To vertically lower the breasts like this, you will need an external app.

Rigging weight maps for clothes in fallout or oblivion takes seconds with weight copy scripts. I would guess they would add a script to do this in poser/DS to make content creation quicker, then adjust as needed. I would love to see weight mapping because then lower poly models could be used. This would open a range of possiblities for the artist that does crowd scenes. It is rare that I go anywhere in the real world and see only 2 people posing with each other. Though I admit I do not visit old temples.

Weight mapping could also allow proper rigging of fantasy armor that does not bend like rubber.

Attached Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGvpdACiCCA

a nice vid about 5th gen figures is on youtube Victoria 5 Requests for Studio 4 5th gen figures, need weight mapping, deformers & good rigging... I like the article, big changes daz need to do! else programs like(daz vs poser) are dead very soon.

This all depends on the end result and how it is done. But if it does not work well or takes more time in the process, I see myself doing the whole model in ZBrush and then just making the textures for it as needed. When in ZB4, I have done very high poly models just because I need close up and great looks. It also depends on what you want to do. I have a VERY high-end main production computer with two additional render nodes for network rendering. Everything is possible, even very high poly models with lots of detail and complex scenes if you have the equipment for it.

Like I said though, will have to wait to see how this will turn out.

Quote - > Quote - Displacement is also limited to deforming a surface along its normals, so the types of baked deformations would be limited.

stewer (Stefan Werner - SM's maintainer of Firefly) told me that Firefly displacement is actually 3-dimensional. It accepts a vector, much like normal maps do. But only a simplified form (equivalent to bump mapping) was exposed in the material room.

I'm not 100 % sure about this, it's been several months since I saw the thread at DAZ...

In DAZ Studio normal maps can be used to control the direction of displacement. I.e. you'd use a regular displacement map and a normal map together. I don't remember exactly how this works; I don't use DS so it was just a curiosity quickly (almost) forgotten.

I don't know for sure, but that doesn't sound plausible. I agree that it is possible to use normal maps while also using displacement maps, in either app. But the normal map only alters normals. It does not influence displacement, at least not in Poser. What I was talking about is the ability to use a vector displacement where a point can be moved anywheere, not just along the line defined by the normal.

Quote - markschum wrote Version 5 figures wont be on my shopping list anyway, I just cant justify the expense. I also cant afford to upgrade from Poser 7 for a hobby.  Daz went away from Poser with its dynamic cloth items , and its subdivision figures. Its been obvious for some time that maintaining compatibility was going to get harder.  V4 was not comparible with Poser 5 , lets see what Daz says about V5.

Weight maps is certainly a way to go, Lightwave uses them as does every other professional modeller application I know of.

Looks like Optitex is now involved in making Poser dynamic items, too...

http://www.daz3d.com/i/3d-models/-/poser-dynamic-jeans?item=11744&_m=d

http://www.daz3d.com/i/3d-models/new-releases/poser-dynamic-qi?item=11738&cat=421&_m=d

There's no feud between DAZ and SmithMicro like there was with the previous Poser owners. Maybe things will change. SmithMicro stuff has been in the DAZ marketplace recently.

Kevin

Just in usability terms, I'm sure you'd have to have a sculpting app that would translate hard geometry into a "map" (obviously it couldn't be a simple grayscale map) in order to get anywhere at all with a feature like that.  I guess when a tool to make that kind of displacement "map" it might be a neat feature.

Quote - Looks like Optitex is now involved in making Poser dynamic items, too...

The only innovative thing Optitex and DAZ did with dynamics was to agree on a proprietary format that excludes everyone but them from producing content.  Hopefully that approach won't rub off on the Poser business model too much.

I wonder if one could access the 3d displacement abilities of firefly thru python?

Quote - > Quote - Displacement is also limited to deforming a surface along its normals, so the types of baked deformations would be limited.

stewer (Stefan Werner - SM's maintainer of Firefly) told me that Firefly displacement is actually 3-dimensional. It accepts a vector, much like normal maps do. But only a simplified form (equivalent to bump mapping) was exposed in the material room.

Dumb question, but why not have poser or DS use a sphere mapping system to give you a begininng weight map?  Auto convert it over.  That would allow you to at least have a starting point.  Maybe include a 3d painting option for your weight map and you're good to go. 

Or you can import a 3d mesh for some boolean weight mapping.

Will we finally see the long antipated final break between poser and d/s? Will DAZ finally break free from Poser?

Will we poser user finally be freed from the depandancy upon DAZ figures and see other figures flourish because of it? Will other figure creators finally get the chance they do deserve, without being overshadowed by DAZ? Will DAZ finally stop dominating the poser market with ever repeating slut items and allow creativity outside of the DAZ universe to come back again? Can this really be true?

"flourish" or be forced to use inferior other figures because daz vickies and michaels won't work anymore?

Quote - I wonder if one could access the 3d displacement abilities of firefly thru python?

Quote - > Quote - Displacement is also limited to deforming a surface along its normals, so the types of baked deformations would be limited.

stewer (Stefan Werner - SM's maintainer of Firefly) told me that Firefly displacement is actually 3-dimensional. It accepts a vector, much like normal maps do. But only a simplified form (equivalent to bump mapping) was exposed in the material room.

Nope.

Quote - Eh I'm not worried about how they handle legacy content, I wouldn't be surprised if they just implement some kind of flag in CR2 or other Poser file format that says "Use Weight Mapping" and if it's not present then default to the old system - just speaking as a clothing content creator, if the base morph is a featureless androgynous thing, and you're expected to morph the conformer to fit whatever target the user picks, that's going to be an immense amount of labor.  Content creators won't be excited to do that, and users won't be excited to pay for it.  Plus the results of that kind of thing cannot ever be made to mix well (even if you can make them look GOOD, which is dubious).

I haven't read the whole thread, but I didn't want to get there and forget to comment about this. I understand the concern on the issue above, but I imagine that even if we end up with one single mesh for any shape, there will be still some "standard", male-female predefined shapes, which would be a starting point for modelers and content creators to start at. Then one could state a piece of clothing is compatible with "Gen5 Female" or "Gen5 Male" only. It doesn't mean every piece of clothing from then on should work with any shape of the figure, just that, hypothetically, it could.

I seriously doubt the Poser cloth room will go proprietary like Optitex.

Weight mapping is over-glorified JCMing.

Weight mapping is nothing like JCMs.  Weight mapping defines the flexablity of the mesh at individual vertices.

"Will we poser user finally be freed from the depandancy upon DAZ figures and see other figures flourish because of it? Will other figure creators finally get the chance they do deserve, without being overshadowed by DAZ? Will DAZ finally stop dominating the poser market with ever repeating slut items and allow creativity outside of the DAZ universe to come back again? Can this really be true?"

LOL, you so funny.   :D

SnowS

Weight mapping is nothing like JCMs.  Weight mapping defines the flexablity of the mesh at individual vertices.

Let me see if i have this correct.  You use weight mapping to control vertices.

JCMs are morphs - which move vertices along a straight line between the base position of the vertex and the morphed position - that are controlled by the value of another parameter, such as a bend. Weight-mapping is an alternative way of deciding how strongly a vertex responds to a bend (or other parameter), like the current falloff angles and spheres (and capsules and extra zones in Poser 8+). They are totally different things. There are two desirable aspects to weight-mapping - first, that it allows any weight to be applied to a vertex rather than being restricted by the falloff shapes which should be a boon with more complex items; and second, as long as it's a single-skin system, that you are no longer restricted by the group boundaries (to choose a common example, it would be possible to have a webbed hand and the finger bends would affect the skin between fingers; the current limits on grouping - mesh may touch only its parent and its children - and deformation - a bone may partially affect only itself and its parent - prevent that.

I was going to write the same, RH, but then while explaining the big difference between linear interpolation of a set of displacements (what a morph does) versus rotation, I suddenly realized something.

It is possible to implement a true rotation using a pair of orthogonal displacement morphs. You simply use a weighted sum of the two morphs based on sin(a) versus cos(a), where "a" is the rotation angle of a joint. One might call it a double-joint controlled morph, or DJCM.

As far as I know, I'm the first person to ever mention such a thing. 

Once I started thinking how that could work, it became clear to me that a DJCM can do things that cannot be done with weight mapping. 

So I decided that if I could think of it, probably somebody else did, and I should not say what weight mapping can do that JCM cannot. Because I'm pretty much convinced that DJCM can do even better than weight mapping.

For example, I think to truly simulate the movement of clavicle, collar bones, scapula, etc. or perhaps the strain of tendons against skin, you would do it best with DJCM, not with weight mapping.

But I'm not a morphing or rigging person - just thinking about these things from first principles.

OK i apologize for my general statement.  Thing is weight maps for joint deformations are still controlled by bone rotations.  Thus given we already have spherical fall off zones,  bulges,  and JCMs,  wouldn't weight mapping be a redundancy?

Perhaps instead of weight mapping maybe it is time to introduce an advanced rig?

Please re-read what Mr. Haseltine wrote, then maybe do some additional research in weight mapping.  Weight mapping is the first step to a better advanced rig.  It is what most of the rest of the CGI world uses.

Well... if we're going to "back the train up" so to speak let's start at the start.  With Poser figures,  are we dealing with euclidean or non-euclidean geometry?

If "back the train up" means we get better tools for rigging, thus figures can bend better and I can rig bodyparts with attached props without hacking the cr2 then I see no problem.

Unless, there are far better alternatives to weight mapping, such as the implementation of what BB proposes. I'm not in the bussiness so I don't know any.

Interesting point on using double-functions, BB. Though the idea of implementing it is bringing on a fit of the vapours.

Man this is one of those days where I'm glad I don't know as much as you guys, since there seems to be a little worry about possible changes that may or may not happen.  I look forward to whatever they decide to do since the purpose of it is to improve things.  I'm also sure that from a business sense that they aren't going to damage their existing revenue base.

Seriously even the DVD industry had fixes that allowed VHS users to use VHS tapes and even to convert them to DVD.  I see this same possibility with Daz and Poser. They won't chop their money tree just for the sake of trying something new. 

If "back the train up" means we get better tools for rigging, thus figures can bend better and I can rig bodyparts with attached props without hacking the cr2 then I see no problem.

Unless, there are far better alternatives to weight mapping, such as the implementation of what BB proposes. I'm not in the bussiness so I don't know any.

The tools are there.  btw do you play pool?

i wouldn't worry about daz.  If they stay fine,  if they leave that's fine as well.

Personally, I wish it was like it use to be in that Poser upgraded Poser Program structure, and DAZ made the models. DAZ Studio 3 is a great Program. But it's like doing Brain surgery with Boxing Gloves on.

They have so many tools, which is great in one since. but it is a nightmare to pull tools onto the screen. The pop into areas without wanting them to go there.  Poser, estecially Poser Pro 2010 I can work with no effort fast, knowing that the tools don't dictate to me, I dictate to the Tools.

And as far as the People that come with Poser. I like the Poser 4 figures better to work with than the figures from Poser 6 on. I can't get their clothes to work correctly on those charactures, where as. DAZ's charactures I have no problem with 85% of all the clothes made by the many talented people I by from.

The best features that DAZ has in there DAZ Studio, is AniMate. but even that has bugs, everything I use in DAZ seams to be more time getting use to animating with Animate and Importing it into Poser so I can clean it up with confidect. There is nothing like making an Animation in Animate, then half way through. the animation disapears, just because you ad another characture an put a characture in the scene.  This doesn't happen every time. but when you spend 20 minutes trying to tweek things. Then lose it is a big waist of time. When there is a mistake, I like it to be mine. That away I can learn what it is and correct it or learn what it takes to correct it.

I know that DAZ and Poser are Taking about trying to keep the charactures to be compatable from a reliable source. But that doen't mean much, if the final results don't end up that way.

Yep, all I want is great animating tools, People an dynamic clothing be faster, and easer to work with. same with the Hair. People with great rigging where arms, and legs bend. the body parts look more natural. Also, like the Caractures shown on the first thread to DAZ on V5. that has the capabilities of those and other charactures shown in their pop up. And of course, For only $500. dollars.  Woops! I must have dosed off while my finger kept typing in my last Paragraph.  Time to go to bed.