We have a storm moved in so I have to turn my laptop comp off.
I disconnect it from the electric to protect it.
Not enough battery power to run it long at a time.

I'll check the site and see what is wrong.

The new feet work fine in P7 at 1 as far as I can tell.

Quote -
It looks like the pose is inserting the new shaping morphs at double intensity, in P8 SR 3.  They look very nice with the new FBM dial set at 0.5, however!  At 1.0... monster toes!  :scared:  :lol:

Oomph! I'm glad I have PP2010 now, so I can just skip P8 SR3.

Quote -
I'm not sure what joint changes I should be testing, if any. 

I didn't include any joint changes in that file, so there's nothing you need to be testing.

I'm actually thinking maybe I should release Antonia 0.9.124 as it is now, after finishing the foot reshaping business (I still need to adjust the toecaps and maybe do a teensy bit of tweaking on the big toe).

I know I meant to have everything from the neck down finalized by 0.9.123 and then delayed that until 0.9.124, but it's been a month since the last release, and lots of little (and some slightly bigger) changes have piled up since then that seem worth sharing (and Roger, not all of them can so easily be distributed via pose files, unfortunately). Unless more little things creep up, that would leave me with just adding JCMs to the toes and neck for version 0.9.125.

Attached Link: Antonia on github

As I said earlier, you don't need to know or use git if you just download from there once in a blue moon. Just follow the link and click on the button saying 'Download Source' near the upper right corner. You can then choose between a ZIP and a compressed TAR file.

Your download will come with a long wacky name including a number. When you unpack the ZIP (or TAR), you'll get a folder with a similar name, also including the same number. That number is the so-called commit number. If you encounter a problem, that number will tell me exactly which version you were using, so it will be easier for me to figure out what's going on. Long story short: don't rename that folder, or at least copy its original name to a safe place.

If you find yourself perusing github frequently, you should probably acquaint yourself with git. If nothing else, it's a courtesy to the github people who host this stuff for free and whose bandwidth would get unnecessarily strained if people did full downloads all the time.

Hmm, might check that out sometime.

Just one thing, don't you mean RAR file!?

Quote - Hmm, might check that out sometime.

Just one thing, don't you mean RAR file!?

No, mean TAR file. It's a Unix thing.

Oh, ok, not come across that before.

CHEERS!

Quote - I'm actually thinking maybe I should release Antonia 0.9.124 as it is now, after finishing the foot reshaping business (I still need to adjust the toecaps and maybe do a teensy bit of tweaking on the big toe).

Sounds good, and the list of updated features is excellent.  :thumbupboth:

With the foot reshaping, I assume a new base .obj will be involved.  Will this have a new name, for the version, or just overwrite the 123 .obj?  If the geometry file will be changing, it's a reason for me to hold off a bit on releasing a character, so I can update to the new version.

How often will you be updating the files at github?

Quote -
Sounds good, and the list of updated features is excellent.  :thumbupboth:

Thanks!

Quote -
With the foot reshaping, I assume a new base .obj will be involved.  Will this have a new name, for the version, or just overwrite the 123 .obj?  If the geometry file will be changing, it's a reason for me to hold off a bit on releasing a character, so I can update to the new version.

Yes, the new .obj file will have the number 124. I'll keep numbers on the .obj and .cr2 files until I get to version 1.0, then I'll drop them and just call the files Antonia.obj, Antoinia.cr2 and so on.

Quote -
How often will you be updating the files at github?

I have a master Runtime folder for Antonia on my computer, which I update whenever I'm satisfied with a change I've been working on. In turn, each time I make a change to that folder, I 'push' it to its 'origin' repository (git jargon). Previously, that was just a backup folder on the same computer, but as of now, the origin is on github, and you'll see the changes as soon as I push them.

In other words, you won't be able to spy on me much while mucking around with things, because I usually do that in a separate Runtime. But you'll be able to see all the good stuff right away.

For people who use Google Reader or similar programs: it is also possible to get notifications from github via an RSS feed. But as far as I can see, you'd have to have a (free) account for that.
When I make interesting changes, I'll probably brag about them in here, anyway, so you should normally notice soon enough.

I have a question: I know we've discussed the rigging of the toes earlier, but now that I'm actually getting to it, maybe it's time to reconsider the options. There are basically two ways to proceed:

1) Group several toes into one actor and pose them all as one. That's how the current rigging works, with the actor hierarchy Instep -> Toe -> BigToe1 -> BigToe2. The main advantage of that hierarchy is that no actor has more than one child, which makes it easy to keep the toecap from slipping into the flesh (ouch!). A big disadvantage is that curling or spreading the toes requires heavy JCM action. It would be possibly to have a second 'collective' toe actor, which would change the hierarchy into something like this:

Instep
Toe1
    Toe2
    BigToe1
        BigToe2

That would make curling the toes easier while still leaving the total number of actors relatively low. Dealing with the toecap would be a bit trickier, but still manageable. Small adjustment in the relative positions of the four grouped toes could be implemented as morphs.

1. Create two actors for every toe, similarly to the way the hand is rigged. The hierarchy would look like this:

Instep
    BigToe1
        BigToe2
    IndexToe1
        IndexToe2
    MidToe1
        MidToe2
    RingToe1
        RingToe2
    PinkyToe1
        PinkyToe2

This would making spreading and curling much easier, and give a lot of flexibility for other poses. On the other hand it seems a bit like overkill, since the individual toes can hardly move that independently. But as with the hands, one could introduce dials for common poses like curl, spread, bend up etc, and as long as there are no single toes sticking out, it should still be possible to avoid excessive toecap poke-through.

So, what do people think is the preferable configuration? What are your experiences with existing figures that use the individual toe rigging? Is it worth trying? I'll probably experiment a bit with both options, but some opinions are always good.

I prefer the last option. It does add extra actors which if you had to pose each individually would get tiresome. But with some simple erc it is made much easier and you still have the option of fine tuning the toe pose. Also one added benefit is possible compatibility with other Poser figures.

Quote - So, what do people think is the preferable configuration? What are your experiences with existing figures that use the individual toe rigging? Is it worth trying? I'll probably experiment a bit with both options, but some opinions are always good.

My initial reaction, without having given it much thought, is leave the toe hierarchy as is, or at most add a Toe2 actor. Most of the time, all the added functionality of extra toe actors would probably be wasted on all but a few dedicated foot fetishists, who will undoubtedly enjoy spending countless hours making foot morphs (no offence meant). One thought tough, what if you leave Toe as one actor, but divide it into separate groups. That would make it easy to make morphs for individual toes in Poser, should anyone ever desire to do so. On the other hand, adding extra individual actors for each toe joint would mean making morphs would become excruciatingly tedious in Poser.

Thanks to both of you! That helped me remember some of the pros and cons from the earlier discussion. I have one smaller counterpoint (or counter-question, if you will) for each...

@phantom3D: How much would compatibility with other figures really be worth, though? The DAZ figures seem to be the most popular of the lot, and they don't have individual toe actors. The original Poser figures from Poser 6 on do, but how many toe poses are there for those? Also, most of those also seem to have buttock groups, which would limit the compatibility again.

@lesbentley: It seems to me that with the move toward better support for full body morphs and ERC in general in recent Poser versions, the morph making argument is becoming less important. Since this still appears to be the most serious objection one could have from a user's perspective, I'd like to ask you what kind of workflow you had in mind. I do pretty much everything in Wings these days, and have for a long time, so I wouldn't know.

Compatibility with other Poser figures really is never going to be very close, and so not worth much. Mainly because even if they have the same body parts the JP's are going to be different and likely work differently. But the Poser people can write the conversion files for anime studio and universal pose. Similar body parts may make that easier. I like the idea of individual parts because of the complexity i guess. Considering the toe cap though it may be a nightmare to set up.

Hmm, since individual toe actors seem less useful for end-users than for myself as the developer, maybe I could create the alternative rigging and simply use it as a tool for making toe morphs, but leave the rigging as is for the public version.

I like individually rigged toes.
Myself, I can take a handkerchief from the floor with my toes.
When walking barefooted my toes are spreading apart when the toepart of the foot is the only thing touching the ground.
In short: toes are moving individually.
(Sorry for my bad english)

Quote - I like individually rigged toes.
Myself, I can take a handkerchief from the floor with my toes.
When walking barefooted my toes are spreading apart when the toepart of the foot is the only thing touching the ground.
In short: toes are moving individually.
(Sorry for my bad english)

Yeah, I've seen that argument, but how many would actually use individually rigged toes? I don't mean to be contrary. I'm just trying to figure out whether the extra flexibility would outweigh the morphing problems that Les mentioned.

Quote - Hmm, since individual toe actors seem less useful for end-users than for myself as the developer, maybe I could create the alternative rigging and simply use it as a tool for making toe morphs, but leave the rigging as is for the public version.

That works well too. I like to make the end bone on each part a body handle because then I dont have to deal with the extra group, use the body handle for making the morphs, and just delete when I'm done.

Quote - > Quote - Hmm, since individual toe actors seem less useful for end-users than for myself as the developer, maybe I could create the alternative rigging and simply use it as a tool for making toe morphs, but leave the rigging as is for the public version.

That works well too. I like to make the end bone on each part a body handle because then I dont have to deal with the extra group, use the body handle for making the morphs, and just delete when I'm done.

...or work on a copy of the CR2, of course.

Hey, I have to keep that idea in mind. Not that useful for the toes, since I would need to add more than just end bones, but for other morphs that method should be very useful.

Now, does anyone happen to know how to add bones in the D*Z Figure Setup Tools?

Quote -
Yeah, I've seen that argument, but how many would actually use individually rigged toes? I don't mean to be contrary. I'm just trying to figure out whether the extra flexibility would outweigh the morphing problems that Les mentioned.

I did:
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1761277&user_id=422036&np&np
You can see I spread the toes of his left foot - because that would be what toes are doing.

If it's just a bit of spreading, though, that could easily be accomplished with a morph. I wouldn't dare offer a figure whose toes couldn't at least spread, curl and bend upward.

Edit: Wee, Page 250!!! :woot:

To tell the truth: if the toes can spread, curl and bend upward, it doesn't matter to me how it was achieved. ;)

Quote - @lesbentley: It seems to me that with the move toward better support for full body morphs and ERC in general in recent Poser versions, the morph making argument is becoming less important. Since this still appears to be the most serious objection one could have from a user's perspective, I'd like to ask you what kind of workflow you had in mind. I do pretty much everything in Wings these days, and have for a long time, so I wouldn't know.

What kind of work flow do I have in mind? Say I want to make a morph to curl the toes (excluding the big toe). At the moment I could take a magnet, attach it to the one toe actor, position the zone and base, and make the morph. Then spawn or export it. If one Toe actor became  four toes with 3 joints each, I would need to spawn or export 12 times, not just once, to save the same shape. Then to apply the shape it would not be sufficient to import one obj file, I would need a delta injection with ERC so the morph could be applied to all 12 actors equally at the same time. No! Separate toes would defiantly be a hassle as far as morphing in Poser is concerned.

So from the above, you might think I am strongly against separate toe actors. I'm not! Not strongly. With individual toe joints, rigged well, with due care and attention paid to the joint parameters, there is no need for toe bending morphs. The only reason you would then morph the toes is for overall shape.

My suggestion that you leave the hierarchy as is, had a bigger element of "Why go the all the trouble of rigging 12 extra actors?"  behind it, rather than the thought "Extra toe joints are bad.".

I can see merit in extra joints, as well as problems, but leave you with this thought. The twist of the current one Toe actor is essentially broken, although it has been a known issue for quit a while now, there is no mention of fixing it in the next release, even though it affects the everyday use of Antonia, now that the tongue is fixed, the toe twist is the one major outstanding problem that I am aware of. Would it perhaps be a better use of time and resources to fix the existing toe twist, then move on to something else like face morphs, rather than creating 12 new potential problems? Perhaps it is now time to start consolidating what you already have, towards a final release, rather than branching out in new directions.

Quote - Perhaps it is now time to start consolidating what you already have, towards a final release, rather than branching out in new directions.

Fair enough! As you may have noticed, I've been in consolidating mode for quite some time now. I just don't work very fast.

Question like this help me understand things better: user preferences, my own decisions from way back... Sometimes they provide insights into the inner workings of Poser that I did not have before, because, let's face it, I'm just an amateur in this and some of you guys know way more than me. I thought before I finalized this rigging, I should at least ask and see if there were any strong arguments for separate toe actors. I didn't hear any, so obviously I will not change the rigging at this point.

Anyway, this has also helped me figure out how to actually go about making the toe morphs and JCMs. The idea of making a provisional rig as a crutch sounds pretty good, but in practice it's way too much work to sort out all those new groups and set up joint parameters. But I can simulate the process in Wings by just selecting the proper polygons and shifting and rotating them around. This probably sounds completely obvious, but I was a bit blinded by workflow for other JCMs and thought I'd have to use the bent, unmorphed toes as my starting points.

Oh, and sorry about that toe twist. I wasn't aware that you actually needed that for your poses. What do you use it for, I wonder?

PS: You should also take into consideration that I have a cold and possibly a fever, and might not be thinking too straight right now. :laugh:

I'm not sure how often I would use separate toe morphs.
It would depend on what kind of pose I put her in.

I can tell you that I notice when I walk barefoot or see my grandchildren walk barefoot, their toes spread apart.
Edited to say: that is when most of the weight is on the ball of the feet.

My younger sister can use her toes almost like fingers, and my son did when he was a babe...lol.

A little bit of toe twist can be handy when the figure is standing on the balls of her feet, with the heel off the floor (1 above). In those situations, a lot of twist may be needed in the foot to place the toes on the floor (2 above). Shifting a some of the twist from the foot to the toe can make a better looking pose, with less twist needed in the foot, though the result is not anatomically correct, it will look passable when the feet are not a major focus of attention (3 above).

Another reason to fix the twist is that I think many people will use stock poses from other figures as a starting point for some of their poses for Antonia. As many stock poses for other figures do contain a bit of toe twist, it obviously helps if Antonia can tolerate a bit of toe twist. Another option would be to force limits to zero on the twist, and use morphs to twist the toes (bottom image), this can look more realistic, and be more anatomically correct, but also has its drawbacks. One drawback is that a morph channel will not normally be included in a pz2, so that means editing it in by hand. Another problem is that morphs are not good at implementing rotations, as the vertices only move in straight lines, I think I just about get away with it in the example above, because the simulated rotation is fairly small, but a 90° toe curl or bend would almost certainly require at least two morphs each, and some ERC, before you got something that looked OK at both 45° and 90°. Hell, perhaps you should add a Toe2 actor!

Hello again, I just wanted to let you know that I am still alive, I just had to spend some time in the hospital and away from the computer: In other words - most accidents happen in the own household. But don't worry, I am in a whole and will be fit again in a short while. I will try my best to catch up with what happened during the last two weeks.

SF, been wondering what happened to you.
Glad you're back.

I've been playing with BB's soft Studio Lights in P7 (it's made for Ver. 8) and I love the results it gives me on Antonia's skin.
I'll try to post an image using them soon to my gallery. :)

I've finished the texturing and shaping of my character.  I just need to add some ERC to the belt, so it poses properly with the thighs, then re-write the Python script for the two-sided cape cloth.  Then I'll be ready to start packing it up for distribution, once Antonia 124 is out and I can plug in the new .obj references.

Erm.  I hate to keep harping on about it....    I don't see the eyebrow transparencies up at the Free Site.  Will these be available, so I can point people to the download link for the textures they'll need for the character?  Or should I try to use another texture?

Cage, here is the link to the directory where I uploaded the eyebrow trans maps...
http://www.bluecho4u3d.com/Antonia/database/sites/resources.htm

Here is the exact link...
http://www.bluecho4u3d.com/Antonia/file_upload/Resources/BE4AntoniaBrowTrans/BE4AntoniaBrowTrans_File_1.zip

But remember they have to log-in to download.

This is the one I edited to include the same set to work on the latest version as well as  118 version.

I'm only getting one file in the linked zip.  It's a brow transparency for the newer mapping, not the 118 (now the "A") version, and it looks like the thumbnail at the Free Site link.    The file at the Free Site link is the same transparency, but it's a .jpg with a .zip extension.

The transparency I'm looking for has the brow shape like the one on the bottom, in the attached image.  The file which is uploaded is on the top, in the image.  The lower brow has a specific shape to it which I used as a point of reference when morphing the face of the character.  The upper version is a great transparency, but the wrong shape, now that the lower version is sort of "baked" into the character morph, as it were.

I feel like I'm being a bit of a PITA about all of this.  Sorry.  :sad:  :blushing:

Ummm, something went wrong when I zipped the file  then.
I'll correct and re-upload in a bit.

No, you're not a PITA about it.
I'm just glad you found the error. :)

I just heard back from 3d.sk on their license agreement for use of content.

Commercial or hobby use is permitted as long as the original material is altered enough to keep it from being extracted.

Here are links to both licenses in case you need them...
http://www.3d.sk/hobby-terms

and 
http://www.3d.sk/commercial-terms

I hope this helps clarify the question of may we or may we not use them for Antonia free items. :)

Cage, will you please download again and see if it is right?

I'm having problems editing the file on site and want to see if i did it this time.
PM me here so we don't use up this thread on it...lol.

I had to clarify the differences between 3d.sk hobby and commercial licenses ~2 years ago.

hobby license should be called individual license while commercial one is business. You (a person) can create free or commercial products with so called "hobby" license.

I'm still not clear as whether their license would allow me to distribute a texture made with their content under a CC license. But this is not relevant for me anymore, as I am no longer distributing any textures with the Antonia base package.

I see that BluEcho has already started a thread about this in the copyright laws and ethical standards forum (right at the bottom of the forums list, for those who've never seen it). I strongly suggest that anyone interested in further copyright and licensing discussions goes there.

Yes, I did start a thread there for any who are interested so we can keep more on track here...lol.

odf, you said you are going to be ready to release the next version.
Will it be an official release or another for us to check out?

The UV's will remain the same, won't they?

I'm still working on my promos so I'm not in a big hurry yet. :biggrin:

I'm not quite sure how to answer your question, BluEcho. All releases are in a sense official. I think the more important distinction is between stable - or finished - and unstable. That's why I wrote this bit in the Wiki which says which parts of Antonia are considered finished at this point and won't change anymore.

I was planning to have both the hands and feet finished by the next release, which will have the version number 0.9.124, but as it looks now, it will just be the hands. By 0.9.125, I should have everything but the head finished.

There will be no changes in the UVs that you need to worry about. When I reshaped the feet, I decided to make some changes to the toecaps that might introduce some stretch. I will try to adjust the UVs for the toecaps - and just the toecaps - appropriately so that the stretch disappears. As far as I know, there are no texture maps for the toecaps yet, so that shouldn't concern anyone. Even if there were, I'd try to do it in a way that wouldn't break existing textures.

That's generally true: if I were to do any further changes on the UVs at this point - and I am not really planning to do that anyway - it would just be small adjustments after reshaping things so that existing textures will still work the way they were supposed to.

Great.
I could adjust if needed but I'd rather not so this is good news.

I haven't had any problems with the new feet so far, they look fine.

What would it take to be able to use poser's face room with Antonia?

Quote - What would it take to be able to use poser's face room with Antonia?

What a great idea ! ....
They were able to do it with Apollo, so why not ?

Attached Link: Antonia-0.9.124.zip

As usual, I will wait a few days before linking it on Antonia's site, updating the wiki etc., just in case I made any huge mess when packaging the files.

Thanks ODF,

Crumbs, I've been too busy to render the last version! I'll get onto that, promise!

CHEERS!

I just tried v0.9.124, she works great in Poser and Daz Studio. And thank you amy for the fixed volleyball outfiit.

Amy, I notice that in the updated version, the collars of the beach volleyball top won't morph using Daz Studio morph follower, while in the older versions they did. This renders any brest or body morphs useless (at least for me!) I noticed this using the Age 19 PMDs.
Thought I'd point this out, though I don't know why it would occur- maybe there needs to be some blank channels for those body parts?

Quote - I tried to fix the problem as described by lesbentley. I edited the .cr2 and set the initValue to 0 for all rotations.  I tested it with DAZ Studio, it acts the same as before, i.e., it works in DAZ Studio.  

Haruchai, could you try it in Poser?

odf, you are right! I'm using 122's cr2 as the base because it is the one that is available at the time I started.
 
Updated version can be downloaded from 
http://sites.google.com/site/amyaimei/antonia/AmyAimei_Antonia_BeachVolleyballSet.zip?attredirects=0&d=1

Quote - And... release 0.9.124 is ready. Get it while it's fresh.

Woo hoo!  :woot:  Thank you, odf!  :laugh:

I've just uploaded the Victoria 3 morphs for Antonia to the Free Site.  These are only the morphs available on the free V3 base.  RTEncoder is needed to decode the .pmd file, and the V3 base .obj file is needed as the key file for the decoding process.

Cage,

Thanks ! ..... I'm sure I've missed something already mentioned in this thread, but how are you able to do this ? ..... in other words, to what extent is Antonia compatible with V3 ? 

regards,
Andrew

Quote - Cage,

Thanks ! ..... I'm sure I've missed something already mentioned in this thread, but how are you able to do this ? ..... in other words, to what extent is Antonia compatible with V3 ? 

regards,
Andrew

TDMT Morph Transfer Python script

I used a Python script for Poser.  See the above link.

Antonia and Victoria 3 aren't compatible at all, in terms of vertex structure.  The script maps the vertices of one geometry to those of another, allowing transfer of the morphs.

(I don't want to take over the Antonia thread with the subject, however.  Apologies to odf.  )

Wow. amazing. Thanks !

I finished all my promo shots for the first retail set for Antonia when the stable version is released.

Added another image of her to my gallery today and now to work on her other textures.

I'd like to a custom face morph in Blender but have a hard time importing obj files to it.
If I figure that out I'll play with that idea and see what I can do.
Antonia is just so easy to work with. :)

Quote - > Quote - What would it take to be able to use poser's face room with Antonia?

What a great idea ! ....
They were able to do it with Apollo, so why not ?

You have to buy a license from SM, and they need to encode it.

They did the Apollo one when he was for sale at thier site. Anton had his usual falling out with them, and they held back on releasing it as a result. almost a year later, once Apollo became a freebie, I was talking with one of the SM developers, and it came up. He asked what O thought, and I told them that since Anton was pretty much gone again, and Apollo was a freebie, it wouldn't hurt SM at all to release it, but they would look like heroes supporting a free character like that.

They discussed it internally, and a month later, they released it.

I have no idea if my input helped it, or if it just bubbled it up enough for them to finally move on lot, but evidently there are a lot of required man hours for faceroom support, which is why it costs a LOT to have done.

I don't think you'll see it for any other free character at all, unless its a buyout from SM, and released by them as a promo thing.