Qoute: "The secondary morph package thing? Well that started out based in part on people's desire to have more and more morphs in a figure, but complaining that the figures have gotten too bloated, you yourself champion the one figure fits all concept well that means more morphs generally.": UNQOUTE.

Well - you can create what you need for free with AM by just turning the dials, all of the essential morph channels are intact. Ask the folks who have made morphs for V4.2 WITHOUT the ++morph packages, and that DO NOT require the ++morph packages to be used by the end user - and they'll tell you that it's not an easy task at all. No-one whose either sane or smart wants to pay for something that they really shouldn't have to if it's not a sneaky marketing ploy. I don't know why you should be defending that train of thought unless you work for DAZ.

Qoute: "with V2 there was no way to expand the figure beyond it's base morphs easily. Yes there were aftermarket morphs and they could be loaded with Morph Manager and by other means but it wasnt a simple one click solution (Don't get me stared on people's dependence on one click solutions)." Unqoute.

 The AM figure is NOT V2 - your argueing apples and oranges. AGAIN - the AM figure is a POLYMORPHIC SEED FIGURE, the V2 figure is a STATIC MESH WITH MORE LIMITED ADJUSTMENT OPTIONS.

Qoute:"as far as why people sell characters based on those prepackaged morph channels rather than create their own. the answer is simple, conforming clothing support, if you use stock morphs than more clothing will fit your character and more people will buy the character, yes there are a number of merchants like Blackhearted who create their own character morphs from scratch, but try to find clothing that will fit those characters and you will see why everyone isn't doing it. That's not to say this will always be true, Morph transfer to clothing has come a long way since the Tailor. Dimension3Ds Morphing Clothes is a perfect example of how far its come. also we have dynamic clothing which doesn't have to be concerned with morphs." Unqoute.

Although you pretty much rebuttalled your own statement - here's another fresh perspective.
A figure like AM would actually STIMULATE more qaulity merchant offerings insomuch as accessories and clothing are concerned - because you would not have to deal with the "keeping up with the Jones" factor as far as new static characters popping up all over the place like Swine Flu cases. It would force them to be more innovative and not crutch lean on the same old tired approaches and formulas.

Qoute: " if you are on the internet and don't realize that sex sells now than I don't know what to tell you. and btw yes there is a realistic Police Uniform for V4, I created it. www.daz3d.com/i/3d-models/-/real-world-heroes I like doing realistic clothing, but I can tell you that it's not as lucrative as the "Whore Clothes" which is why you see so many of them and less of the realistic stuff." Unqoute.

Read my original post, I am VERY AWARE that sex sells, what I am SAYING - is that we need more of the mundane stuff to actually be able to do tangible work with. SUPPOSE I'm a professional artist (hopefully I will be soon) who is creating a visual novellette about an actual historical event like, Oooohhh, for example Pearl Harbour. Would it make sense to have all of my sailors 23 year old hotties in anal floss and stilletto heels? YES - it would probably attract a larger audience (mostly mouth breathers wearing house arrest anklets), but it would totally trash what I wanted to accomplish. It would also invite a mob of peed off vets to show up at my door and beat me senseless - to which I could not protest their actions at all, or blame them in the least, because I would totally deserve it. 

Keep the WHORE CLOTHES selling. I SUPPORT THAT, just sell as many NORMAL CLOTHES too. Don't let market trends exclusively RULE YOUR ARTISTIC LIFE COMPLETELY - BE CREATIVE and show that you have a modicum of artistic integrity and sheer guts.
Like I said before, I would rather Melvin the geek to be in his mom's basement having a simporn Poser pervathon, than stalking people with a paperback copy of "S&M For Dummies", and a coil of rope in his pocket.

Ah ok I didn't realize that your theme was an attempt to push AM. I have nothing against him, but I don't particularly find him versatile enough to completely cover the gammet as far as characters are concerned. No single figure is, for reasons laid out by others already, and if it was possible you would still end up with the bloated figure issue where you would need tons of morphs to get every variation possible. Believe me if there was one figure I could create content for that covered every variation and the software could really handle the requirements of such a figure it would make my life simpler as a content creator.

as far as your argument about whore clothes, sorry guess you didn't look at my catalog, there is far more conservative stuff in there than not.  but bottom line, most merchants are in this to make a living, they can have all the artistic integrity and sheer guts as they want but that doesn't actually put food on the table, and as long as customers are buying more of the sexy stuff, and I can attest that I have seen actual numbers that say they are, merchants will go with what is most likely going to put that food on the table. yelling at the Merchants who sell the stuff is putting the cart before the horse because the merchants wouldn't sell it if people didn't buy it in huge numbers.

Qoute:"Ah ok I didn't realize that your theme was an attempt to push AM. I have nothing against him, but I don't particularly find him versatile enough to completely cover the gammet as far as characters are concerned. No single figure is, for reasons laid out by others already, and if it was possible you would still end up with the bloated figure issue where you would need tons of morphs to get every variation possible. Believe me if there was one figure I could create content for that covered every variation and the software could really handle the requirements of such a figure it would make my life simpler as a content creator." Unqoute.

Actually - in a way your correct - I am to a certain extent pushing AM. As I said before (if you were paying attention) I don't think he's flawless, and every figure has faults. The AM subject on this thread was a can of worms first opened by my very good online buddy and long time Rendo aqauntance pakled. He made a VERY GOOD POINT. I have been waving the AM character on this thread around like a flag since then for a VERY GOOD REASON - and that is that he represents a concept that can stabilize the "Poser World" a little more, and in my opinion, make it a lot friendlier towards people who don't want to have to spend their eyeballs out on materials just to get character diversity in their scenes. NAMELY - an icon for folks who want highly flexible figures with INTACT CORE COMPONENTS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO BROKE OVER!!!

Qoute:"as far as your argument about whore clothes, sorry guess you didn't look at my catalog, there is far more conservative stuff in there than not.  but bottom line, most merchants are in this to make a living, they can have all the artistic integrity and sheer guts as they want but that doesn't actually put food on the table, and as long as customers are buying more of the sexy stuff, and I can attest that I have seen actual numbers that say they are, merchants will go with what is most likely going to put that food on the table. yelling at the Merchants who sell the stuff is putting the cart before the horse because the merchants wouldn't sell it if people didn't buy it in huge numbers." Unqoute.

Firstly - I'm not "yelling" at anybody. For those who feel that excessive capitalization is equivalent to yelling - you need to get away from the keyboards and get some nice fresh air and sunshine for a bit, it's starting to ware on you profusely.

Secondly - I am NOT in opposition to making a buck, otherwise I would not be contemplating being a merchant here. I am not saying go STARVE yourselves (that's being a tad bit over the top - don't you think?). I AM suggesting that you DIVERSIFY YOUR OFFERINGS A LITTLE!
(AGAIN - YOU DID NOT READ MY COMMENT CONCISELY).

Tell you what - you would make a heck of a lot more money just bending over and mooning the world in front of a web cam for five minutes a day than sitting around for hours tinkering with making little 3D models - but are you willing to do THAT? It seems logical according to the basic premise of your position. It would INDEED put food far more quickly on your table.

Show me where my mooning would make me more than selling content and I'll sign up today. :) frankly I think people would pay me more not to put my butt on the internet.
you keep insisting that I didn't read your comments concisely,  I can assure you that I did, perhaps it's just that you don't like my responses to them? In any case as the old addage goes, opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. obviously ours differ.

Yes wdupre, we do have differing opinions - ain't it grand?

Qoute: "Show me where my mooning would make me more than selling content and I'll sign up today. :) frankly I think people would pay me more not to put my butt on the internet."

First of all - far be it from me to corrupt you, but it doesn't matter if your a one eyed, green skinned lab experiment with a hunchback, and both of your boobs AND all of your knuckles drag the floor simultaniously like a misanthropic neanderthal. There are freakoids with hinky kinks of every stripe, kind, and variety floating around the gutteral turges of cyberspace, so you'de probably find a sustainable market. Just look at some of the stuff that's right here in the Rendo galleries and you'll get the picture. Lmao :lol:.

Qoute: " In any case as the old addage goes, opinions are like assholes, everyone has one." unqoute.

Yes...they are...but some are minty fresh - and others are cursed with roids, Lmao :lol:.

Quote - "scrapings of trace puritanism still left in the cake batter bowl of my superego, lol." 

Too much Freudian symbolism for me :-)  BTW trench coats went out with the VCR.

They DID----even the black latex ones----they were great for keep folks nice and dry during a thunderstorm.

I love you Plutom. I love you more than oxygen, lmao! :lol: :lol: :lol:

"even the black latex ones" 

Along with everything that (reportedly) made 42nd Street worthy of a pilgrimage. Damn you Giuliani!

Quote - Well - you can create what you need for free with AM by just turning the dials, all of the essential morph channels are intact.

For the figure, yes. Now how about the clothes? 

Therein lies the rub. Hell, even for clothing that was made for a specific figure, you often find no way to match the clothing to the morphed figure without breaking out a lot of magnets, or spending time in a mesh editor (which most folks will avoid like the plague).

D|S worked out a partial solution, "Magnetize Clothing". Problem is, the solution often bogs things down in a hurry with a lot of clothes (it basically adds a bunch of D-Forms --magnets-- to make the clothing fit the figure). It also only works with certain figures, IIRC.

Long story short, sure you can turn a base figure into pretty much anything, but the clothing simply isn't going to follow along. It won't even follow along if you make the base figure fat, pregnant, small-chested, or, well, whatever deviates too far from the typical runway model shape.

Quote - A figure like AM would actually STIMULATE more qaulity merchant offerings insomuch as accessories and clothing are concerned - because you would not have to deal with the "keeping up with the Jones" factor as far as new static characters popping up all over the place like Swine Flu cases

See above - the effort required to make the clothing would start to get prohibitive.

Quote - Read my original post, I am VERY AWARE that sex sells, what I am SAYING - is that we need more of the mundane stuff to actually be able to do tangible work with.

Hell, even in the sex realm, the more mundane stuff is needed, desperately. There are only so many fishnet stockings, thongs, heels, and bodices that one can stomach.

I still say that there's no such thing as "one size fits all" figure.
As I mentioned above (which was ignored by everyone but Pengy), sure you can morph the bejeezus out of any mesh and make it anything else if you have enough geometry.

But if you take what started out as a medium-build male figure and try to make it a teenage girl, an ogre, Hulk Hogan, or an opossum, while you may be able to physically morph the geometry, you're going to run into serious problems with the textures and the joints.

And while you can (and probably would want to) make new textures for each figure morph, you're not changing the UVs any by doing that, and that is the only way to avoid texture distortion. Same with the joints - Your Hulk Hogan is going to have different bending requirements than your teenage girl, and all that extreme morphing is going to change the mesh topology/topography in a way that simply will not work equally well for both variations.
So your Apollo-As-Teenage Girl suddenly requires remapping and re-rigging. What was supposed to be a simple matter has suddenly become more complex than creating a whole new figure.

This is why animation and game studios create new figures, or alter their existing figures significantly to suit their current CA needs. You can bet they would love to do it if they could get away with it, as it would save a lot of time.
But "One size fits all" seems to be a uniquely Poserverse idea, and it doesn't work for extremes. It's not a conspiracy that there are so many figures, it's a necessity to more optimally suit the needs of the people. And it makes sense. Trying to use one figure for everything is going to lead to major problems for the person trying to do it.

All good points Penguinisto. However - don't you find the typical runway model shape tedious and redundant?

Here's an example - I'm a frequent T.V. watcher because I love to break down media, ANYWAY - I've seen so many "dime a dozen" supermodel body types that I only find so called physically "perfect" woman marginally appealing now (years of desensitization due to incesant archtype overkill). Oh don't get me wrong - they're still attractive to me, just not as much so as when I was 18. I now find myself more compelled to notice female body forms that have an imperfect, earthy, "real life" ambience, like a lady that's a tad bit grungy, a tad bit chunky, and with not so much "perkiness" to certain aspects of their charms. It could be that I'm now technically middle aged and my tastes are changing - but I think it's more of a maturity of perspective really, rather than chronology. Perfect just gets REEEAAALLLY boring man.

I think designing figures - AND the clothing - unless your doing SCI FI or a period type of thing - should reflect reality a little more. For no other reason than the fact that you can't bog your work down with TOO MUCH out there stuff. You really do need standard stock, and more germain to the topics of the thread - you need figures that are COMPLETE - and not in piece meal parts and components.

Last comment also in your court as well Mikej.

Quote -
Last comment also in your court as well Mikej.

Well there's a difference between a malfunctioning 3D mesh and one designed to be imperfect.

Quote - All good points Penguinisto. However - don't you find the typical runway model shape tedious and redundant?

I do, and that's what I'm getting at... even if the mesh can morph beyond it, the clothing mostly doesn't.

Mike makes a solid point as well - a morbidly obese guy is going to bend a lot differently (especially in joint controlled morphs) than a scrawny teenaged waif. The former needs to move a lot of flab out of the way, while the latter needs smoothing and shaping around joints that are hyperextended.

Perfect example - Vicky 3's Unimesh. When you bend up the leg of the A3 variant, the tops of the thighs get a wonky depression and the butt cheek blows out.

AM does a better job of it, but even in its case, it can only go so far before the complexity makes it unusable. AM stops just short of that point (which is what makes it a pretty solid figure in my eyes), but you still pay for it in CPU cycles.

Quote - Oh don't get me wrong - they're still attractive to me, just not as much so as when I was 18.

Welcome to old age. We'll soon be sending you your complimentary lawn to keep the kids off of. ;)

Quote - I think designing figures - AND the clothing - unless your doing SCI FI or a period type of thing - should reflect reality a little more.

Actually, a surprising number of figures do that. Miki for instance stands out very well in this regard...

Qoute: "Welcome to old age. We'll soon be sending you your complimentary lawn to keep the kids off of. ;)" Unqoute:

Response:  I'm partial to Kentucky bluegrass - but not that hybrid crap from Loews Garden Center - throw in some sprinklers and a garden gnome, ceramic - not plastic - make a note of that, lmao.

Ok - in summary, it's not so much the figures, but the clothing. Ok - granted - I'm just thinking "What's the REAL difference between five static figures, and one figure that could assume five static forms? roughly you'de think that the clothing issues really wouldn't be all that different.

Quote -
Ok - in summary, it's not so much the figures, but the clothing. Ok - granted - I'm just thinking "What's the REAL difference between five static figures, and one figure that could assume five static forms? roughly you'de think that the clothing issues really wouldn't be all that different.

I've explained that several times. Are just not getting it, or are you so in love with the idea that you simply refuse to see it?

Yeeeessss Micheal.....I'm getting it..........Lmao.

Ah, if it's imperfection you want then nix the TV and Poser and step outside. Aside from The Biggest Loser, TV caters to perfection and even the TBL folks are trying to get buff. In the real world, diet pills and cosmetic surgery could float the national debt. Assuming that most real people would rather not be imperfect, why would they want their [often] fantasy driven 3D creations to be?

You are perfectly correct that is an probably under served market for less idealized figures and clothing. from historical to contemporary - I'd like to see more 1940's style garb. It's a topic/complaint that comes up fairly often. People are always alluding to a pent up demand that would make creating such content profitable, but for whatever reason, the marketplace has never moved in that direction and I don't see that changing. Apparently content creators place more faith in Sex in the City than Field of Dreams. Can't say that I blame them

While I agree with much of your basic premise, I must say that your argument would be more effective, or at least less tacky, if you dispensed with the implications that those who have different tastes are mouth breathing degenerates. OTOH, your image of sailors, who would have all been male (save for the nurses) running around in fishnets and thongs offers food for thought. I can imagine the Japanese getting one look at that scene and fleeing in panic. Gives a whole new meaning to 'Tail End Charlie.'
 

It makes no sence to tell someone with a low income to use ZBrush for morphes. We all now that zBrush isn´t cheap at all ;-) So it would be more easy to buy V4 with all morphes.

A pack of good quality paper, a bunch of pencils and a trip to the library for art reference books will set you back about 5 quid.  Easy!

lmckenzie - I wasn't saying MALE sailors, I meant FEMALE sailors. Nonetheless - it's a hilarious idea.

Secondly - I'm not saying that everyone who has different tastes are mouth breathing degenerates - just most of them, lmao :lol: .

Thirdly - yes I am tacky, and damn proud of it - behold my freak flag flyeth!!!

Fourthly - Field of Dreams practically put me to sleep when I saw it, and even though "Sex In The City" was both a film, and a TV series that I avoided like Dracula turning from garlic - at least Sex In The City would've illicited a bad case of dry heave gagging, and not a coma.
I was thinking more along the lines of clothing and goods that you could actually make a comic book, graphic novel, or gaming material with - and not just bathing suite and lingerie ads. 
How your eqauting useful general stock material with "Field Of Dreams" - I can't even hazard a guess.

Fifthly, Qoute*:*"Ah, if it's imperfection you want then nix the TV and Poser and step outside. Aside from The Biggest Loser, TV caters to perfection and even the TBL folks are trying to get buff. In the real world, diet pills and cosmetic surgery could float the national debt. Assuming that most real people would rather not be imperfect, why would they want their [often] fantasy driven 3D creations to be?" Unqoute.

Why do you think fictional shows are losing ground to reality shows? Simple - reality shows do not require the gross suspension of disbelief. Yes - it IS an ughly world in real life (metaphorically speaking), and how believable is a detective story, or a horror story, or a science fiction story, or ANY kind of fictional work if all of the actors look like Shakira, and are wearing black leather anal floss and thigh high fetish boots?

Sam Therapy: What's your point brother, I do pen and ink, pencil, AND 3d stuff. I don't get it?
(If your point is actually simple and obvious - but I'm still not getting it - don't get ticked off with me because I think I might be getting senile anyway, lol :lol:).

Quote - It makes no sence to tell someone with a low income to use ZBrush for morphes. We all now that zBrush isn´t cheap at all ;-) So it would be more easy to buy V4 with all morphes.

As a long time ZBrush user I can tell you it makes no sense, period, to tell anyone to use ZBrush for Poser morphs, no matter how much money they have. Between Poser's ridiculously tiny scale and Zbrush's desire to round everything off and arbitrarily rescale, and all the things you have to do on the way in and out, it's just not worth it. IMO, of course, and some would disagree.

A better idea for that is a modeling program that doesn't reorder vertices, doesn't do any transforms on the mesh size, rotation or position. I think Wings fits that and is free, and I think Hexagon does too, and is very cheap. Personally I think Modo is the best software for making Poser morphs because it doesn't alter the import or export in any way and has sculpting and doesn't require any plugins or OBJaction Scaler or anything like that, plus is more suited for manipulating geometry in a way that doesn't radically and adversely distort the mesh  like ZB can do. And you can much better control texture distortion, since you can slide edges along their normals and keep things even, while actually seeing what your morph is doing to your texture. Not free or cheap though.

I use WINGS3D! The learning curve is reasonable, and for a free app, it rocks. Does everything that you essentially need. It's on par with BLENDER and the pay app HEXAGON, but it's much easier to follow - probably even easier than K3D. I own BLENDER, WINGS3D, K3D, Splatch3D, some king of beta nurbs / glunk modeler that came out a long time ago, and several offer off name flash in the pan freebie modelers, and the only one that I really even use is WINGS3D.
Learn it and it becomes intuitive second nature.

http://www.wings3d.com/

Comes in Linux, Win 32, Win 64, and OSX flavors.

Quote - I still say that there's no such thing as "one size fits all" figure.
This is why animation and game studios create new figures, or alter their existing figures significantly to suit their current CA needs. You can bet they would love to do it if they could get away with it, as it would save a lot of time.
But "One size fits all" seems to be a uniquely Poserverse idea, and it doesn't work for extremes. It's not a conspiracy that there are so many figures, it's a necessity to more optimally suit the needs of the people.

Hi
MikeJ, I absolutely agree with your assessment  except that game Studios tend to create figure rigs for a specific title release,and move on to the next project they tend not to develop "long term", often emotional relationships with specific "3D character meshes" that make them want to "do everything" with that one character.

Lets be honest,

There are people in the poser community that are loyal to a specific figure to the point of Pagan IDOL WORSHIP yet do not even realize it.

just look at the emotional reactions you get from some if you say:*"possette is ugly"*or "Apollo is puffy& lacks realistic muscular Definition".

They React just as one might react if you had said "your religion is False"
and immediately begin attacking you and the  poser figure you prefer as the  the "Enemy".
over what, in reality, is just a consumer product but is certainly not treated with that cold same detachment as our other consumer products like our Microwaves & Automobiles.

And then of course there is the ever present merchant/program loyalty/opposition groups. There are some who will buy anything simply based on the subjective criteria that the item is/ or is not
from the evil DAZ "Empire"
for example there there is a dedicated group  of Sanctumart haters  over at the DAZ forums who sieze every opportunity to speak against him  and his products regardless of their high quality & Detail, based only on their perceived
"Arrogance" in Michael Raks( Santumarts) personality.

So to Mugsey& Others you need to realize that the popularity or ,lack thereof, of any poser figure rarely has anything to do with technical superiority or utilitarian usefulness of the figure.

Cheers

Me point, Mugsey, is if you're that hacked off with Poser in general, why not just draw rather than suffer all this pain?

Sam Therapy: I'm not in pain bro - just gripin, everybodie's gotta gripe every now and then. It's very healthy.
I do draw by the way and might be posting some stuff shortly if I can pull it out of the mothballs, lol. I'm just trying to champion the cause of the poor and down trodden....OK - ok - the lazy and ambitionless, lmao.
                          

Quote - the lazy and ambitionless, lmao.
                          

:lol:

Quote -
quoted from wolf
Hi
MikeJ, I absolutely agree with your assessment  except that game Studios tend to create figure rigs for a specific title release,and move on to the next project they tend not to develop "long term", often emotional relationships with specific "3D character meshes" that make them want to "do everything" with that one character.

Well I didn't mean recycling the character, but rather, not reusing the same meshes over and over again. For example, Psycho from Crysis Warhead looks essentially the same as Psycho from the original Crysis, although the character definitely appears to be a different mesh with updated textures.
And while Valve could save themselves a whole lot of time recycling Alyx, Barney, and everyone else from Half Life 2, I very much doubt they'll be using the same meshes and textures for Half Life 3, though I'm sure all the characters will look very similar.

All I meant to say was I bet some of the game studios would love to have some sort of "polymorphic" UltraMesh that could be morphed into different figures with different textures and enveloped/skinned to a multi-purpose biped rig over and over again, without the need for doing any extra work on the mesh. That way they could at least save some time in not having to remodel the figure meshes at least.
But they don't, and even in the cases where they may recycle a mesh to use for a different character, they still have to do a whole lot of work to it to fit with any radical new shapes they might be trying to create.
They don't because although it may seem practical on the surface, it doesn't work in the long run
Obviously they do reuse meshes and rigs in any one game for similar characters, to save time, but not over the course of a series, and if they have a big fat dude character, and a skinny little kid character, they're certainly not going to use the same mesh and rig for both.

But you already know all this.

I've done a whole lot of morphing for characters and one of the things I've constantly struggled with is morphing while keeping the textures from stretching too much. Even something as simple and basic as opening a mouth or closing an eye can be tedious when you're trying to completely avoid texture stretching or distorting, and the simple fact is you can't avoid texture distortion, period. The best you can hope for is to distort it evenly and not too much in any one direction, so it's less noticeable.
And you can see that in the galleries easily enough: Vickies with gigantic hooters and textures obviously stretched well beyond what human skin would ever do.
It's true you can compensate for that to a certain extent by creating different textures for your different morph shapes, but even that has problems. And of course, the more radical your morphing is, the further away from the original shape, the more obvious and worse the problem gets.

So, the only way you could make a "polymorphic" figure work is if you had a new geometry for each radical change, with mesh topography adjusted to suit the new figure's joints, and new UVs to accommodate the new shape.

So in the end you have three choices:
-Buy new figures and the morph packages that go along with them. (spend a lot of money)
-Buy total overhaul packages for "ploymorphic" Supermesh figures. (spend a lot of money, just on different things)
-Use unoptimized point'n'click solutions on your SuperMesh and convince yourself it's good. (spend maybe less money, or no money, or maybe even more, for something inferior to the above)

Of course there's a fourth choice - to do it all yourself, or to at least create your own new modifications for your existing rigs, but there are very very few people around here who have the skills for that.

Long story short - no matter how Super-Wow OMG! Apollo may be in the eyes of some, the idea that he can be some kind of universally adaptable figure that can be anyone from your 102 year old grandmother to your boss, to your martial arts instructor to your pregnant girlfriend without major intrusive and fundamental changes to everything involved, is a fable, a pipe dream, an unreality. Maybe it could work well for when the character isn't up close and in your face, but the closer it gets to the camera the more noticeable the flaws will be.

Then again, if the galleries here are any indication, many people aren't particularly concerned about flaws, or even notice them at all, even when uploading pictures to the Poser-Realism (insert massive snicker-fest here) section. ;-)

Quote -
I am still amazed that some people actually  try to $sell$  a V4 "male morph"
when there is a completely Viable  FREE male in the form of the M4 Base.

I suppose they want Vickie's clothes to fit...  :laugh:

"How your eqauting useful general stock material with "Field Of Dreams" - I can't even hazard a guess."

Sex in the City = Sex sells. Field of Dreams = 'Build it and they will come,' i.e. create non-whorish outfits and the world will beat a path to your door.

"Why do you think fictional shows are losing ground to reality shows?"*

Two main reasons: 1. Cheap production costs for the networks. 2. The public's appetite for the kind of plotting, backstabbing, dog eat dog mentality many of these series promote - the Colosseum without the blood plus the fantasy of everyman's 15 minutes of Balloon Boy fame. In terms of appeal, I suspect that much of it is more centered on the youthful, fit, skimpy bikini and briefs scenes in Survivor and the titillating bedroom antics of Big Brother (from what I've seen in excerpts). Even the token old folks seem to be pretty far from the typical lineup at KFC. 

"...how believable is a detective story, or a horror story, or a science fiction story, or ANY kind of fictional work if all of the actors look like Shakira."

Granted you need the grizzled and gaunt to fill out a scene but by and large the focus is on beauty - see Marg Helgenberger & Emily Proctor (who hardly look or dress like 'believable' CSIs), Twilight vampire chicks etc. Toulouse-Lautrec wouldn't last a day in principal casting. Most people probably do scenes with one or two characters and they often prefer them to fit some conventional ideal of human (or fae) beauty.

I haven't used Apollo enough to have an opinion on him. Vicky 4 has a lot of versatility for my needs, from teenager, to aged, to a decent BBW but the Millenium girls make better teens, most Asian morphs don't look as authentically Asian as Miki etc. Using a hammer to drive screws only works so far and with or without the clothing issue I think that a dedicated mesh will beat morphs in most cases. If you had a super-duper MakeHuman application that could take a generic base mesh, subdivide it differently and custom rig it for each generated figure and throw in some of the evolutionary algorithms for human mesh generation that researchers are playing with then you'ld have something but it would be close to what people are doing manually now in creating unique figures.

BTW, thanks for the latchworm! I can see it as a worthy opponent for a bunch of totally believable, whorishly clad, space marines. Now if I can just find a Denise Richards morph.
 

Lol. Your welcome!  While I'm working on the hovercar models I'm doing - I oughta start on more freebie offerings as well.

Do a theme. The hovercar looks kind of  like a 1940s-50s vision of the future.

I just checked out the hovercar WIP. Looks pretty cool, really. :-)

I haven't been a member of any community where there weren't angry, heated arguments about issues that would be uninteresting to outsiders. There are cheerleaders and haters everywhere. It's human nature

What hovercar? Did I miss a link or picture of it?

It's in my gallery spaceman - click on my screen name or do a site search on "mugsey" and you'll find it. My stuff is in the wings3D gallery under Science Fiction AND work in progress.

The hovercars are something that I've been working on off an on now for a spell.

I agree with the OP as well.  I've been complaining directly to DAZ and in their forums about all the fairies, Aiko, Hiro, cartoon figures, and too many items for Vicky.  I recently dropped out of the PC again when for about six weeks straight it was all fairy clothing.  After that it was back to V4 where it still is.  The only items worth buying are props.

I mostly use M4 and V3/S3 and for the limited clothing for M4 I just convert it using PhilC's Wardrobe Wizard.  I've pretty much given up on any support from DAZ PA's on male clothing.  I'm not getting into that debate as to why that is because I think it's all BS.  The PA's create what they want based on just that and nothing else.

I also dislike that every time M4 gets new hair or clothing it also fits V4 and the cartoony characters, while it never seems to work the other way around.

M4.2?  Was there an update I missed?

Speaking of Vicky 4 - you know what I discovered today?

I was farting around at lunch, stuck in the server room waiting for an install, so I fire up D|S on my laptop.

Now, this laptop isn't exactly a powerhouse: Latitude E6400 w/ a Core2Duo, 4GB RAM, Intel integrated video... and running Windows 7 Enterprise. But wahey - I got a 128GB geek stick with my runtimes backed up on it, so I get and install D|S real quick for giggles and plug in the stick.

Given the constraints (hell, even my ancient dual G5 Mac runs faster for CG), I decide to fart around with an old V3 figure. Then, I remembered that D|S now comes with subdivision, so I give it a shot on the figure.

You know what? SubD makes even the worst joints on V3 not only bearable, but looked pretty damned awesome. And get this - in spite of SubD, it still ran lighter on the resources than V4... suddenly I had a shitload of stuff I hadn't messed with in years, all sitting and ready to mess with again, with results that (IMHO) rival V4 and all her stuff.

"...running Windows 7 Enterprise"

He weakens Lord Vader, soon we will have him. 

Quote -
"...running Windows 7 Enterprise"

He weakens Lord Vader, soon we will have him. 

Yeah no doubt, what's up with that? I had  to re-read that a few times to make sure I got it right. ;-)

Quote -
You know what? SubD makes even the worst joints on V3 not only bearable, but looked pretty damned awesome. And get this - in spite of SubD, it still ran lighter on the resources than V4

It's even better when you have an actual low poly figure to work with to put into SubD, particularly if you can paint weight maps for bone influence. Dunno about D|S, just general purpose.
Does D|S have weight painting these days? I haven't at all kept up with things in the Daz-verse but I often read about all this new stuff that D|S has which has really surprised me a few times.

Quote - "...running Windows 7 Enterprise"

He weakens Lord Vader, soon we will have him. 

LOL! It's part of the job, and represents the only Windows machine that I myself actually use. (I'm typing this on a Mac). If they wanna pay me the salary I get (let's just say it's really healthy), but require that I use Windows @ work to do it, I'm okay with that... (as I slowly install Linux servers into the infrastructure, in spite of my koolaid-drinking boss >:) ).

==

Quote - Does D|S have weight painting these days?

I suspect the Advanced version might (or might not), but I only have the ordinary freebie version. I'm cheap like that.

I don't think DS has that but maybe it could...

If you use Figure Mixer to combine Aiko and Laura, the resulting figure has a "Mix Type" setting which can be set to one of these (quoting the manual):

• Vertex Weights: When selected, uses DAZ Studio's vertex weights to determine the mixing of morphs.
• Joint Params: When selected, uses Poser's Joint Params to determine the mixing of morphs, however, it is not as accurate as using vertex weights and manual adjustments may be necessary.

But other than through Figure Mixer I don't know how you can use "vertex weights" with your figures. (this line shouldn't be indented)

*" It's part of the job" *

Of course, of course, that's what every undercover agent says just before he falls for the Mafia Don's daughter. Cut to Ballmer stroking a cat and chuckling softly.

Does he do that pinky thing too? I can almost see him doing that pinky thing for some reason.