak: You're a Sub-D modeler yes?  How does that work exactly from the poly end? Do you edge loop at very low resolution in such a way that the end result when its devided is a fully functional mesh that can use morphs? I have the Sub-D dragon and I noticed that when you devide the mesh it comes out pretty smooth, and I was wondering if that is started from the very beginning at very low rez?

Yep.  Here's the start.  The frame is constructed of 8 sided cylinders placed where the joints will be.  The cylinders for the chest and waist are 16 sided.  Breasts are 12 sided spheres.  I start my heavy and thin full body morphs at this stage.  Once the frame is filled in I go into Sub-D mode and begin edgelooping around the joints.

Quote-"I don't like saying that, hence I'd encourage folks to support SM any way they can, so they have sufficient funds to do a fabulous job on poser 8."

I think the problem is a lot of folks are losing patience with Poser. It changes hands too often. The latest owner has scrapped doing figures for the most part and there is NO word that I know of other than here say that they are even going to make Poser 8 ever. In fact some seem to think that SM is a company that buys end of the line software and sells it until they've gotten everything out of it they can and that's it. SM needs to make it more clear what they're long term goals are so that those who would will back them. For now I suspect they have their hands full just fixing bugs in Poser Pro and plugins and also selling it to even be thinking about Poser 8. What's their long term goals and I'm not talking about promises either? Even the best of plans fall through sometimes.

dogor,

I agree

I agree too. MS is not going to tell us what they really have planed. They may never sell another copy of Poser again if they did. So we are left withthe wait and see game and possably look for alternatives.

patorak, that is a nice clean way to start, will have to try it when I have time. In Modo we have the Tube tool that lets you draw your basic shape. Then subD and edgeloop.

"it's somewhat OT, but I checked the modo gallery here last week and there were only 5 images.
is it a rather new app, e.g. only released 2 months ago?  then I checked the gallery modo gallery
here yesterday and there were only 4 images.  perhaps I'm using the gallery functions wrong."

No, I think what it is is that many of us here at Rosity are learning Modo. Some of us got in because of the Daz deal on 101 and luxology let us have the upgrade price for 301. So it was a great deal/ chance to get in on Modo that normally would have been out of my reach anyways.

If you want to see the art and what is being don with Modo, check the Luxology site and be amazed. You could also see WIPs here in the Modo forum.

"Yep.  Here's the start.  The frame is constructed of 8 sided cylinders placed where the joints will be.  The cylinders for the chest and waist are 16 sided.  Breasts are 12 sided spheres.  I start my heavy and thin full body morphs at this stage.  Once the frame is filled in I go into Sub-D mode and begin edgelooping around the joints."

Man! that's what I should have done it would have made the edge looping so much easier than putting it in later. That's a pretty cool way of doing the original mesh.  I did it by making stovepipe like things and extruding ect. for the legs and arms and a shirt for the torso, and then worked from there. But I can see from the way you start this it's going to devide alot better and you've  got your basic body parts already sectioned off. IGot to try this.

I forgot to mention.  8 sided capsules for the fingers and toes

Hey maybe Rendo could replace CP as the main figure site.

Quote - 2. Make the HIGH-END versions of Daz figures at least 3-4X the number of vertices and polygons as the current V4 with full realistic features including genitals advanced rigging for human replication, etc. Remember, the Poser software will take advantage of all memory available so having 10-30GB of RAM for these figures is not an issue.

Yeow... you do realize that 4x~100k is one hell of a burden to anything that isn't a PowerMac, right?

Even the high-end apps are moving to Sub-D and other measures to minimize the vert burden, so why on Earth would you want a generic humanoid figure with half a million polys?

(heh - you could model skin pores at that level... and nose-hairs. and have one hell of an ass-crack out of the deal. :) ) 

/P

"it's somewhat OT, but I checked the modo gallery here last week and there were only 5 images. is it a rather new app, e.g. only released 2 months ago? then I checked the gallery modo gallery here yesterday and there were only 4 images. perhaps I'm using the gallery functions wrong." I think the Modo gallery is intended for things created and rendered in Modo. I render in other programs. That's why I post Modo models like these in other galleries.

Thats a great render.

Miss Nancy, click on most viewed in the Modo gallery and you will them. I don't know why you cant use the date search for archives, but the most viewed works.

The 3D universe is huge it's hard to keep up with every thing.

But to help keep up to date.

http://forums.cgsociety.org/index.php?

Would not post a Poser render there thou.

Modo has actually been out for years now.

V4 was modeled in Modo.

V3 was modeled in Lightwave.

V4 has a lower polycount then V3.

The creators of Modo was originally part of Lightwave.

If ya use a micro displacement map you can have skin pores.

RorrKonn
http://64.234.196.28/

If ya use a micro displacement map you can have skin pores. I'm wondering if adding noise on the bump map in PhotoShop might work just as well for most purposes.

*I'm wondering if adding noise on the bump map in PhotoShop might work just as well for most purposes.

Might save a lot of baking time.

*patorak, that is a nice clean way to start, will have to try it when I have time. In Modo we have the Tube tool that lets you draw your basic shape. Then subD and edgeloop.

I think you'll like how quick your figure will develope.  I mean it's not like box modeling.  You have a basic form to start with.   Comes in handy too for catsuits. 

Quote - Hope this isn't OT.  What about for morphsdon't you need the extra poly's?

Not necessarily, no. It is more a question of how the polys are laid out than how many of them you have (e,g, more polys at the joints than at the flatter areas of the body, laying out polys in a way that can intelligently move with the morph as it increases, etc). The MakeHuman project has a very nice, long discussion stashed somewhere on their site concerning this.

/P

Quote - Hope this isn't OT.  What about for morphsdon't you need the extra poly's?  svdl: that makes sense different figures for different purposes.  I have been working on a figure that has high rez face-neck, high rez hands-forearms, but low rez everything else. This would work well for clothed figures and I cannot think of a reason to have a poly heavy body with a clothed figure. And with a high rez face you still can have all the facial and expression morphs.  Thoughts?

I'm very interested!

 I saw the "Nargron Race" render and yes it is good. However, besides the back ground created in Vue 6, there is not a lot of FINE detail for the character creatures. While nice, doing models like creatures can be (certainly not always) much less demanding than human realism and that is what I have been referring to. Programs like Vue 6 Infinite are very amazing and well designed programs that I certainly would recommend. Mainly though, it is a background/world creator. This is why Poser needs to split and be at least as high-end as Vue 6 in the next 5 years. 

While Modo is indeed nice, it has a bit of a learning curve some may need professional training with. There are not yet enough books and DVD how-to beginners guides (at least that I know of) to really get a NEW user into it and realize the potential at their hands.

I still will debate the fact about Poser needing to split for this very reason. It is brand most are comfortable with, most will automatically think that with enough time and practice they can learn it without the need of professional training courses at a university or studio. Plus, if they split it as I always maintained you can use BOtH the current Poser library for years to come and the newly modeled high-poly figures or whatever they come up with to re-boot the Poser program.

Penguinisto -

If you read my other 2 main posts that was the whole point. One entry level version at the $2-400 price range, one ULTIMATE version at $800-$1000 price range. As I said too, yes you would be marketing to the top consumers and NOT the "mass market" typical computer buyer. Only a current cutting edge computer at least 5+ thousand would run software like this but that's the specific market they should go far with by using the split. In other words the top 5-1% of computer users.

Penguinisto is right.  See,  for clothes,  subdividing a primitive and shrink wrapping it to a Poser figure  won't work for animation.  You'll get all kinds of unwanted deformation.  This is where edgelooping comes into play.  Edgelooping allows the polys to fan in and out during movement,  kind of like an oriental hand fan.

Edgelooping is also unique to each modeler,  making your work easily identifiable.

BTW edgelooping should be used for dynamic clothing,  too.  

*This is why Poser needs to split and be at least as high-end as Vue 6 in the next 5 years. 

I think that if they do split then they should rename the high end software.

Throwing more polygons at a more powerful CPU, but sticking with the old polygonal methodology in order to increase realsim is a brute force approach. High end does not equal brute force; high end equals multiple clever ways to achieve realism WITHOUT resorting to pure brute force. For example, I use both Vue 6 Infinite and Poser 7 Pro on the same hardware, and Vue 6 Infinite has no problem rendering scenes that have hundreds of billions of polys - in rendertime. Almost all those polys are procedurally generated terrains, rocks and plants - a CLEVER way to get realism. Poser starts to throw fits when I exceed 10 million polys, less than 0.1% of what Vue is capable of - ON THE SAME OS AND HARDWARE!

A higher end Poser should use SubD for human figures, it should support the ability to create HLSL shaders, it should support procedural geometry, 16 bit displacement/normal mapping, parallax mapping, light mapping, texture baking. A more modern approach to bones and skeletons would be highly appreciated - and again, weight mapping a 100k poly mesh is a royal pain, while weightmapping a 4k poly mesh is relatively easy. 

Poser High End should NOT rely on brute force and hi-poly meshes. An analogy would be mounting a massive 18th century steam engine in a modern car and saying you are on the same level, as a modern V6 turbo engine - after all, you have the same amount of hp to drive the car, don't you?

I also think that these features should not be reserved to an expensive high end version of Poser - it is base functionality.