Hm, maybe I'm misremembering. It seemed to me that I handled Antonia's scalp with the head map.

Yep, tlc is right. The scalp goes with the body map.

Quote - My first scenic render with Antonia is now in the gallery... not closeup, mind you....

www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php

Hey, cool! I think that's the first rendered scene with Antonia ever.

@phantom3D

Have a look at this kokcito.tk/tut/shoulders.html you might find it interesting since rigging is your specialty.

If the technique can be migrated to Poser it would help solve the issues with poses extending the arm up on Poser figures.

Interesting read. Thanks for the link!

My Inj morphs I did don't use any channels.  AND they work, using PMD's.  I don't know why.

Joel, my understanding is that unlike traditional INJ, PMDs don't require these channels.

Quote - My Inj morphs I did don't use any channels.  AND they work, using PMD's.  I don't know why.

PMDs can create channels, injection poses using traditional deltas can't. So traditional deltas need existing empty channels to work.

Edit: Oops, crosspost.

Quote - Yep, tlc is right. The scalp goes with the body map.

Hm, I better fix that. I think I've got the body map in that spot. Now truthfully, it probably doesn't make any visible difference in terms of what I've done (my starting point was to create an identical base for both head and body, then add details from photos in limited places such as face and hands etc), but if someone builds on my textures with photo references, it's gonna get messed up.

"Shapekeys" ,that is the magic word I have been searching for so long.That would really push Poser foreward if it was a Poser 8 feature.(I am quite pessimistic there).But Posers morphtargets and embeded Magnets seem to to be a poor substitute for that.At least I have a keyword to throw in at another  "Poser 8 ,9,10 -wishlist thread "

Believable3D: Yes, definitely use the body map for the scalp material, not the head map.

I love the Zuloni morph and also the materials. The only thing that strikes me as a bit odd is the strong assymetry of the lips. I think you mentioned that.

Quote - "Shapekeys" ,that is the magic word I have been searching for so long.That would really push Poser foreward if it was a Poser 8 feature.(I am quite pessimistic there).But Posers morphtargets and embeded Magnets seem to to be a poor substitute for that.At least I have a keyword to throw in at another  "Poser 8 ,9,10 -wishlist thread "

What's the difference between a morph target and a shape key?

Ohoh I was so afraid I have to explain my post ;).I understand shapekeys as a fullbody-morph that correct unwanted distortions on joints when posing.The problem with poser is , that I am not able to create fullbody morphs by selecting the whole figure.The poser figuremesh is broken in body parts and I have to morph each one individually.I would like to be able to use the morph brush (the best of P7) on the whole poser figure .This made it possible to fix joint issues.If I could link these fixes with the bone rotations and store this somehow with my figure it would be quite easier....I hope you will know what I mean . I hate those moments ,when my english is leaving me.It is getting complicated I am afraid.

o.k. "shapekeys" seem to be a blender-only expression . Maybe "skinning " is a better word ...?... isn't it?

Quote - Ohoh I was so afraid I have to explain my post ;).I understand shapekeys as a fullbody-morph that correct unwanted distortions on joints when posing.The problem with poser is , that I am not able to create fullbody morphs by selecting the whole figure.The poser figuremesh is broken in body parts and I have to morph each one individually.I would like to be able to use the morph brush (the best of P7) on the whole poser figure .This made it possible to fix joint issues.If I could link these fixes with the bone rotations and store this somehow with my figure it would be quite easier....I hope you will know what I mean . I hate those moments ,when my english is leaving me.It is getting complicated I am afraid.

While some of the processes or tools you mention may not be available in Poser, the basic description of a Shapekey (as far as I can tell) is known as a Joint Controlled Morph (JCM) in Poser-speak and is already being used in many/most figures, including Antonia.

Creating these in Poser does require some knowledge and (usually) hand-editing of .cr2 files (there's no built-in Poser tool for attaching them to joint rotations).  And yes - most morphing in Poser has to be resolved down to the 'body part' level, because Poser meshes (as opposed to Blender meshes) are (internally) broken up into body-part chunks.

Nothing wrong with requesting tools/features to help deal with the above, but I don't think we need to start using some new term for it - it's a Joint-Controlled Morph (that site has other tutorials and additional discussions about the use of additional bones for some techniques, but those don't fall under the 'shapekey' terminology he's using).

Did not intend to create any confusion. The link I posted was an example of a rigging technique that might be convertible to Poser.

Seems like a possibility because the implementation of shape keys in the text resembles the application of JCM's in Poser.

@Timberwolf

If you have an external modeling program you can use Compose to create a joined mesh, sculpt it as a whole, then revert it back to it's separate groups and create your FBM INJ/REM files for Poser by your preferred method. Some people use UV Mapper in place of Compose in the unified mesh creation.

I have a tutorial for the Compose/Blender work flow. The Compose section of the tutorial is applicable regardless of your modeling program because it is the intermediary step between Poser and the modeling program.

PM me if you are interested in downloading the tutorial and I'll send you the link. (It's posted in one of the threads here but it would probably be faster to PM then search...I don't remember which thread it's in.)

Quote - Did not intend to create any confusion. The link I posted was an example of a rigging technique that might be convertible to Poser.

Seems like a possibility because the implementation of shape keys in the text resembles the application of JCM's in Poser.

...sorry for the confusion on my part - I was just responding to Timerwolf about the topic of Future Poser Wish Lists / Feature Request.  The gist of which is (in my opinion), that we should use the terminology already familiar to Poserites for that, which is JCMs (or more specifically in this case, asking for additional tools/methods of creating and applying JCMs and the like).

But, just to also comment on the rigging aspect... that technique is not really transferable to Poser, since it relies on vertex weighting/mapping, which Poser doesn't have.  You can do JCJ (Joint-Controlled-Joint) stuff, but I don't see that as much advantage over JCMs (or even Joint-Controlled-Deformers/magnets) and it adds complexity to the rigging ( additional body-parts == potential end-user confusion).

I wouldn't want to squelch any potential inovation or experimentation, but I just don't see it as a potentially better solution than what's already available with JCM and/or JCD (magnets) and/or Body-Handles.

Actually... I guess what I'm really trying to say is that:  While that's an interesting read (thanks for the link!), it doesn't really present anything that can't (or hasn't) already been done in Poser, using Poser methods of achieving it.  About the only 'new' or different thing described there is implementation-specific (using weight-mapped joints/vertices, which we don't have in Poser).

I posted the link because Phantom3d is already taking Poser rigging in other directions from the standard fare available with the rigging setups that deal with the groin/hip/thigh area through the addition of the secondary hip and therefore might find the information useful or thought provoking.

However, please correct my abysmal ignorance and direct me to the pertinent Poser information to correct the shoulder deformation deficiency when posing figures with arms extended overhead.

It seems all my Poser characters suffer from this so I'm sure that others besides myself would find the information revealing, such as the creators of this figure, Smith Micro, DAZ, and the plethora of figure creators.

Thank you and I eagerly await the solution outlined by you as "anything that can't (or hasn't) already been done in Poser, using Poser methods of acheiving it."

I think Spanki is just explaining that poser does not have all the tools that an app like Blendermay have. But I am indeed working on the shoulder problem for figures in Poser and I hope I will be able to solve most of it in the very near future.

Meanwhile, here is a few pose files I have made for Antonia, I'm going to wait till I have 8 or 10 put together befor I upload to the developers site.

Cheers,

Mike.**

She's definitely looking good in those poses, Mike! Shows you've done the hard work in the rigging.

Here's  some poses with Antonia leaping about and Antonia with Brad-Lo  just to show his posing off too. ( I posed Antonia in the couple takes badly and her abdomen separated somewhat - you have to be careful to spread extreme stretches out between parts such as hip2  abdomen and chest rather than stretching just one of them to extremes.)

Muscle morphs were suggested for Antonia in another post and I agree that they would be essential in dance poses especially. But mainly I sought to illustrate  how just tapering her calves a little as it meets her ankle would be wonderful.  Don't know if anyone else noticed this and don't know if it can be accomodated at this point. 

Great figures to pose,  even if I have to get used to them yet and even if Brad-Lo is unfinished as yet.

These aren't textured yet :.  Great promise for animators, thank you odf and Phantom!!

Thank you Masha, those look great!  Wow Antonia and Brad look good together

Great poses, phantom3D and masha!

Speaking of calfs and Biceps, take a look at this! www.artsyfartsy3d.com/index.php/downloads

Talking of JCM's and the need for biceps and Calf definition and being sick all day, I found this.  Sorry I haven't been able to do much.  I'm out of some meds, and have taken ill until I can buy more.  I'll be fine, but I'm run down and have no energy, until Monday when I can get some to hold me over for a while.

If someone wants to take a look at this, maybe something similiar can be set up for Antonia?   This is pretty exciting to find.  To have a figure with this stuff built in would kick so much ass, it's staggering.:laugh:  Litterally.

Here's another motion, where it might better show how some lower leg tapering from about half way down the calf to the ankle would give her legs more definition. Can anyone else see it?

Is it too late? Undesirable?  Am I belabouring the point? 

I'll shut up about it now. :)

PS Geez they make these attached pics small!

More achilles tendon definition, you mean?  The area just below the bulge of the calf muscle?  I think that'd be a good idea.  See above your previous post for my other calf suggestion.

PSS;  Maybe the tapered down shin would also help the heel bend at extreme poses ?

Not belabouring some more just adding to the previous belabouring ?

Hey JoelGain, forgot where we can send you some help with PayPal.  Let me know?  It won't be much but meds are important.  Take care, hope your situation's getting closer to resolution.

Cheers!

Quote - I posted the link because Phantom3d is already taking Poser rigging in other directions from the standard fare available with the rigging setups that deal with the groin/hip/thigh area through the addition of the secondary hip and therefore might find the information useful or thought provoking.

However, please correct my abysmal ignorance and direct me to the pertinent Poser information to correct the shoulder deformation deficiency when posing figures with arms extended overhead.

While I appreciate your vote of confidense in my abilities, I don't claim to have all the answers.  As mentioned above, I was merely commenting on the tools available within Poser for addressing such issues (which don't include weight-mapping).

Aside from that, the only thing I can base my comments on is my own personal experience and understanding of the topic - which is something I'm not entirely unfamiliar with myself, as this thread on a figure of mine from 4 years ago might suggest.  The figure in those images didn't have any JCM or extra bones or anything else fancy, just an early stab at straight Poser rigging (with no 'flat-topping' the thighs, btw).

Quote - It seems all my Poser characters suffer from this so I'm sure that others besides myself would find the information revealing, such as the creators of this figure, Smith Micro, DAZ, and the plethora of figure creators.

Thank you and I eagerly await the solution outlined by you as "anything that can't (or hasn't) already been done in Poser, using Poser methods of acheiving it."

Well, you took my quote out of context, so let me repeat the whole thing first....

Quote - Actually... I guess what I'm really trying to say is that:  While that's an interesting read (thanks for the link!), it doesn't really present anything that can't (or hasn't) already been done in Poser, using Poser methods of achieving it.  About the only 'new' or different thing described there is implementation-specific (using weight-mapped joints/vertices, which we don't have in Poser).

As for examples of JCM and JCD usage, Daz figures are full of them - whether or not the result is effective or not is something you can decide for yourself - but that doesn't mean that it can't be done using those methods (heck, Antonia already has good working JCM on the arms-up poses).

So, getting back the the link you posted and how it relates to Poser.... I wasn't suggesting that it was a worhless effort (ie. "While that's an interesting read..." and "thanks for the link!" both suggest that it may be "thought-provoking", if nothing else) .  I was only trying to outline 'potential' Poser implenentation issues...

• JCMs - yep, we can do  (and have done) that.
• JCDs - (joint-controlled deformers) yep - we can do (and have done) that too (look at V4).
• Weight-mapped vertices/joints - nope, can't do that.

...and that leaves us with "Additional Joints" - I wasn't limiting my response to the "arms up" posing issue, but assuming we are, then... yep - we 'could' do that (and I seem to recall at least one figure that was done/tried, but I don't recall the specifics at the moment), but "my opinion" (which may or may not be worthwhile to you) is that that wouldn't be a compelling solution to the "arms up" issue, in Poser - there's no reason that a JCM couldn't give you the same level of any kind of results you got from adding another (perhaps needlessly complicating) joint.

Just for the record, the above might be said for "other" additional joints (like Phantom has done in this figure), and while I'm not personally sold on the additional hip joint yet myself (I'm also not particulaly against it), I do find the additional foot joint very useful and it falls outside of my comment above in the following ways (ie. why a JCM wouldn't be a better solution in this case): - Since the issue at hand is 'downstream' of the joint in question (foot-bend), you wouldn't want to do a JCM based on the foot bend value (maybe you could do one based on the tow-bend, but see the next point...)

• You don't "always" want the affect to take place.  With an "arms up" situation, you pretty much always want it to look correct/better.  With the additional foot bending that can be achieved with an additional joint, it's "available" for situations where you want the affect, but not forced on you when you don't want it (when simply bending the foot for high-heeled shoes).  Likewise, if it were tied to the toe-bend, you still might not always want it.

...I'd also be in favor of an additional "spine" joint somewhere, for similar reasoning - I'm just undecided so far if this particular implementation makes the most sense - it definately provides more flexibility for doing your typical "waist bend" type poses, but also requires a new workflow and proceedures (ie. doesn't work well with many pre-existing pose files and additional joints like the big toe also need to be added when bending the toe joints, etc).  It also has additional problems - for example, try applying any 2 rotations (X +Y or Z+Y or X+Z, etc.) to the "hip" joint to see the problems.  Whether this particular problem can be 'fixed' or not, I don't know (I hadn't really looked into what's causing it yet).

I hope that gives you some better idea of where I'm coming from - just stating my own opinions, like everyone else.

Cheers,

Keith

Quote - It also has additional problems - for example, try applying any 2 rotations (X +Y or Z+Y or X+Z, etc.) to the "hip" joint to see the problems.  Whether this particular problem can be 'fixed' or not, I don't know (I hadn't really looked into what's causing it yet).

Hi Keith,

I'm not completely sure what you're referring to here, but we spotted and fixed a problem with a hip rotation a few pages back. It had nothing to do with the rigging method. There was simply a glitch in the cr2 file that I introduced by doing some automatic cleanups, one of which was a bit faulty.

I haven't updated the preview in my file locker yet because it's such a small thing. Just change every word starting with 'hiphandle_' in the cr2 such that the 'hiphandle_' part is gone.

Regarding more/better JCMs: I think it's never quite too late for those, as long as the basic rigging stays the same. I was thinking about separating the JCMs from the main cr2 anyway and make INJ/REM poses for them. That way, we can easily insert an improved set of JCMs when someone makes them at some point in the future. Of course changes in the JCMs might lead to poke-throughs in some tight clothing, but if we keep everything nice and modular, people could still use the old JCMs - or none - with those clothes.

Basically, I would like to try and set up things so that work can continue and improvements can be made as we go along wherever that's possible.

So my focus at this point is on things that can't easily be changed later on: the mesh topology, the skeleton and basic rigging, and the default UV mapping. But of course if someone wants to have a go at adding to or improving the JCMs, that's very welcome, too.

'nother topic: can someone give me some details on how the morph brush in P7 and Pro works? Can I move individual vertices? Can I open an existing morph and modify it?

I'm looking for some way to fine-tune the expression morphs I'm planning to make and I can't afford any high-end applications. What I need is a way to edit a morph while being able to animate it and combine it with other morphs without having to switch back and forth between applications all the time. So I think it's either upgrade my Poser - I'm still using P6 - come to terms with Blender, or write my own morph-editing tool. The latter would allow me take symmetries into account, but it's also a lot of work, and I'd like Antonia to have a kick-ass face rig rather sooner than later.

Quote - I'm not completely sure what you're referring to here, but we spotted and fixed a problem with a hip rotation a few pages back. It had nothing to do with the rigging method. There was simply a glitch in the cr2 file that I introduced by doing some automatic cleanups, one of which was a bit faulty.

Ahh - yep, that was it.  I guess I missed that, thanks.

odf, I use the putty tool in Poser 7 to fine tune my Face Shop morphs.
It takes a little practice but it works.

Not sure on the vertice thing but I believe someone said you can.

I've been using it tonight to fine tune my older woman morph for Antonia.
And I've saved it to a pose file now and almost finished the full texture to go with ti.

As soon as I can do a bit more, I'll post it to the developer's site so folks can check it out.

I never had any real fine usage from the morph tool.  In my opinion, it's not an elegant tool.  It works to a degree, but I prefer Blacksmith for fine morphs.

The thing is, I need to see how every single vertex moves when I go between 0 and 1 on the dial, then fine-tune the morph vertex by vertex until it's exactly right. If Poser can't do that, I need to find a tool that can, and doesn't burn a huge hole in my bank account (not to mention a steep learning curve). I have to say, I was never that impressed with Poser in terms of its interface and usability. So unless someone tells me that the new vertex brush is the bee's knees, I guess I won't even bother trying it.

The question then becomes: do these things work well enough in Blender to be worth the effort of wrapping my head around its palimpsest of chaotic widgets and idiosyncratic, undocumented hotkeys, or should I just spend the extra time and write my own tool which will do exactly what I want the way I want it? I have to admit, I'm starting to lean a bit toward the latter.

Usually if there is any learning curve, it's best to use what's been practiced with.  Blacksmith 2.2 is really easy, but I'm always learning new ways to use it. Use what is easiest on your blood-pressure.

Quote - Usually if there is any learning curve, it's best to use what's been practiced with.

That's good advice, Joel. Maybe it would be most reasonable to stick with Wings and Poser and try to streamline the transfer of the morph data between the two.

Does anyone know of a Python script that lets one update a specific morph from an obj file? Basically I'd like to have a button that I can press whenever I made a change and that will then read in the new obj file and replace the existing deltas with the one computed from the new data.

I just had a look at the hands again and it was one of those "what the heck was I thinking" moments. The joints are positioned very badly, so it's no surprise that the mesh looks weird when grasping. The extra geometry that's supposed to support the bend isn't were the bend actually takes place.

I'm also debating whether I should rewire the palm and try to establish an edge loop that follows the life line, so that there's a natural place for the mesh to fold when doing a thumb grasp. The other two main lines are pretty much there already.

Hey Joel,
I just  realized I haven't yet responded to the post about that JCM for the calf link you posted. Wouldn't it be just great to have something like that incorporated into Antonia.  Would be good for all high heel poses too where the weight is forwards on the feet.

And yes, the calf definition I *was * talking about  was the achilles tendon area.

Hope you are feeling somewhat better... ugh, just realized it's after 2am your time, so here's hoping you're fast asleep. :)

I was fast asleep at 2AM, thank you. :laugh: But to the business at hand. Litterally.

odf- Look at that JCM on the calf, and give your 2p on it.

"Does anyone know of a Python script that lets one update a specific morph from an obj file? Basically I'd like to have a button that I can press whenever I made a change and that will then read in the new obj file and replace the existing deltas with the one computed from the new data."

I remember seeing one here that would do that, but I can't remember the name of it, or the maker. Send Ockam a sitemail, he's the BagginsBill of Python!  If he didn't do it, he'd know who did.

About the HANDS: The creases in the skin are where they are for a reason--USE!  When the skin is folded, it creases.  Creases SHOULD be where the joints bend.  Humans are a good judge of what DOESN'T look human, or if a member of the tribe has become defective or diseased.

That IS why so many people are SO critical of CGI.  If it isn't perfect, the human mind is struck negatively by the movement,or bends or texture.  We look for faults in other people whether we want to or not.  It's hard-wired to exclude defectives from the gene-pool. I was reading about it last month. It's an interesting theory.  I forget by who, now.

Quote - The thing is, I need to see how every single vertex moves when I go between 0 and 1 on the dial, then fine-tune the morph vertex by vertex until it's exactly right. If Poser can't do that, I need to find a tool that can, and doesn't burn a huge hole in my bank account (not to mention a steep learning curve). I have to say, I was never that impressed with Poser in terms of its interface and usability. So unless someone tells me that the new vertex brush is the bee's knees, I guess I won't even bother trying it.

The question then becomes: do these things work well enough in Blender to be worth the effort of wrapping my head around its palimpsest of chaotic widgets and idiosyncratic, undocumented hotkeys, or should I just spend the extra time and write my own tool which will do exactly what I want the way I want it? I have to admit, I'm starting to lean a bit toward the latter.

Hi OFD
Blender does work well for precise morphing. From my experience ( which isn't much just the bare basics ). It may be worth a try to learn atleast the following things.

A. Selecting vertices in edit mode and moving them on a fixed axis. Right Click verts then use G-key to grab and press X,Y or Z to move verts along that axis. Left click to confirm. You can even create vertex groups for easy re-selection.
B. Sculpt mode
There quite a few tools here but there really simple to learn in a day. Symmetry with Lock Axis X,Y or Z is awesome for sculpting along a fixed axis for more accurate sculpting.
C.ShapeKeys
This kind of works like poser dials where you can dial values and mix morphs. You can animate them with the timeline to see how they blend. There is alot to learn with how shape keys work but the blender site has a good wiki article all about it and it took me a few days to get the basics down.

Note: I do not recommend to use Multi-Res>Catmill Clark option when sculpting. This option has given me problems in the past ( moving verts I never sculpted on ) even when bringing it back to it's original level. I think it's bugged. Instead you can use add modifier>Subsurf to see details while sculpting.

I can't guarantee you'll love Blender in a few months but just give the three things I mentioned a try and I think you'll find them very useful. As Joe suggested, practice is your greatest teacher.

I found playing around with (fill in blank application or program) and having fun with it, a good tutor,too. :laugh:

Quote - odf- Look at that JCM on the calf, and give your 2p on it.

I think it looks great.

Quote - "Does anyone know of a Python script that lets one update a specific morph from an obj file? Basically I'd like to have a button that I can press whenever I made a change and that will then read in the new obj file and replace the existing deltas with the one computed from the new data."

I remember seeing one here that would do that, but I can't remember the name of it, or the maker. Send Ockam a sitemail, he's the BagginsBill of Python!  If he didn't do it, he'd know who did.

Thanks! In the meantime, I found a script by svdl that takes an obj file, turns it into a set of morphs - and optionally an FBM - for the current figure, writes INJ/REM poses and even makes thumbnails and a Python script to create the channels. Looks very nifty, and although it doesn't do exactly what I want, the ingredients are all there. I posted in the Poser Python group, anyway, to see if maybe the script I want already existed, but if I don't hear anything, I should have no problem now writing it.

Quote - About the HANDS: The creases in the skin are where they are for a reason--USE!  When the skin is folded, it creases.  Creases SHOULD be where the joints bend.  Humans are a good judge of what DOESN'T look human, or if a member of the tribe has become defective or diseased.

That IS why so many people are SO critical of CGI.  If it isn't perfect, the human mind is struck negatively by the movement,or bends or texture.

That is all quite true, but - no offense - in it's generality not all too helpful. Since we can't provide the perfect illusion, in practice we have to figure out which clues are most important to fool the human eye and try to provide those. Also, we have to find a good compromise between simplicity and accuracy in our meshes. So obviously, it would be very foolish not to have edge loops following the naso-labial crease in the face mesh. But for hand creases, it might be enough to have them in the texture or, for extra realism, add a displacement map and maybe some JCMs for the hand.

That's why I'm debating. The life line seems a good candidate for a loop, and I agree it's important for realism to have a crease there. But the thumb and its attachment to the hand are very difficult to model, and even if I came up with a better solution now, it could be quite tricky to make sure that all the existing morphs still work. So for me it's the question whether the gain would be worth the effort.

I'll do some experimenting and maybe post some renders here. It might turn out that - although not ideal - shifting some points along the palm-thumb intersection will be enough to achieve a better crease.

By the way, I adjusted the joint positions on the fingers, and I think they do indeed look better now when bent. I think it might be time for posting a new preview fairly soon.

JB123: Agreed! Blender definitely has the functionality I'm looking for all in one place. There's a nice chapter on shape keys in the Blender book I have, too, so I might actually be able to do some interesting things without pulling out my hair in bunches. On the other hand, I'm now thinking maybe I should wait for 2.5 before I start with the serious Blendering. It looks like there will be some radical spring cleaning done on the interface, and the result might be much more attractive and less frustrating for the likes of me.

odf--I didn't express my thought right.  What I meant was more directed at the thumb-1 movement.

You don't have it set up to move right. Look at your thumb. That bone moves the thumb from -5 degrees away from or up to 90 degrees toward the palm on it's side to side and from 45 degrees on a maximum bend to a minimum of about 10-15 degrees, with an endpoint of the bone just inside the life-line

I was really fuzzy earlier, and WAY imprecise in my language. Antonia's thumb one doesn't move right with the combination of  spread and grasp on both the outer side of it, or the inner side.  The bulk of the thumb's muscle is on the palm-side of the thumb-1 and bunches up when used to grasp. Antonia's thumb gets thinner there

Using the life-line as a basis of muscle-mass boundary is solid reasoning, the only tripp-up I see (on my own hand) is the web of skin between palm and thumb joint one.  Perhaps some JCM's could correct these muscle and other problems?  Hands that look right up close have been the final frontier of Poser.

AND I might be picking nits,too.  But there isn't enought Thumb-1 actor area on Antonia for me to even morph.  If I could fix it myself, I'd do so and not bother you with it.  Way beyond my ability. to do anything other than observe....and write way to much about it. :laugh:

Quote - You don't have it set up to move right. Look at your thumb. That bone moves the thumb from -5 degrees away from or up to 90 degrees toward the palm on it's side to side and from 45 degrees on a maximum bend to a minimum of about 10-15 degrees, with an endpoint of the bone just inside the life-line

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. But I will have a good look at the thumb tonight after work, and maybe I'll understand then.

Quote - AND I might be picking nits,too.  But there isn't enought Thumb-1 actor area on Antonia for me to even morph.  If I could fix it myself, I'd do so and not bother you with it.  Way beyond my ability. to do anything other than observe....and write way to much about it. :laugh:

I'm not sure I understand this either. Since an actor's movement influences the actor itself as well as its parent, it's only natural that the JCMs driven by that movement would have to apply to both the actor and its parent. In other words: I'd expect to morph both thumb-1 and hand, anyway.

It's a bit counter-intuitive, but the location of the thumb-1/hand boundary actually depends on what one needs for the thumb-2 and index-1 movement (because index-1 can only influence itself and hand, but not thumb-1), not the thumb-1 movement itself.

Oh, and Joel, I don't mind that "too much writing" of yours at all. It's usually good to get some broader perspective on things, and if we lose sight of the nitty-gritty details on the way, I can always ask again.

odf--I can't explain it clearer than I did. Treat your palm like a plain of orientation, then look how the base of your thumb (thumb-1 actor) acts. If I find a better way of saying what I mean, I'll use it.  It's one of those goofy thing that would take seconds to SHOW, but is insanely difficult to describe. :laugh:

Mike--Those feet kick ass! (Luckily, I can't put that simpler!) Those look spot on to me! btw--can you look at what I posted and do you get what I'm saying?  Sometimes I babble, without knowing it.