Quote - *as a head morph for V4

*the kid  head has the same poly count and order as V4?

cos it's a morph of the same base mesh ;)

Kids? These are supposed to be kids? I've got 3 kids of my own and none of them looks like these.... I'm really grateful they don't. These kids are freakish..... little kids with teenage/almost adult like heads, almost creepy.

I wonder how they modeled them..... Well, we don't have kids at the office, but we can use ourselves as reference. Yeah, cool idea, let's go with that. We need to scale thing a little perhaps. who's going to google for children proportions?

*I wonder how they modeled them.....

• Well one thing I just learned in  this thread -  its yet  another  rehash of  V4....  
  Same old  shit.

Quote - cobaltdream says: AprilYSH works with D|S a lot, but is quite mistaken about Shader Mixer.  it's equivalent to the Material Room, not Matmatic.  it isn't a way to script materials so that you don't have to worry about making nodes at all.  in Matmatic, the compiler decides how many nodes you actually need to implement a statement like Blend(color1, color2, mask).  that's not at all the same thing as having to work with nodes directly.  the whole point of Matmatic is abstracting to expressions and not needing a GUI.  not to mention, ShaderMixer doesn't have built-in input multiplication.  it has input override.  so any nodes you'd generate from something like a Matmatic script need to be implemented very differently. 

lol ok I'll wear that but quibble that it could be more because I've not used matmatic... but also I'm sure I did not equate Shader Mixer to the Poser material room because in mixer you can redefine the attributes (nodes?) that appear in the main shader (and hence what the end user has to input in the surface tab ui) ... while in Poser you have to start with the predefined "PoserSurface". So it's still not quite the same in the context I was thinking,  and I'm not sure what else to equate it to.  Any suggestions? :)

On a separate note, Shader Mixer is still marked BETA and only a few people have poked sticks at it yet.  Personally I'm staying away from it in favour of reading up on RSL (if and when I have time) because beta means it could change drastically. Investing much effort in understanding its "bricks" could be a huge waste of time.  :/

Quote - cobaltdream says: but that's the thing.  the people who really understand stuff like this and build shaders mathematically sell things like HSS and PWSurface.  they don't say: "hey, this is how i made SSS work.  here you go for free."  i'm not saying they should do that, but even face_off wrote a free tutorial on how his Real Skin Shader was built before he sold it.  and all of the other Poser skin shader people i know of  posted their experiments here in the forums.  so yeah, the Poser community tends to be a little more generous, which happens when people don't need to pay more to become experts. 

probably true... just wanted to note that Arthur Heinz did have a huge long thread on his shader(s) where he shared his info and compiled copies for free long before he sold it :) 

Quote - cobaltdream says: not to say that there aren't nice and generous D|S users, but it's just harder and more expensive to get at in-depth D|S knowledge than it is to get at Poser knowledge.  and as a result, a lot of very accomplished D|S users don't actually have in-depth knowledge or understanding, so they can't share it even if they wanted to.

never thought about it before but your observations sound about right...

(well now I wish this heretofore reasonable discussion topic was in its own thread lol :) )

Quote - but also I'm sure I did not equate Shader Mixer to the Poser material room because in mixer you can redefine the attributes (nodes?) that appear in the main shader (and hence what the end user has to input in the surface tab ui) ... while in Poser you have to start with the predefined "PoserSurface". So it's still not quite the same in the context I was thinking,  and I'm not sure what else to equate it to.  Any suggestions? :)

no, it's still the Material Room.  so.....
this is actually a problem i see a lot in different contexts.  people get caught up with what something is called instead of how it functions.  the Poser Surface gives you slots that automatically do stuff for you and have names so that you can put them away easily.  think of it sort of like a spice rack that takes containers of absolutely any size.  just because it says oregano, doesn't mean you can't put cinnamon there.  and if it says, "Alternate Spice," or "Good Taste," you can put whatever you think should go there.

you can put absolutely anything you want into Ambient, Alternate_Diffuse, Alternate_Specular, and Translucence, and outside of a few special situations, the results will be the same.  diffuse internally applies the diffuse node, and specular internally applies the specular node, but the rest just show what you give them (well, Translucence does some crazy things in certain situations, but let's not get into that because it's kind of complex).  and because Poser's nodes are flexible, and the base nodes are there, like different types of diffuse and specular, you can put anything and any combination of anything anywhere.  there's absolutely no more flexibility in saying your main surface is user defined and saying you provided user defined input to your globally defined root node.

the only thing making the base user defined would do is give slots user defined labels.  imho, that's of debateable use.  in general, when you give a whole populace flexibility in terms of labeling, what you have is a mess of questionable usability and little consistency. but folksonomies vs. taxonomies is a huge usability discussion.

When the K4s was released I made a Wishlist at Daz, I just cleared it with the exceptions of some the new hair... I can re-fit to the Gen 3 kids, Thanks DAZ for saving me some money.

It's hard to believe you over looked Poser Users ... after all Poser is what gave you your Start.

For me, learning Daz|Studio is like learning to draw with my left foot when I can already do it very well with my right hand,  and OK with my left hand. Why would I want to, when I already know how to do it in another program? Yes, I love the way some of the D|S renders look, but I'm learning how to get that look in Poser more and more every day. I don't use D|S. I've loaded it a few times and tried it out, but it was JUST counter intuitive enough to be offputting. It's not as close even as, say, Photoshop and Paintshop and GIMP. It's like learning an entirely new method of the same damn thing. ;)

As for the kids, I grabbed the free bases, but likely won't end up doing anything with them beyond background in an image, maybe. I already have the Gen3 kids, and morphs to make them look decent.

I'm gonna get the Daz Gen 4  kids  and turn them into  my own personal herd of  slave children.

They  will  mow my lawn  and bring me beers.

Maybe a foot rub  now and then.

cobaltdream, thanks, didn't realise most of the PoserSurface node input labels were pretty much arbitrary 8o

Khrys, apart from content vendors, I don't see why people would want to learn both poser and ds depth either.  And it's why there's a lot of complaint when content can't work the same in both since people want to stick with their app of choice. Like the toddler's scaling... and that's exacerbated since the creator is one of the app's owners. lol Oh well, can't please everyone!

most labels on anything are arbitrary.  the labels the Shader Mixer user would choose would be not only arbitrary, but idiosyncratic and personal.  for instance, most bagginsbill followers use the Alternate_Diffuse channel for what it sounds like: a particular way to shade a surface that's different from the primary diffuse.  it usually includes specular, but that doesn't stop Alternate_Diffuse from being a pretty decent label for that purpose.  

you could probably do the same in D|S, even without the Shader Mixer.  you could plug an image into Reflection Color, and i doubt it will behave any differently than if you plugged it into Ambient Color.  the key is to stop looking at labels and start looking at how the application actually works.

Every time a new figure is release there is whinging us & them threads, you would think people would get tired of it :rolleyes:

Most meshes V4, M4, kids whomever, are BASE meshes they are there to be morphed, I don't think I have liked any base mesh out of the boxes, except maybe A3, but it doesn't stop me using them. Morph them into something you like, easy .

Okay, like I said in the Daz forums, I've taken this far enough away from topic, for which i apologise. Back to the Kids4.

I've started another thread on what might hopefully bring more light to some burning questions I have. Thank you to all who have answered and contributed.

Quote - Every time a new figure is release there is whinging us & them threads, you would think people would get tired of it :rolleyes:

As long as DAZ keeps on supplying the fuel for these kind of threads, they will not go away anytime soon.

Actually, The Toddler does NOT work with Poser, due to it using Single Axis Scaling.
See attached screen capture.

glaseye has come up with a partial cure for the Toddler Morph in poserPro
2010
It's in the Faeirewyld Forum in the "Poser Spells" Glade.

 A partial cure for the distortions in the Kids 4 Toddler

http://www.faeriewylde.com/FW3/index.php?topic=1658.0

And Yes, I agree with your first statement.
I encountered this all the time while sailing around the world.
Europe uses 220v 50 cycles
US uses 110v 60 cycles.
So should a Customer in the US expect a European Product to work?

Quote - > Quote - Every time a new figure is release there is whinging us & them threads, you would think people would get tired of it :rolleyes:

As long as DAZ keeps on supplying the fuel for these kind of threads, they will not go away anytime soon.

Agreed.
When one intentionally builds Round Pegs for Proggies with Square Holes, you should expect it.

He looks much better there mariner.  :)

Quote - A partial cure for the distortions in the Kids 4 Toddler

http://www.faeriewylde.com/FW3/index.php?topic=1658.0

Fixed link.

LOL. I don't have a membership anymore at faeriewylde. For some unknown reason. I will have to register all over again. I was a member since 2002 or so.

Quote - LOL. I don't have a membership anymore at faeriewylde. For some unknown reason. I will have to register all over again. I was a member since 2002 or so.

They've switched to new forum software and don't appear to have transferred the previous registrations.

I wish faeriewylde would just make some figures, then we might get something worth downloading.

Well, if you like little fairy types, especially impish ones, Nursoda's figures are awesome ;o). I don't know how he does it, but his figures have the cutest facial expressions of any figures I've used yet. Of course, if you're not into cute, than maybe he isn't your guy...lol.

Laurie

I just think they could create some decent children figures and not leave out the Poser users. It's our own fault though, if we had been buying things from CP and supporting Poser compliant figures all this time instead of throwing everything behind Daz, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Ya I know, who knew they were going to dump us. What ya get for putting all your eggs in one basket.

Well, for the longest time there, they were pretty much the only basket (other than Poser native figures)...lol.

Laurie

Well I've learned my lesson, I have deleted every piece of Daz crap from my runtimes and I'll never buy another. From now on I buy elsewhere and if it doesn't have the little Poser running man sticker on it I'm not buyin. Big deal right? Well maybe enough people will do the same to make a dif.

Well, mike1950, if I only thought you were right. However, people like you are just little drops of water in a very big Daz pond ;o). I have a few pet names for the "likers of Daz" but I won't say them...this thread could get nasty enough without my help...lolol.

In Daz's defense, they are probably the only place you can buy a figure and be darn-near guaranteed that there will never be a copyright violation. Perhaps that's the reason people keep going to them...assurance. In all the years I've been using Poser, I can only remember 1 time when there was a problem there. Daz was on it too like flies on a corpse. And that was a very long time ago now. You have to admit, you can't say that about other stores ;o).

Laurie

Quote - Well, mike1950, if I only thought you were right. However, people like you are just little drops of water in a very big Daz pond ;o). I have a few pet names for the "likers of Daz" but I won't say them...this thread could get nasty enough without my help...lolol.

In Daz's defense, they are probably the only place you can buy a figure and be darn-near guaranteed that there will never be a copyright violation. Perhaps that's the reason people keep going to them...assurance.

Laurie

Well thats true, but gotta put my foot down and start somewhere. So I'm Daz free, sorta like quiting smoking.  :laugh:

i'm not ready to boycott them (yet- i have artists there i follow), but i deeply hate being lied to.  the ad copy and forum posts saying this was a technical issue, and that they tried hard to get around it, are lies.  if it was technical, a company that invented several figure innovations could have done before release what a single, independent user could do in one day.  Poser scaling is different than D|S scaling, but that's not the issue. the issue is why they, with all their expertise and previous experience making figures that scale perfectly well in Poser, didn't bother to make the same effort glaseye did.  and it wasn't for technical reasons, it was for business reasons.  which is fine, imho. just say that.

and they had to know this would spark frictions between user communities as D|S users defended them.

well, i hope this series of events and statements makes us all a little more deliberate about where and how we spend our money, and a little less credulous about all business' actions and statements.  otherwise, we'll end up funding changes to the market that we don't want, rather than fostering changes we do.