It seems like this would be useful for lots of things... chains, rope, decks of cards, that sort of thing. I suppose to be really useful it would have to be possible to use a different material on each repeated element (as in the deck of cards just mentioned). Seems like a waste of space, otherwise.

If anyone knows anything about this and would like to share, I would surely appreciate it.

Do a search over at ShareCG in the poser section for "Chain."  There is a freebie chain set there that uses a python script to help pose/construct the chain.  You might get some clues from there.  

 In a way you can, since Poser will load the same OBJ file for several props. So you could make ONE chain link and import that repeatedly, probably with the help of a Python script that offsets the thing. Ockham made one for me for my modular hallway that works the same way by loading segments :) 
Poser doesn't do REAL instancing though like some other programs. Too bad, really.  It is something I'd wish they'd implement in Poser 8.

Morkonan, I'll take a look for that chain, and see what's up with it. I guess I was thinking along the lines of distributing a prop, and how big the file would be. I was modeling a playing card on a whim the other day, and it occured to me what a mess it would be to have to repeat the mesh 54 times (gotta have Jokers, being one m'self... :biggrin:)

TG, Instancing would be great, but I'd bet credits to navy beans that the internal structure of Poser's source code is such a nightmare that they won't do it without a ground-up re-write. Wanna take bets on whether that'll happen in our lifetimes? 

Well, ain't that cool... thank you.

I've definitely learned something, and that makes it a good day.

I don't see that there's any real advantage, other than giving you a way to avoid learning modeling. ;)

I've definitely learned something, and that makes it a good day.

Me too...You don't suppose it could be used for animation?  Like a chain hoisting something?

Quote - I don't see that there's any real advantage, other than giving you a way to avoid learning modeling. ;)

Well I can see several advantages to this. You could have a chain (or anything, be it a tube or a tunnel or a hallway) of infinite length, it's just a question of running the python script over again. It's not like you don't have to model the beginning at least (though exactly a chain could be made with Poser's Torus prop if needed)

I know I find the version Ockham made for my Modular Hallway VERY usefull. And ... I still had to model one segment of the hallway... but this way it's up to the end user to decide just howlong that hallway should be.

Well I can see several advantages to this. You could have a chain (or anything, be it a tube or a tunnel or a hallway) of infinite length, it's just a question of running the python script over again. It's not like you don't have to model the beginning at least (though exactly a chain could be made with Poser's Torus prop if needed)

I agree...anything that can reduce time spent modeling is a God send.

Well, you're basically trading time spent modeling with time spent scripting ^^

Quote - I don't see that there's any real advantage, other than giving you a way to avoid learning modeling. ;)

My main thought was to make the file on disk a little smaller. For example, those chain links I made in the example picture in the beginning have 144 faces. It just seemed to me that an OBJ fil with a hundred of those links would be unnecessarily huge is all.

When I was playing around doing a playing card, I put in a lot of faces so I could morph the card every which way, and I ended up with a bunch of faces (over 1500). Now, I wouldn't do a whole deck of cards with each one having that many faces, but if I did, it seems like 1,556  faces would store (and possibly load) better than 84,024.

I'm always up for amodeling challenge, but the programmer in me likes efficient storage. :biggrin:

The chain might be better rigged as a figure, but the card deck would be
the perfect candidate for a one-OBJ prop set, with each card parented
directly to the box.   If the card deck were a figure, you'd have to do all
sorts of fiddling to make the cards stay in each player's hand.
As a prop set, each card can be re-parented easily.  

Quote - I don't see that there's any real advantage, other than giving you a way to avoid learning modeling. ;)

If someone wants to learn a new way of doing something, maybe we should encourage them.
Just a thought.

If someone wants to learn a new way of doing something, maybe we should encourage them.
Just a thought.

Yeah!  Specially since this could lead to instancing for Poser.

Quote - Now, I wouldn't do a whole deck of cards with each one having that many faces, but if I did, it seems like 1,556  faces would store (and possibly load) better than 84,024.

The file size of the OBJ would be smaller (although probably not terribly much, if you compress the OBJ to OBZ format) but memory usage after loading would be exactly the same.  I'm not trying to discourage anybody, just pointing out that this is probably more easily accomplished with a modeler for nearly all uses I can think of, that's all.

And by the way if you're really expecting any significant changes to Poser for the foreseeable future (like, forever), I think you're dreaming ;)

*And by the way if you're really expecting any significant changes to Poser for the foreseeable future (like, forever), I think you're dreaming ;)

Stock ain't doin' too bad.  http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SMSI