Nope, I noticed what you said, I just expanded upon it and pointed out the differences between the various commands people were tossing around.

;-)

Quote - Well, one could just search the Poser Pro manual for "full body" and find:

Quote -
You can use a third-party application to create a full body morph for a Poser figure, and then use the Figure > Load Full Body Morph command to apply the complete morph to your figure. The Load Full Body Morph command will then split the morphs across each individual body part and create a parameter dial in the Body actor to control all of the individual body part morphs.

they should have added in the manual that its important to have the boy groups inside the OBJ object. if its not inside it will not work.

IDL keeps getting better and faster. I only do test renders without it now.

Quote - > Quote - Well, one could just search the Poser Pro manual for "full body" and find:

Quote -
You can use a third-party application to create a full body morph for a Poser figure, and then use the Figure > Load Full Body Morph command to apply the complete morph to your figure. The Load Full Body Morph command will then split the morphs across each individual body part and create a parameter dial in the Body actor to control all of the individual body part morphs.

they should have added in the manual that its important to have the boy groups inside the OBJ object. if its not inside it will not work.

It's in there. There is a note that immediately follows this paragraph that says:

In order for the Load Full Body Morph command to work properly, the OBJ file must be grouped the same as the original figure. If the morphed figure does not contain groups, you will only see a parameter dial in the Body actor, and you will not see any change occur when you adjust the dial.

;-)

Quote - > Quote - Well, I just bought Poser Pro 2010, but I'm scared to death to install it.  I'm afraid of compatibility issues with some of my content.  Silly, I know.

I have P5,P6,P7,PP,P8 and PP2010 Installed.
I haven't encountered any problems to date. PP2010 installs as it's own program.

PP2010 is my Fav version of Poser.

Thank you so much for the info, mariner.  That is great to know!!

Quote - i dont know if my computer is having a good day or what. but this is a test render. it rendered very fast. and the IDL is very good for those settings.  IC 30 and IDL quality 30. this is very low. and yet very good for a test render.

ice-boy -- Wow, that looks amazing!! I can't believe that it's only a test render!! 0_0

i remember asking bagginsbill months ago if there was a chance in poser to change it so that we could use seperate lights for seperate objects.
for example a seperate light for hair.and i remember that he said that this was not possible.

any chance if we could do something similar now? for example have a python script where we tell poser to ignore lights on some objects? for example to tell him that light_3 should ignore Box_1?

if we could do at least something similar and hack it then i can tell you right now that we will get faster render time with hair.

what numbers should i insert in the toonID to get different color passes in PSD? 

Seems to be web hex format. ie RGB in hex, hex, hex and then converted to decimal. So eg

pure red would be   FF0000 = 16711680
pure green would be 00FF00 = 65280
pure blue would be  0000FF = 255

And so on. If you have photoshop you can use its color picker to get the hex value for each color (or google for a conversion tool) then use window's calculator to convert to a decimal number and use that.

to bad that poser doesnt automatic make different colors with each object

to bad that poser doesnt automatic make different colors with each object

Quote - Seems to be web hex format. ie RGB in hex, hex, hex and then converted to decimal. So eg

pure red would be   FF0000 = 16711680
pure green would be 00FF00 = 65280
pure blue would be  0000FF = 255

And so on. If you have photoshop you can use its color picker to get the hex value for each color (or google for a conversion tool) then use window's calculator to convert to a decimal number and use that.

Yup, that's correct. If you want to figure out other colors, Stewer clarified it earlier

It's (RED * 65536) + (GREEN * 256) + BLUE

if i want to render a HDRI render what format should i use? what is better?

OpenEXR or HDR?

thanks

OpenEXR. HDR is also ok, but doesn't support alpha.

thank you.

can we set different crease angle settings on one prop? 

is this ''assigning smoothing id''?

i read teh manual and it says that i should use assigning smoothing id to seperate what parts have smooting on. but what should i type in? 

I don't think it matters. Just remember to use the same number for polys you want to smooth together and different numbers for polys you want to have a crease between. eg here i've used numbers 123, 124 and 125 for the 3 sections:

i dont want to add a crease.

i want to control where the smoothing is.

Maybe you could post an example of what you're trying to do ?

You can disable smoothing across the boundaries of groups with different smoothing IDs, but you can't change the smoothing parameters (on/off and angle) individually for each smoothing group. These are set for the whole object (prop or actor).

To do what you want, I'm fairly sure you will have to split the object up into separate props or actors.

Quote - Seems to be web hex format. ie RGB in hex, hex, hex and then converted to decimal. So eg

pure red would be   FF0000 = 16711680
pure green would be 00FF00 = 65280
pure blue would be  0000FF = 255

And so on. If you have photoshop you can use its color picker to get the hex value for each color (or google for a conversion tool) then use window's calculator to convert to a decimal number and use that.

i searching now in photoshop where i can find out the colors with the hex values.

but i can not find them. can anyone help?

The color picker in Photoshop is located at the bottom of the tools palette.  There are 2 boxes for background and foreground colors.  The hex values should be located on the bottom preceded by #.

and those numbers are used in the photoshop toonID for AUX render data?

why are teh edges so bad? why are they not mooth? 

render settings were ok. every pass has good edges. only the toonID has this.

pixel samples : 3
shading rate : 1

what does ''Include morphs when conforming '' and '' Include scales when conforming '' mean?

for example if i use the superhero morph on M4 it will fit all clothes to the body?

because this doesnt work.

If the clothing you load has the same morphs and you tick the box for the clothing then those morphs should automatically get used, a bit like superconforming. It doesn't transfer morphs to clothing.
If your figure uses scaling then again ticking the scaling box on the clothing should transfer the scaling to the clothing enabling it to fit correctly. I've had mixed results with the scaling, some items are ok, others aren't.

Sorry if I seem dull on the subject, I am currently downloading the trial of Poser 8 (do they have a trial version of pro 2010?!?) and want to know if its the correct version to do what i am "thinking" of doing...

(and yeah, its the FBM thing =P)

I want to know if this feature is what we've been dreaming for for so long. Can I assume that I would be able to import the original geometry of a figure into another 3d application, morph the figure in its entirety and then have Poser 8 morph (and save) the distortion?!? Obviously w/o having to go through each individual body group, making the morph, applying the morph throughout the figure, and then spawning the FBM? I have actually avoided this for so long of dread of that "process"... Shame on me =/

Also, I currently own Poser 5, so what would be my best upgrade options?!?

Thanks for any help or advice =)

Quote - i exported the toonID pass. auxiliary render

why are teh edges so bad? why are they not mooth? 

render settings were ok. every pass has good edges. only the toonID has this.

pixel samples : 3
shading rate : 1

i have now the service pack 1 instaled.

and it looks like that the auxiliary passes still render without smooth edges. like pixel samples was 1.

the strange part is that the main render has good edges.am i doing something wrong or is this a bug?

I have no experience with postwork compositing. I understand that compositing is a specialty in the CG world, and as with any specialty there is knowledge that is often gained only through experience.

I do not know whether compositors prefer aliased or anti-aliased layers. So I don't know if this behavior is a bug or feature.

Think about this: suppose you were trying to do a "blue screen" type of composite. Suppose you through away everything in your previous render that is red. What you are left with is completely blue.

But if the edges were smooth, there would be a few thousand pixels that are purple - neither blue nor red, but some mixture. How would you deal with those if you were compositing? How would you avoid a purple fringe on the figure?

how else would you be able to use tose renders as matte's.

for example DOF pass. if i use it with the lens blur then i will get ugly edges.

I repeat.

I have no experience with postwork compositing. I understand that compositing is a specialty in the CG world, and as with any specialty there is knowledge that is often gained only through experience.

Since I do not have such experience, I therefore do not have such knowledge.

"how else would you use those renders"

I imagine that people who do compositing have tools for that purpose. Perhaps these tools do their own anti-aliasing.

I understand also that there are postwork motion blur techniques, so that composited images can be combined with motion blur that was not present in all of the original content.

There are many things about compositing that together represent a specialty within CG. I can only assume that the people who do this expect certain things to NOT be done.

For example, you know that I am a specialist in materials and shaders. You know that I cannot stand burned-in specular in a color map. Yet there are hundreds of color map vendors who believe they are doing the world a favor by including photo-realistic lighting effects in their texture sets. I, on the other hand, think they are foolish, do not listen very well, do not understand shaders, and therefore they miss the whole goddamned point of shaders. I also think that they are obnoxious for constantly and consistently ignoring what people are telling them about how to properly do textures for use in proper CG workflow. These vendors believe they are doing us a good service by including such features in their maps. They are wrong, but they don't understand or refuse to understand, because they believe they know how CG works best in all phases, despite the fact that they have no experience, and therefore no knowledge, of how their components are used later in the CG workflow.

Similarly, I have to believe that the inclusion of anti-aliasing in these layers, like burned-in speculars, represents a disservice to compositors, and it isn't there for the same reason. If you want it anti-aliased, you are looking for a shortcut that causes trouble down the line.

I therefore assume that Stephan Werner, who put this feature in, knows how it is to be used and did so in a manner that is acceptable and convenient to those in the CG community whose specialty is compositing.