Just saw it. I am interested of taking pictures of my friends and make morphs of them for M4 and V4.

Does it give what it promises?

erm...  I'd go with no it does not.  There has been some discussion about FaceShop 4.  You can read up on it here:

Faceshop for Poser.

There's one post towards the end about FaceShop 5 on Mac.  Haven't heard anything about the PC version though.

I agree.

Okay. How about FaceGen?

How can M4 & V4 be used in this software?

Hmm.. got it. Looks kinda difficult to do.

http://www.facegen.com/Tyler/CustomizerTutorial.htm

Yeah but I understand they're working on a Poser plugin for it...

Quote - Yeah but I understand they're working on a Poser plugin for it...

Any idea when is it going to be out?

According to a previous post, not any time in the immediate future.  Perhaps by Summer.

I have it, but unfortunately it has crashed every single time I've tried to use it.  :(  Face Shop 4 has usually been stable for me, but I've never been able to get results out of it that were useful.  Interesting, sometimes.  Not really useful.

But I've read that it can be quite powerful, if you can develop just the right level of expertise with the interface and/or process.  I'm afraid I don't have enough tolerance for frustration and disappointment to get there.

And yet I'll probably still end up shelling out for FS 6, if and when it comes along.  Ever hopeful.  :lol:

The program makes me think of that Hitchhiker's Guide quote: "Looks like a fish, moves like a fish, steers like a cow."  :lol:  So much potential.  Apparently robust and effective algorithms in use.  And an interface that handles as awkwardly as the Poser Hair Room tools, for me, at least.  Sigh.

 I spent too much time wrestling with Faceshop 5's bugs, poorly designed UI and spending hours trying to move dots on the photograph and the poser head only to have the whole app crash and lose all that work. I'm waiting for the Poser compatible version of FaceGen to be released in the summer.

The Face room in Poser 5+ was adapted from or inspired by FaceGen so a compatible version shouldn't be too much of a task for them hopefully.

Quote -
And yet I'll probably still end up shelling out for FS 6, if and when it comes along.  Ever hopeful.  :lol:

I'm the opposite, after being underwhelmed by v3.7 I'm reluctant to throw more money at a new version. I'm not interested in the FaceAge thing so I'd be buying it in the hope that the 3.7 features worked better, and if they don't I'd have to punch myself in the face for not learning anything from the first time.

Quote -
I'm the opposite, after being underwhelmed by v3.7 I'm reluctant to throw more money at a new version. I'm not interested in the FaceAge thing so I'd be buying it in the hope that the 3.7 features worked better, and if they don't I'd have to punch myself in the face for not learning anything from the first time.

Same here, I have wasted more that enough $$s on FS already.

FaceShop so far ends up for me being one of those 'Potential vs Reality failure' products - fabulous idea, great promise, failed implimentation.
I regularly create finely detailed vector artwork used to machine cut panels for commercial artwork. This involves precision positioning of vectors, so I know a thing or two about placing points in both 2d and 3d space. I've also made quite a few face morphs the old fashioned way in a 3d modeller. I'm no stranger to the kinds of workflow that FaceShop purports to utilise.
I spent many hours with the standalone FaceShop4 (watched the video tutorials, studied the suggested workflow, followed the forum posts, emailed the vendors etc) and was entirely unconvinced about that version's ability to create even a mediocre morph or texture, not to mention the regularity with which it just plain crashed.  I actually think it's core methodology is flawed such that it can't really work in any real sense.
IMO it was not fit for purpose as laid out in the marketing blurb and should not have been commercially sold - my opinion as I say.

Nonetheless stores keep selling it, people keep buying it and apparently many are happy with it - something that mystifies me. It's one of those commercial mysteries.
To be fair, I haven't tried FS5 and don't intend to - definitely not after seeing this thread.

I´m looking more towards programs like BlackSmith3D for morphing.  Even though it doesn't have that 'Auto-Function'  you could probably get pretty decent results judging from some of the videos I've seen.  I have a lot of face morphs for V4 so I can get varied results with those alone.  I don't see the point of spending hours moving points around to get disappointing results when could spend hours getting the result you want by morphing the head yourself.

Whenever I see people showing off morphs from FaceShop it's usually a character that has its head turned like the photo it was morphed from with a horrible texture applied to the face.  If you change V4s face texture with a photo of a celebrity and render it out 'head on', chances are it will look a lot like that celebrity without changing any morphs.  Turn the face 45° and it looks nothing like it at all.

Quote -
Whenever I see people showing off morphs from FaceShop it's usually a character that has its head turned like the photo it was morphed from with a horrible texture applied to the face.  If you change V4s face texture with a photo of a celebrity and render it out 'head on', chances are it will look a lot like that celebrity without changing any morphs.  Turn the face 45° and it looks nothing like it at all.

This is exactly the reason why I think FS is fundamentally flawed. I mean, what's the point of creating a 3d version of a head from a photo that can't be rotated and lit differently?

In truth, I'm not sure it is really possible to create such a morph from just one photo - not without some VERY clever analysis of cast shadows (which arn't always present in photos) and cross-reference with hundreds (if not thousands) of pre sampled 3d heads in order to assess a 'best guess' on averaged results. I'm pretty sure FS isn't doing either of these.
That's how I understand it anyway.

You'd need to reference at least two photos (ideally a full frontal and a full profile) to position chosen points in order to reasonably accurately recreate a head in the way FS works.