Great!  Thank you so much Mike.  Impatient for time to play with him :)

Well the only scaling I have set up right now is the penis, I only set up that because otherwise its in your face when you load the figure. But playing with the scale settings in DS, it looks like I should not have any problems getting it all to work in DS. actually looks better for scale in DS   But the actual body bends look better in Poser (likely the auto smoothing in the poser preveiw.)

You're welcome Masha, let me know what you find, problems etc.

Attached Link: Brad Symmetrical

I remember you used C4D and as i don't like the GUI of this prog I don't use it, so I don't know how to make symmetrical a mesh. So i fired up modo and i have translated some of the vertices of the central YZ plane and have launched several times the symmetrical tool. Now the mesh is symmetrical at 1 um precision ( modo can't do more :lol:).

I've attached the mesh (hope this works).

Cheers.

Hi poliakis,

Thank you, this will work nicely, very kind of you.   I have been using Zbrush to do any symmetry  functions like that, but I dont think Zbrush is very accurate.

Cheers.

Looking good! The brows are fine, I think. People have a tendency to place them too high, which results in perpetually surprised faces.

(Just look at your own userpic. Brows too low? )

You're right odf, My brows are even lower.  I may have to adjust the figure geometry. His eyes might be too big or maybe too wide. once I get some eyes in there I'll have to look. It sure makes a difference with a texture, I can see things wrong with the shape that I did not see in grays of the plain obj.  Well I'll keep working at it.

 I agree with Olaf. Look at other guys, not other figures. He looks like a guy I went to school with years ago. Doing good so far!

Ooh!  Fantastic!  Looking really great, phantom3d!  :woot:

This is your first map?! Wow!

Oh and talk to Antonio about pics of fingers. He is after all a photographer, too ^_^
(tell him I said to ask him ;) ) 

That's a good suggestion actually.

I've been messing with maps but alas... it was (so far) a disaster lol.

I've looked at 3d.sk, but I haven't caved yet. I won't, until I get better at this. :)

But Brad is really cool to play with, I gotta say.

 My work comp is having probs so still haven't been able to try him, but it's looking terrific Mike.  Like his face a lot too.  Just an observe from your pics  and considering his hands are closest to the camera in the first one, do the fingers/thumb seem a tad too skinny?  Is it even too late in the game to make such a comment anyway?
 
  Keep on keeping on, it's great!

Looking real good.
I have been busy with my Non-Poser life, Do I need to down load a new version?
Thanks,
           Niles

Thanks Cage, Joel.

TrekkieGrrrl:  Good idea, I will ask him.

Silke: Did you get the last version with the UV map templates?

Masha:  No not too late, I have been noticing several things myself that I need to work on. So its an ongoing process.

Niles: Did you get the last version with the UV templates, Alpha 0.2 ? The fingers still are not set up for Y and X rotation but work with the Z rotation. Still no scaling set up.  But everything is there and more or less works.

I have noticed that I am not getting the detail I wanted in the body of the high res version so I plan on rearranging the UV's a bitm differently so that I can get better detail.  So the UV template for the high res version will be changing.

Something I noticed while doing this first skin map, there are lot of shadows in the photographs that cause shadows on the figure, even if the photo looks fairly shadowless.  Getting them out is taking most of the time spent so far. If I take out all the gray from the texture though it looses most of the detail as well, and bleaches the hair to orange. Must be that I just want to remove the deeper shadows that cause shape distortions ?

I'm glad I did this now, as I can better understand what is required in a UV map for decent textures. 

Cheers.

I was not getting the detail out of the body that I wanted with the current UV's, also I was thinking about someones question about getting the face head scale the same as the body. (different scales are noticeable in the quality of the render.

So New UV layout. The low res version has all body parts on the same map with the same scale.

While we do have some stretching, we dont have distortion.

For the high res version I can simply break this UV up into 4 UV sets and scale them up. So if you were to make a high res texture, it would be a simple matter to convert that to the low res map, by simply scaling down and fitting it on the low res map.

Wow.  I like the new seams better, I think.

I'm wondering what the last figure to have the face UV's at the same scale as the body would have been.    All I can think of are the old Poser 3 figures.  

Reducing the number of maps for a figure would be appealing to those of us who prefer faster render times and simpler materials setups.  :thumbupboth:

Looking very good.  :laugh:

Quote - While we do have some stretching, we dont have distortion.

For the high res version I can simply break this UV up into 4 UV sets and scale them up. So if you were to make a high res texture, it would be a simple matter to convert that to the low res map, by simply scaling down and fitting it on the low res map.

This is an interesting issue - UV density.

One of the thoughts I've had for a long time is that Poser makes it really easy to scale a texture map file, mapping it onto any subset of the UV space (.25 to .35 instead of 0 to 1). Much of the reason that head maps are often separate files is simply to devote a lot more pixels to the head map. But since many apps do not support easy scaling of the UV space onto a map file, for most uses this translates into the head map being a different density in UV space, and that body has it's own 0 to 1 versus the head/face 0 to 1.

But I did experiments in the past that take advantage of UV scaling in Poser in interesting ways. For example, I once constructed a mapping for P6 Jessi  lips. Instead of using a 4K by 4K image for the entire head/face, I simply made a 1K by 1K image of just the lips, and a mask to go with it. Then I mapped that lip file into the UV space of the face. The result was the ability to have very high resolution lip color and bump, without resorting to that same resolution for the entire face. Instead of a 16 megapixel image, there are two 1 megapixel images. That's an 8-fold reduction in texture memory.

So what's the point for Brad?

Well - here's my suggestion. Place the parts into one UV space, as you've done. But be very precise about the boundaries of each subset. If you can publish the exact UV space bounding boxes for each piece, then it is easy enough for somebody to make a texture that is filled with nothing but face/head, and map it into the specified UV space boundary. For low-res work, everybody could just use single-image textures. For high-res work, knowing the precise boundaries, it will be easy to load a head-only map into that UV space.

Related to this issue of pixel density, I've often wondered why the CG industry has not architected a new kind of image file, one in which variable pixel density is automatically taken care of.

Imagine an image file format where it was possible to encode multiple regions, each with a different pixel density. Then it would be a simple matter to have one image for color across an entire figure, but allow parts of that image to be higher resolution than other parts.

For example, in your Brad UV layout, I could assign the image as a whole to be 1K pixels, but the region where the head is, I could assign an effective density that is quadruple that, the equivalent of a 4K by 4K image, but ONLY for the area that needed it.

This would so simplify the use of textures. A texture author would always be free to pick and choose where to apply higher resolution, without incurring the storage cost of that increased resolution over the whole image. Users would always just have one file to deal with.

Everything could be in that one image, not just high res heads, but high res eyes, eyelashes, etc. One color map to deal with, one bump map to deal with.

Seems obvious to me.

Quote - Imagine an image file format where it was possible to encode multiple regions, each with a different pixel density.

Such things have been around for at least 15 years: Kodak's Photo CD format sort of had that feature, and FlashPix built on that - but neither caught on.

The JPEG 2000 file format enables the file to be encoded to produce progressively higher levels of resolution, which can be region-specific, and it's possible to encode a TIFF file with a (multi-resolution) pyramid structure; the trick is to get  applications to use these features.

Actually BB, it's my understanding that PTEX From Disney is just that, a resolution free format that can store tons of texture information. Programs like Mari, a new texture painting tool from weta and the foundry, will feature support for PTEX. 3D Coat already does, though I'm not sure of his use of the format.

http://ptex.us/

http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/pkg_overview.aspx?ui=3366FFA1-E59B-4772-9BB3-94F496491576&p=1

Or maybe that's not what you meant? After re-reading, I think you're talking about something a little different.

since the head is one body part it would also be simple to just make an alternative geometry for it with a single map including just the  face
this way using one dial would give the choice to switch from one map for all  to a detailed head map
Also a texture set could have both options provided for close ups or full body renders. this would be a simple technique with not many for the user to do

Cage: Thanks, I agree for most uses a single map is fine. I found too that even for the high res mapping 4k X 4k devoted totally to the face is a waste and does not even get used unless you are rendering a two or three inch patch of the face. Pores and hair, small details will show up just fine with less texture space. You still need a high res mapp for details like that but a single map devoted entirely to the face is overkill.

bagginsbill:  I think I understand what you mean. I can assign specific values to the UV space with Max or UV mapper and save a print out of the assigned values. Would that work?

Teyon: I have 3DCoat I'm not sure of Andrews use of the tech either. I have two options microvex or per pixel. I have been using the per pixel option for my textures. You can choose a different resolution for each material zone if you like. I dont know of any other options. I'll have to go hang out in their forums and ask questions.

pitklad: I could use that idea with the option of geometry insertion. I think something like that would be good for hands and head. Most renders are likely to be clothed, and the line of the resolution change could be hidden within the clothing.

Edit, I wonder why I couldn't just assign a specific texture space to each material zone? Why not?

Quote - Would that work?

Yes. You don't even have to do that, but if you make them nice round numbers, it makes it easy to type them into the Image_Map node for precise positioning of the map in the UV space.

Quote - Most renders are likely to be clothed, and the line of the resolution change could be hidden within the clothing.

CLOTHED Poser people??! On which planet?!
:b_funny:

Seriously though, it's a good idea. But admittedly if I'm rendering a clothed figure and want to save memory, I make all the hidden body parts invisible anyway... so their texture resolution is a moot point.

Yes, but if the hands are on the same texture map as the arms, hiding the arms doesn't save you texture memory.

I think I am getting this second skin worked out. I dumped the idea of having it all welded and just went with a close tight skin.It covers the entire body if you wish, everything except inner orifices.

Here's a pic with just some quick nodes over just the torso and legs. The green showing through is the underlying skin. It all comes out to 33K polys with the second skin. Not low poly but not overly excessive.

Edit:  You know I didn't even know there were two more replys to this thread, I had not read. Didn't get any bots. Sorry, didn't mean to ignore anyone.

cheers.

Quote - I think I am getting this second skin worked out. I dumped the idea of having it all welded and just went with a close tight skin.It covers the entire body if you wish, everything except inner orifices.

It looks quite good!  :D  I'm wondering how it would have been welded. 

Hi Cage.  :biggrin:

How are you doing? Good I hope. Did you get Posered out? I'm getting there, need to start taking the dog out for a walk more often. Stop sitting behind the comp every spare moment. 

"I'm wondering how it would have been welded.  "

Well, I got the idea into my head that a second layer of identical poly's ocupying the same space and with the points welded like double sided poly's would be a good idea.  I had thought it would keep the two materials from poking through eachother and help with making morphs because the points of the two layers would always move with eachother.  I got it to work in Poser 6, but in P8 and PP 2010 the two layers of materials just became a jumbled mess.  So I decided not to bang my head against thw wall of Poser physics and just scrap that idea. Staale had done a three layered skin by actually using five layers of poly's all wellded and occupying the same space.  He had a layer in between each material layer. I definitely do not want to add that many poly's just to get a second skin.

This method with two separated layers is tried and proven and works well enough for me. It may be a bit harder to make morphs for while keeping the two layers separated, but oh well, cant have it all. I do have the second skin set up with its own distinct groups in the geometry so that you can select it individually apart from the figure with the morph brush or modelling app. It also has its own material zones, but shares the figure bones.

Starting on the JCM's tonight. I hope not to need too many, but I know the fingers and toes will need them especially.

cheers.

Posered-out?  I don't think so.  Hopefully not.  Hmm.  In terms of scripting, I've ended up trying to do things which are only explained in academic papers in the fields of mathematics or computer science.  Which is a bit over my head, so there's a lot of hammering the stuff into my poor noggin and hoping it "clicks" and starts to make sense.  :lol:  Hasn't happened, just yet, so progress has slowed.  I suppose it was bound to happen, sooner or later.

Are you trying to weld separate actors as a new layer, with a new set of vertices for the same geometry assigned to the layer actors?  Or are you using the same vertices and just adding multiple polygon layers to the original actors?  I've done the former, with body handle geometry, and it mainly works, aside from creating some shadowing artifacts.  The latter had never occurred to me before.  Hmm.

Hoping This has not been too OT.  Off-topic is apparently a worse thing than was previously understood.  :lol:

Whats OT? :lol:

Well your muse will come back.  Personally I do get posered out alot more lately.

The second one. Adding a second layer of poly's using the same vertices...... It does work in P6 pretty well. But not in P8. I looked at the example given by Staale, but it was not what I wanted. or rather was what I wanted partially. I could not find a way to get P8 to render one layer always in front of the other.  But no worries Cage, this method I am using now works just fine, it's basically just a body suit without its own bones, it shares the original figures bones.

You know about using subgroups? You can have a piece of geometry included in say hip and controled by hip, but keeps its own group and material identity. That is the way I am doing this second skin thing. (this version)

But won't you have to duplicate all the morphs as well?

You should not need to change your strategy if the only problem is that the order (topmost) of the doubled polys is ambiguous.

First there is the case where the second skin isn't being used. Well in that case, it should be 100% transparent, so who cares which is on top?

Second case is where the second skin is used, but not displaced. In this case there is ambiguity, but in this situation there is no point in having the second skin. Whatever combined materials are desired can be implemented with one polygon layer, using a blended shader. This has been demonstrated already - foam, oil, whatever. Second skin doesn't help with these so don't bother.

The third, and only legitimate, case for the second skin is if it will be displaced in the shader. In that case, the layering will not be ambiguous at all.

bagginsbill: Yes all the morphs would effect double the number of vertices, That was a big reason I wanted to weld it.

What you explain makes perfect sense. I mean why bother putting hair on the figure if it's not displaced? So then I can use the first idea. Thanks for that. This is a reason I really need to better understand  materials and shaders. If I dont understand the way they work I make bad decisions.

Well then this uncomplicates the whole business quite a bit. I was dreading the JCM's because I only gave myself .00002 clearance between layers.

Cheers.

With just a little displacement it pulls the second skin right out. This is the welded skin. Of course you have to use displacement in your render settings as well. But I'm happy with it. It covers the entire body. With the welded skin it actually only has the same number of vertices as without the skin so it will save lots on the morphs. And I'm not sure but maybe on the figure movement in the scene, depends on how Poser does its calculations, if by vertice then it will save alot.

rendered in Poser pro 2010 and no mixed up materials.

Brad is a very exciting new figure.  Please keep him beefy, Mr. Phantom.  Average men usually aren't very slim and we have enough very thin male models floating around.  I just discovered Brad today, keep up the good work and much sucess.  I'm impressed by the way Brad bends and noticed the shoulders look much more natural and bend better than the Mil 4 figures and the G2s.

Thanks Tomsde, I will. 

I booted up DS 3 with the figure setup tools, and found that the parenting in the legs was broken.  :(    Don't know how that happens, must be from saving it back to the Poser library so much. Funny thing is in Poser you dont notice it, so strange. Anyway, I found it in DS and fixed it. Also found some syntax problems with the CR2.

I am now working on the JCM's. These setup tools are a lifesaver for JCM and erc work. :) I will have a new upload soon with many improvements.

Cheers.

Thanks for the Brad Alpha model, I'll definitely check it out.

I just found out about Brad.  He looks amazing!  It must have taken a lot of time and dedication.  I applaud you sir.

Thanks khelben. :)

In case anyone is wondering about no new progress posts in awhile. I finished off setting up the fingers and have since been working on JCM's for the figure. They are slow going, I am having to do them the long way since DS will not weld the bone joints of the figure with the second skin.  So I am making the JCM's on the figure without the second skin and then transferring them by hand to the main figure.

But I should have enough done in a bit for some more show and tell.

Cheers,
Mike.

Hi Mike,

That's good to hear :)

Wondered about prompting  you for updates on progress but decided not to harass you and let you get on with it, or even take a break if needed.  Know that I am - for one amongst many I'm sure -  waiting patiently  but eagerly in the background, quite  certain that Brad will be more than worth the wait.

Just don't get "posered out" on us like you mentioned or I will harass you for sure.

Wow, this thread suddenly got quiet. What's been happening?

Sorry, I just got sick of it all for awhile. You know what I mean? just burned out. So I have been learning Drupal and php. Learning how to put a website together, alot more involved than I thought. I like the phpBB3 forums but getting them completely embedded in Drupal is some work.

I'll get back to Brad here shortly. I'm thinking maybe a new thread, this one is getting too long.

cheers,
Mike.

 okay but email me where the new thread is
esther@pacefiction.com
Love esther

 TOO LONG? :laugh: Have you SEEN the Antonia thread?

 I can understand burn out, I've experienced that myself with various products I've done.

 Wow! Extremely impressive. I'm sorry that it took so long for me to finally stumble upon this thread. I need to do a lot of catching up on Brad's progress.

It would be amazing if you could hook up with Catharina Harders from Mec4D to have her produce a hi-res texture for Brad. Her textures are based on actual photographs and her characters are incredibly realistic ... in my opinion they are the best textures that I've seen so far based on photos.

http://market.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/index.php?ViewProduct=78491

Looking forward to following Brad's progress now that I've finally found out about him.

:-)