@lesbentley: Convincing images! I think I might use your JPs, after all.

@odf,

Eyelid syncing is a go, up on github now. I think the UprLidUp morphs need a little fixing, but the rig looks solid. It should be fairly similar to the one lesbentley proposed, even though I was too lazy to look into his files and check the details.

I've had an idea on how to deal with the asymmetric versions of expression morphs. What if I had, say, two controls for the smile, one called 'Smile' and one 'SmileBalance'. The former would work exactly like now, but the latter would add to SmileLeft and subtract from SmileRight. So positive values would result in a left-dominated smile and negative values in a right-dominated one. Unless one side hits the hard limits for these morphs, the average of left and right will be what the 'Smile' dial says (*). That seems more intuitive to me than three separate controls for Smile, SmileLeft and SmileRight. Watcha think?

(*) With a more complex rig, it should be possible to ensure that the average is always equal to the value of Smile. But I'm not sure it's worth the effort. Maybe I'll try out the basic version and if it looks too funky, I'll give the more nifty one a go.

The diaper, though cool, doesn't have to necessarily be a requirement for a baby or childish Antonia (though an Antonia morph and tex set for a baby Antonia would also be cool).

It could also be something for "Senior Citizen Antonia" which I think should be something that should be looked into, namely Senior Morphs and tex for an "Old Woman Antonia"....which would also be....well....priceless.....because even "priceless" babes get old and might have need some cruel day of extra absorbtion!  Sorry...again, couldn't resist.

Quote - I've had an idea on how to deal with the asymmetric versions of expression morphs. What if I had, say, two controls for the smile, one called 'Smile' and one 'SmileBalance'. The former would work exactly like now, but the latter would add to SmileLeft and subtract from SmileRight.

Interesting idea. If I dial in a smile, I might want one side to be weaker, but I'm not sure I would want the other side to become stronger. How about a dial that attenuates the morph on one side, depending on which way the dial is spun?

You don't want the parameters palette to become junked up with too many dials, so if you did the above, you could actually save space. For example, instead of having three visible dials:

EyeClose
EyeClose_L
EyeClose_R

You could have only two dials:

EyeClose
EyeClose_LR

In this set up, if you wanted only one eye closed closed, you would dial in EyeClose at a value of one, then dial in EyeClose_LR at either one, or minus one. An EyeClose_LR value of less than one would leave one eye fully closed whilst the other would be partially closed.

On second thought, I think it is probably best to leave as is.

EyeClose
EyeClose_L
EyeClose_R

@lesbentley: I wouldn't mess with the EyeClose. I think it makes a lot of sense to keep separate dials for each eye as for as the lid positions are concerned, since they can act pretty much independently. The left-right movement is  a different matter. In fact, I was thinking about adding a "cross-eyed" dial.

But I'd very much like to have only two sliders for things like Smile, Frown etc. Your proposed setup also makes sense to me and would have the advantage that in order to achieve a strictly one-sided smile, one would have to move only one dial instead of two.

Anyway, I'll try out both versions and see which one seems more natural.

Above are settings that seem to work well for the jointY of tongue2. Note that Apply Bulges is used.

A "cross-eyed" dial sounds like a good idea to me.

odf,

Whilst you are involved in doing ERC things, here is s sugestion for a possible feature. How about putting a valueParm FootBend in the BODY. High heel shoes are often a problem, it makes a lot of sense to me to be able to adjust the foot xrot to suit high heels in a way that won't be cancelled out if you apply a different pose. This is particularly true of animated walk poses, and when using a figure in the Poser Walk Designer. In the case of the Walk Designer, it is usually best to apply the walk to a flat footed figure, and only apply the FootBend correction after the Walk Cycle has been applied.

I think the idea with the balanced smile is at least interesting and another innovation. For those who prefer a dial for each side of the mouth there's always the split option Poser offers.

And about priceless: IMHO the perfect idea!! And I like those diapers! No let's see how long we'll have to wait until someone creates a nice polka-dot or laced texture for them LOL

Ahem... and would someone please point me to the right location at github for getting the latest update?

@SaintFox: The split option? Do you mean that feature that splits morphs? I don't think that's any good in this situation. In fact, I will remove the symmetric version of the morph, and there will only be a left and right version which, added up, result in the symmetric one.

But it should be easy to write a pose file that makes the left and right dials visible and hides the "_LR" or "_balance" dial.

@lesbentley: That "bend foot" dial sounds reasonable, but I'm afraid that if I start along that path, I'll never get a version 1.0 release out. I'd rather wait and see what extensions and little tricks people come up with to improve Antonia, and incorporate the most popular and useful ones into version 1.2.

Hmm, maybe that's actually an argument for leaving the 'left' and 'right' dials for expressions as they are right now.

@SaintFox, The dials would still be there, only hidden.  You could just apply a simple pose, eg:

{

version
        {
        number 4.01
        }
actor head
        {
        channels
                {
                targetGeom SmileLeft
                        {
                        hidden 0
                        }
                targetGeom SmileRight
                        {
                        hidden 0
                        }
                }
        }
}

Quote - @lesbentley: That "bend foot" dial sounds reasonable, but I'm afraid that if I start along that path, I'll never get a version 1.0 release out. I'd rather wait and see what extensions and little tricks people come up with to improve Antonia, and incorporate the most popular and useful ones into version 1.2.

Hmm, maybe that's actually an argument for leaving the 'left' and 'right' dials for expressions as they are right now.

That's a good point!

[Damn this new reply box! It puts double line spacing in all my code.]  :cursing:

I'm wondering whether in addition to the existing empty morph channels I should also add a certain number of unused 'valueParm' channels in each actor (or maybe just a somewhat larger number of then in the body) that could be used to hold intermediary values for advanced ERC stuff.

@I know, Les - I just meant that this is a workaround if a figure only offer symetric morphs. Miki 3 has some expression morphs I always split when using them to have a more lifelike look. I just saw that odf wants to add as few dials as possible and so I thought that this may be a solution if people want to have some asymetric options.

But if this is not the problem here I vote for the left and right version as it gives the better results, more realistic and looking far nicer than the symetric "toothpast smile".

@odf,

Quote - I'm wondering whether in addition to the existing empty morph channels I should also add a certain number of unused 'valueParm' channels in each actor (or maybe just a somewhat larger number of then in the body) that could be used to hold intermediary values for advanced ERC stuff.

I thought of suggesting that myself, many months ago, but was afraid you would phone the men in white cotes and have them take me away!  :scared:

I don't feel there is much point in putting extra valueParm channels in the BODY. Anything that used a valueParm would be injected via a pz2, and in P6+ a pose has the ability to add valueParm channels to the BODY (only). However P4 and P5 would be left out of the party. There is more point in adding valueParm channels to other actors, where a pz2 can't place them. However I think that adding them to every actor might be overkill.

It's hard to predict in advance where they may be needed, but as a rule of thumb it is those actors where you are likely to spend a lot of time tweaking the actor or its children, places that can serve as a hub of activity, and where you don't want to be constantly changing back and forwards from that actor to another. The head is a prime candidate, as are the hands. Other candidates in diminishing priority might be the hip, feet, and chest.

If it were me, I would only add them to those actors mentioned above.

Some final points. Anything can be controlled from the BODY, so the main reason for having a valueParm in some other actor is to avoid the need for switching the selected actor. Also this can prevent the BODY becoming over crowded with dials. Often some of the targetGeom PBMCC channels could be used as control channels. The main reasons against that are the potential for conflicts with other injections wanting to use the same channel, the fact that the channels value may be recorded in a pose, which is not always desirable, and the fact that the channel can only use a trackingScale of 0.02.

It's a reasonable idea, but as you said yourself in another context "sounds reasonable, but I'm afraid that if I start along that path, I'll never get a version 1.0 release out.".

I think getting the morphs and associated ERC working well should be a high priority, as should getting the tongue bending well. Extra valueParm channels may be a good idea, but are not a high priority.

@lesbentley: Thanks, that made a lot of sense. I keep forgetting all the little details of what can be done where with pose files. I'll leave the extra channels out for now.

The "desymmetrizing" of the expression morphs is done, i.e., the symmetric versions have lost there deltas and now simply drive the left and right versions. Have pushed that version to github. I'll get to updating the JPs for tongue2 and then prepare the files for Antonia 1.0beta1.

BTW: Calling dibs on the product name "The NAIATWAS Megapack". :lol:

Quote - Calling dibs on the product name "The NAIATWAS Megapack".

Just when I was about to suggest the catch phraise "Not your average Worrior Princess".

Quote - The new tongue JPs are in. I've extended the range for the z rotation a bit while I was at it.

That looks really good.

I have decided to run an "Identify the Mystery Polygon!" competition.

Above is part of a UV map produced in UV Mapper. It consists of the materials 'mouthInner' (blue) and 'tongue' (green). This is the MJ mapping (not the 'A' mapping).

The mystery polygon is circled in red. It belongs to the material 'tongue', but which geometry group does it belong to? The prize for the first correct answer is a cookie, good luck everyone!

[Clue, it does not belong to tongue1, tongue2, jawLower, jawUpper, or head.]

We have a winner for the "Identify the Mystery Polygon!" competition, Mr Les Bentley! Mr Bentley submitted the first correct answer, and has been sent the cookie plus a free bonus virus by email. The correct answer was "abdomen"! Yes it was a trick question, although the Mystery Polygon is assigned to the material "tongue" it really belongs to the geometry group "abdomen"!

Rip Off Merchandising would like to thank everyone who participated in the competition, and remember, If it's not a Rip Off, it's not from us!

Les, you should ask for a refund on your copy of UVMapper. First of all, it splits UV islands along material boundaries, which I think it shouldn't (unless that's an option you've switched on on purpose). Second of all, that extra polygon does not show up as belonging to the tongue material in Wings. I tend to trust Wings in these matters, but if you insist, I can run an independent script on the obj file that splits it into separate files, one for each material.

Just to be certain, I did a little experiment in Poser: I turned both the tongue and the mouthInner material pitch black and looked into Antonia's mouth to ensure they really looked black. Then I inspected the abdomen closely. No black spots, not even deep within the navel.

Still, if someone figures out what caused this glitch, and if it can be traced to some peculiarity in the .obj file (the order of group and material commands or whatever), I'll be happy to try and reformat the file so that UVMapper is happy.

So long as it's not causing a problem, then I guess there is no problem. It just seemed very strange to have this show up as assigned to the tongue material, and I thought I should let you know about it. I'm now suspecting that this is a bug in UV Mapper.

Quote - So long as it's not causing a problem, then I guess there is no problem. It just seemed very strange to have this show up as assigned to the tongue material, and I thought I should let you know about it. I'm now suspecting that this is a bug in UV Mapper.

Since quite a few people use UVMapper, I imagine it could turn into a problem at some point. But I don't have the time to debug every application that reads OBJ files, so for now I'll just have to be content with the knowledge that this problem does not seem to occur in Wings3D and Poser.

Okay folks, it's beta time for the 1.0.0 release. That means no additional features anymore, just bug fixes and cleanups.

I won't get my new ADSL connection until Friday, so for now I'm putting this up only on github. Download here: http://github.com/odf/Antonia.Polygon/zipball/v1.0.0-beta1.

So does this mean we can now upload our retail items?

For me that would be in a day or two if it's time cause I hurt tonight...sigh.

So can we wish Happy First Birthday now?

Quote - So does this mean we can now upload our retail items?

For me that would be in a day or two if it's time cause I hurt tonight...sigh.

I'd wait until the 'beta' part of the version name disappears. The same holds for birthday wishes.

As I said earlier, I'm aiming for February 11 as the official release date.

I installed the v0.9.126-21-gdec94b4.zip, but the joint spheres (sphereMatsRaw) are missing and disabled for jointX. The joint spheres are an integral part of the way I set up that joint, and I don't think it works well without them. I have moved on a bit since I first posted the joints. I have changed the X orientation of tongue2 to 10.0, and modified the outer joint sphere for jointX. This seems to give a better thickness to the tongue tip, which was too thick when bent up, and too thin when bent down, and also gives a better shape under the tongue. I have also added a little bit of 'bulge' to jointX.

I will attach my latest settings for tongue2 in my next post

Find my latest settings for tongue2 in the attached file. It does not include any data for jointZ, which I have not touched.

I have not had time to check the 1.0.0 beta release yet, but assume the tongue joints have not changed since v0.9.126-21.

The 11th sounds fine, gives me a little time to stop huryng...hopfully.

Good point, Les! I couldn't quite see what those sphere's were doing, so I left them out to keeps things simple. I'll check out your new settings.

ETA: I just remembered that adding the sphere settings to the cr2 didn't work, for some reason, which is why I left them out. I'll try again, but if it still doesn't work, you may have to post a screen shot.

Yep, got it working. That looks much nicer, I have to agree.

I'm quite excited about Antonia 1.0!  :woot:  :woot:

@Cage: Mmh, I like her. :woot:

I remember someone made an "Antonio" morph once. It wasn't perfect, but not a bad start. Can't remember who it was, though. I'd like to try my hand at a male morph at some point, if only to understand what would need to be changed in the mesh topology and rig to make that really work. Scaling can help with the overall proportions, but then scaling individual body parts in Poser isn't without its drawbacks.

But yeah, I'm (im-)patiently waiting for Brad, as well.

Quote - How about putting a valueParm FootBend in the BODY.

A very sensible thing to put on the wish list.

Quote - @Cage: Mmh, I like her. :woot:

I remember someone made an "Antonio" morph once. It wasn't perfect, but not a bad start. Can't remember who it was, though. I'd like to try my hand at a male morph at some point, if only to understand what would need to be changed in the mesh topology and rig to make that really work. Scaling can help with the overall proportions, but then scaling individual body parts in Poser isn't without its drawbacks.

But yeah, I'm (im-)patiently waiting for Brad, as well.

I am not a modeler but it seems it would be a real chore converting a charater from a female mesh to a male mesh. Wouldn't it be easier the other way around?

I rmember an "Antonio" too but not who made it...sigh.

Was it posted on the free site at some point?

@Cage: the looks great!

I think it was Believable3D who did the Antonio thing. It may have been posted to the Antonia Developers site, but I'm not sure.

Yes, it's on the Antonia Developers site, not sure if you need a password to access the site.

"B3D-Antonio-injection.zip"

In the "Character Sets" section. Don't expect too much. As I remember, it was still a work in progress.

I think I'll wait until after 2/11 to release the character, so I can update for use with Antonia 1.0.

Quote - Something else I'm finishing up.  I'm sad that there's no male Antonia.  :sad:  I have a backlog of male characters I'd like to make, starting with Mister J.  Paging the poster formerly known as Phantom3d!  We badly need a Brad.  :crying:

I'm quite excited about Antonia 1.0!  :woot:  :woot:

Quote - @Cage: Mmh, I like her. :woot:

I remember someone made an "Antonio" morph once. It wasn't perfect, but not a bad start. Can't remember who it was, though. I'd like to try my hand at a male morph at some point, if only to understand what would need to be changed in the mesh topology and rig to make that really work. Scaling can help with the overall proportions, but then scaling individual body parts in Poser isn't without its drawbacks.

But yeah, I'm (im-)patiently waiting for Brad, as well.

If you can't wait, try Apollo, download it from http://www.antonkisieldesigns.com/~akfiles/htmlpages/ApolloMaximusFree3dhumanfigure.htm  

It is the a very good male character.  Too bad, it seems that no one support it.

I've made one free skin for Apollo (I love working with him) and still working on another but undecided if I will release it for personal reasons.

With Antonia there is no personal reasons involved so my work for her gets released. :)

We are just about to get a heavy winter storm unleshed on us here in Missouri so it may knock out our electric.

If it does my work will be suspended for a bit again.

This is just the shorts and I am working on a top to go with it.

Also I need to do the bump maps and displacement maps so it looks better.

If we don't lose our power tonight or tomorrow I'll work some more on it as time permits.

Wow, those are cute!! Nice work, BlueEcho...

BluEcho,

The shorts are looking good!

Cage,

I am very impressed by the work you are showing us. You seem to have become a grand master of the material room!

Quote - Cage,

I am very impressed by the work you are showing us. You seem to have become a grand master of the material room!

Thanks, Les!    I'm really enjoying working with displacement mapping recently.  BE is right: it can really make a texture look better.  The diaper is actually just the simple shorts I posted last year, with some shaping morphs and a lot of displacement for detail.  It's a lot of fun seeing something go from kind of blah to pretty nifty, thanks to a displacement map.  :laugh:

I think the character is pretty much done, here, but I'm not quite convinced by the wrinkling on the neck ruffle thingy.  :unsure: