Quote - If we are going to have a WW compatible version of Antonia, and I'm not saying we should, why not bight the bullet, and make hip (former hip2) a real hip, the child of the BODY. Would that not solve some of the main problems associated with applying stock poses? It would also be less confusing for users, and fix "the current naming of the hip and hip2 actors just makes no sense whatsoever" problem.

Wouldn't that snafu the whole point of having the extra actor?  The hip2 provides extra posing capability for the thighs.  By making it the child of BODY, the extra actor is moved to the other side of the torso chain, where the extra poseability isn't as helpful. 

Quote - What's the deal with the WW-compatible version working better with the Walk Designer? 

It doesn't work better. Odf thought it looked better because the upper body looked more animated.  It looked that way because the hip was stretching up and down because the walk designer keyframes were translating the hip up and down. Because Antonia's hip is not the hip walk designer expects, the mesh was deforming.

I have to agree it did look more interesting, but definitely not correct.

Quote - > Quote - If we are going to have a WW compatible version of Antonia, and I'm not saying we should, why not bight the bullet, and make hip (former hip2) a real hip, the child of the BODY. Would that not solve some of the main problems associated with applying stock poses? It would also be less confusing for users, and fix "the current naming of the hip and hip2 actors just makes no sense whatsoever" problem.

Wouldn't that snafu the whole point of having the extra actor?  The hip2 provides extra posing capability for the thighs.  By making it the child of BODY, the extra actor is moved to the other side of the torso chain, where the extra poseability isn't as helpful. 

Exactamente! Changing the hierarchy is absolutely not an option.

Regarding the walk cycle, that's really hard to tell from two seconds of video. So I readily admit that I may have been wrong about that. I have no clue how walk designer works and if one could make real use of the hip2 actor without renaming it.

@fivecat: which data are you basing your statement about correctness of walk cycles on?

I wasn't saying you were* wrong* (I liked the same walk you did), just that it looked that way because of mesh stretching due to translation (which is not correct, imho, for a walk cycle).  The data I looked at was keyframes for translation in the hip actor (in poser I had to unhide the dials with a script).

@Cage,

Quote - Wouldn't that snafu the whole point of having the extra actor?  The hip2 provides extra posing capability for the thighs.  By making it the child of BODY, the extra actor is moved to the other side of the torso chain, where the extra poseability isn't as helpful.

Perhaps you are correct. Can you explain why the way it is currently, is an advantage? I must admit I never did get the point. I was a bit embarrassed to ask before, and thought that the point would dawn on me eventually, it never did. I can see an advantage in having the extra actor, and the extra flexibility that it brings, I just don't see why having it where it is in the hierarchy is an advantage. I would have thought having the hip directly connected to the thighs would have been better. With the hip directly collected to the thighs, I still have the flexibility of the extra actor. I'm not trying to be funny, I really don't get the point.

@fivecat,

Good point, thanks for bringing it to our attention. The first major strike against the current WW test version, and another reason for making the hip2 a real hip in the WW version. We may have gained compatibility with WW, but have lost compatibility with the Walk Designer. As this is a Poser figure, to my mind compatibility with Poser is paramount.

Quote -
@fivecat,
We may have gained compatibility with WW, but have lost compatibility with the Walk Designer. As this is a Poser figure, to my mind compatibility with Poser is paramount.

I can't say that the WW version is not compatible with Walk Designer. It does work, it is just that my picky personality does not like the translation of non-hip actors that creates unintended mesh stretching.

I should rethink this though, because if it looks good, who cares what is going on behind the scenes? And the renamed Antonia does look better in the walk cycle.

Quote - I wasn't saying you were* wrong* (I liked the same walk you did), just that it looked that way because of mesh stretching due to translation (which is not correct, imho, for a walk cycle).  The data I looked at was keyframes for translation in the hip actor (in poser I had to unhide the dials with a script).

Yep, that makes sense.

@lesbentley: as an extreme example, imagine someone playing with a hula hoop. The hip moves about (a lot), whereas the rest of the body stays pretty much stationary. You can't do that why a figure in which the hip is at the root of the hierarchy. And there are lots and lots of poses like this. Imagine a woman in high heels walking, with her hips swinging all Marilyn Monroe style. In a traditional figure, you'd apply a y rotation to the hip and then not only adjust the thighs to compensate, but also the abdomen. With the way Antonia is rigged, you might even be able to use IK on the legs and then only swing the hip2 actor to get the desired effect.

Quote - @lesbentley: as an extreme example, imagine someone playing with a hula hoop. The hip moves about (a lot), whereas the rest of the body stays pretty much stationary. You can't do that why a figure in which the hip is at the root of the hierarchy. And there are lots and lots of poses like this. Imagine a woman in high heels walking, with her hips swinging all Marilyn Monroe style. In a traditional figure, you'd apply a y rotation to the hip and then not only adjust the thighs to compensate, but also the abdomen. With the way Antonia is rigged, you might even be able to use IK on the legs and then only swing the hip2 actor to get the desired effect.

This is very interesting to me, as I've just spent a lot of time keyframing the millenium horse for a walk, trot, and gallop. I did a lot of pelvis rotation with compensation in the thighs and abdomen.  I want to re-rig the horse figure, it drives me nuts.

Good points odf!

Interesting tidbit: the rotation center of the current hip or possible future waist actor matches pretty well with the lower dantian in traditional Chinese medicine, which is regarded as the center of the body and the seat of the qi.

 Not sure what any of that means, but is sure sounds auspicious! 

  hip -> waist

  waist2 -> hip

  Hip2 -> hip

Please be very careful with this! It changes the files in place, and it shoots first and asks questions later[1]. Be sure to select the correct folder, and always work on a copy (and make sure you've actually copied your original folder, not just moved it to a different position).

If anyone wants to pretty this up or add some more tests, feel free. I'm putting it into the public domain.

[1] I'm lying. It doesn't ask any questions whatsoever.

As announced I took a little break - in the end Leo sent me to bed with a heating pad for my shoulder. My fault, as always: If something really, really grabs me I go on until I wonder why my shoulder and hand feels like dipped into fizzing lemonade. An hour later everything hurts. But as you see: the heating pad worked!
I again take the freedom to comment on several postings at once:

@SteveJax: Great minds think alike? Of course they do!

@msg24_7: I know! I only used this method for pose-files, not on any cr2.

@fivecaat: Those are awesome options!!! The round face and the eye options together will give a completely different, ethnic Antonia. And the long face... it reminds me a lot on a german sportsman, Holger Glandorf LOL All that I would have to add is a more edgy bone-structure (and a multiple broken nose...).
And of course I want them. All those little bits and pieces give me ideas for decades just by looking at them! The sweet little lips pucker thing alone... she looks as if she is eating a very sour lemon-candy LOL

@Lesbentley: Attached File: AP-HipStretchFix.zip.TXT

You are my hero - but of course you know this already!!

I am, as cage, unsure about making the hip2 the real hip. I worked a lot with this body part and can say that it's a blessing. You can create very realistic thigh bending with it's help and it protects the buttocks from nasty effects if you pose the body in a way like every real person but (until Antonia came) no Poser-figure could.

Hip rotation, of course, is necessary to, for instance, lay a figure down in a convincing (and easy) way and then still be able to turn it around by rotating the whole body (into the light for instance) without destroying the pose. I'll post two examples later.

@odf: Thanks for the script - and of course I do not work on a copy (because I still have my zips with the originals to overwrite everything if desired).

Quote - @odf: Thanks for the script - and of course I do not work on a copy (because I still have my zips with the originals to overwrite everything if desired).

That works, too. - As do version control systems, which is what I use.

The pose on the left side was made by adding 30 degrees of each thigh bend (Kick) to hip2 and taking it away from the thighs, some of the hip(1) rotation was added to hip2 as well - but this is not sooo important, in other extremer poses you can achieve softer  and more believable effects by using hip2 as well - but you can forget about this, it leads us too far at the moment.

While the thighs react fairly well to the extreme bend the buttocks react like we are used to it by all the DAZ figures, they deform in an unnatural way.

About the thighs:I am preparing some more renders with different angles to show that extreme bends have their effect on them as well. You just have to look at the figure from the front and you see unwanted creases (and worse).

So if you ask me: Whatever you do, whatever you name it: Keep hip2, it's one of the most valuable things Antonia has!

For today I am closing my little hawker's tray called pc and see my hairdresser and the pub instead I hope I could be helpful.

That was very helpful. In fact, it was so helpful I cancelled a render I've had going all night to adjust the hip2 and thighs. Much better!

Works like a charm, LB.  I had to of course rotate the waist. (I need to get some pants on that girl!!)

Regarding WW support, I wouldn't expect to hear from Phil until she's fully nailed down.  That is the concern I had with a fork, as he has to invest the time to create the plug in, as well as deal with support, sohe doesn't want to complcate his life any more than necessary, as well as make a few dollars. 

This stuff happens with Linux as well-I have to run Debain on my KIds' laptops, but use openSUSE on my desktop because each does diferent things well....

I wish I was using Linux on my Laptop-Windows grabbed an update and keeps wanting to reoot now.  GRRRRR!

PS someone mentioned Crossdresser-has anyone contaced Evilinnocence about a plugin?

Quote - I think the difference is obvious.

Rigid hip was most unnatural part of body almost all poser figures. You all can you check it with mirror. People cannot bend legs more then 90 degrees (sometimes 80 sometimes 100) If you pull your knees to your chest you must bend your torso. Antonias hips are not only better, they are natural.

Another misstake in poser figures are arms. People cannot move arms up along Poser Z axis. Check with mirror ;) You can move your arm up only a little, later you must twist your shoulder. If you look at mirror you can easy notice, that, with arms rised over your head, your armpits are turned towards the front.

I started working on the Wardrobe Wizard support files this morning. My target is to have them completed by the beginning of next week.

Good news, Phil!

BTW, that has got to be the most AWESOME avatar pic ever done.  :lol:

I'm going thin on top so am cultivating a comb-over :)

Careful, Phil! By the time you get done, if you wear a bowler you'll look like cousin It!

Good to hear you're on the case, Phil.

Ok, I can't believe what I am seeing.  There are only TEN CC channels on the hip?  Seriously?  Why doesn't every actor have at least 50?  There are no built in morphs at all to antonia so lots of channels are needed.

Can we get these channels added ASAP to the stock antonia please?  If we don't then there is no place for morphs and morphs are going to be needed, BADLY.

I had Les helping me with making INJ files and he ran out of hip channels and had to drop some belly button morphs.  I think thats realy off.  I already had notes for a handful more of belly morphs and there are already no channels for them.

I would like to get 50 in there (or more) and propose a convention amongst developers.  I would request:

1. 50 channels on every body part.
2. Morphs be set to use 0-39 (Nipples, BellyButtonDepth, etc)
3. Character morphs (Jenny, Alice, Crystal, etc) use 40-49

Are you aware that you do not need spare channels if you use Poser binary morph files? You can inject them straight in, they do not need a preformed empty channel.

No, because I don't use them.  I don't know how to create them.  I don't know how to distribute them.  And I don't think most end users know how to use them either.

Also, how compatible are they to DS?  Can thos folks use them as well?

PMD morphs are a pain to use in DS. There is a script, but it's not really user-friendly, and if that script doesn't get updated or redone by someone else when DS4 comes out, then those users may not be able to use PMD morphs at all.

Would you like to know?

@wolfie: I guess I hadn't expected people to be so enthusiastic about morphs. I don't mind adding more channels. Because I didn't have the faintest idea how many channels would be needed, I asked for advice some time back and followed it.

Personally, I would feel better about PMDs if I could find a documentation of the format. It's really annoying that I can't write my own tools, but have to use Poser or 3rd party software instead.

Everything you wanted to know about PMD files but were afraid to ask:-

http://www.nerd3d.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=13

No more complicated than making a delta INJ file, possibly easier. Certainly less restrictive and no requirement that you "have" to use certain channels for certain morph types.

Quote - Everything you wanted to know about PMD files but were afraid to ask:- http://www.nerd3d.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=13

No more complicated than making a delta INJ file, possibly easier. Certainly less restrictive and no requirement that you "have" to use certain channels for certain morph types.

Unfortunately, that's not everything I wanted to know. Not even close. :laugh:

Good writeup, though.

ETA: Also the first Google hit when I type in "poser pmd".

Well, PMDs are fairly new.  Users prior to Poser 6 can't use them.  While I would be willing to discount those users who are still on Poser 5 and earlier, I am not willing to discount those users who actually use DS (I don't like it but many do).

Also what about poser users who have the PMDs disabled as I do and have had them disabled since they first started.  Phil, I think some of your own tools say to disable them.

Without more channels, morphs are going to have to either wait or go PMD.  I don't like either solution :(

You can use a script to add channels (and probably just use a pose file too, to create groupings and channels for your morphs).

@wolfie: I'll add more channels. End of discussion.

By the way, you don't need to have PMDs enabled in order to use morph injections based on PMDs. Why does everyone think that? That option only tells Poser whether to save morph deltas as PMDs or inline in the original non-binary form. It has no impact on what you can or cannot load.

@fivecat: Unfortunately, morph channels cannot be created via pose files. At least that's what the gurus keep telling me.

Quote - I'm going thin on top so am cultivating a comb-over :)

Best comb-over evah!  

Thanks for working on WW support.

Pose files can NOT add channels.  Scripts can.  Unless they get added to the stock figure then every end user has to run that script.  Having to run a python script (which won't work in DS afaik), before a pose isn't user friendly.

I think we need to keep Antonia as end user friendly as possible.

Quote - @fivecat: Unfortunately, morph channels cannot be created via pose files. At least that's what the gurus keep telling me.

Ah, it's been a while since I created anything for a figure without channels and I forgot that you couldn't use pose files.  For Apollo I disributed a CR2 with added channels that referenced the base. I prefer the script method, but I don't know how to do it in DS.

@wolfie: We've had this discussion before. I don't mind adding some more empty channels, but that still doesn't solve the mix-and-match problem: if 10 people each create a morphset with 10 morphs each, then even in the unlikely case that they all talk to each other and try to avoid conflicts, we'll still run out of channels. The only way out, currently, are either PMDs or scripts/installers that come with the morphs and create channels on the fly.

Quote - Well, PMDs are fairly new.  Users prior to Poser 6 can't use them.  While I would be willing to discount those users who are still on Poser 5 and earlier, I am not willing to discount those users who actually use DS (I don't like it but many do).
Also what about poser users who have the PMDs disabled as I do and have had them disabled since they first started.  Phil, I think some of your own tools say to disable them.

PMDs can work with a morph insertion pose when they're disabled in Poser.  What you're actually disabling is Poser's ability to use PMD files to handle all morph deltas externally.  PMDs will still work as part of an insertion process.  I use them regularly for that, with Poser's PMD setting disabled.

Users of DS also can't make use of any shaders or dynamic cloth or Python scripts for Poser.  If we're going to be limited by what they can't do, we'll have to ignore a huge chunk of what Poser can do.  :scared:  :lol:

One can create, edit, or view the contents of PMD files using the Binary Morph Editor, by Dimension 3D, available in the Rosity marketplace.

More morph slots could be useful, though.

Quote - By the way, you don't need to have PMDs enabled in order to use morph injections based on PMDs. Why does everyone think that? That option only tells Poser whether to save morph deltas as PMDs or inline in the original non-binary form. It has no impact on what you can or cannot load.

Brillient!  I learned my new fact of the day!  I thought it turned them off entirely.  I have been ignoring any downloads that had PMDs as I didn't want to have to switch the setting on and off to use em.

Because, perhaps, they are all as naive about them as I am :unsure:

I think ideally content creators would make morphs available both in binary and non-binary form. PMDs have clear advantages for those who can use them. Personally, I would only create the PMDs as the final step before distribution, though. I find that non-binary deltas are the best way to keep my morphs save and dry.

Quote - @wolfie: We've had this discussion before. I don't mind adding some more empty channels, but that still doesn't solve the mix-and-match problem: if 10 people each create a morphset with 10 morphs each, then even in the unlikely case that they all talk to each other and try to avoid conflicts, we'll still run out of channels. The only way out, currently, are either PMDs or scripts/installers that come with the morphs and create channels on the fly.

Nope, there is no way to avoid  the injection channel overlap.  That is an every day occurance with any figure.

I like the PMD idea, IF it was compatible with DS.  There are a hell of a lot of DS users out there.  Personally, I don't give a flying flip about DS.  But, OTOH, I don't want to alienate them either by making a morph set that only works in Poser (or the reverse, only works in DS). 

Python differs between poser and DS and a matching set of scripts would have to happen.

As stated before, PMDs appear to be no so fun in DS.

What is the best out here?  What would be most compatible from Poser to DS?  What would be easiest on the end user?  I'm game.  Suggestions?

Quote - Pose files can NOT add channels.  Scripts can.  Unless they get added to the stock figure then every end user has to run that script.  Having to run a python script (which won't work in DS afaik), before a pose isn't user friendly.

I think we need to keep Antonia as end user friendly as possible.

You can run a script from a pose file -- is it really that difficult to click one pose file to add channels and add morphs?

Quote - More morph slots could be useful, though.

Is 50 channels in everything but the fingers acceptable for everyone? I have no idea what figures typically have these days.

Quote - You can run a script from a pose file

Not in DS.

@odf: What will be the names of the final v1.0.1 .obj files?  With PhilC having verified WW support, I'm trying to prep for a 1.0.1 release of a few things.

Actually, I believe you can in DS, but it needs to be a DS script. Problem is that some users are still using DS2 and DS4 is in alpha. A script written for DS3 won't work with either. Added morph channels are a better solution for DS. Yes, there could be some overlap, but the chances that a user is going to use all 10 of those hypothetical sets of 10 morphs each at the same time are fairly slim.

As for DS compatibility, as a DS user, I do appreciate those who are considerate enough to make things work for us too. No, not everything for Poser works in DS, but at least some level of compatibility is nice. Changing MAT poses to .pz2 gives DS users a starting point for MATS even if you're unwilling to create DS MATS for them, and not using PMD morphs insures that users will be able to use them as easily as Poser users or in some cases at all.

V4's DS dynamic clothes work fine on Antonia, so dynamic clothing isn't an issue.

Really, the only places for real compatibility concern are morphs and MATS.

Quote - > Quote - More morph slots could be useful, though.

Is 50 channels in everything but the fingers acceptable for everyone? I have no idea what figures typically have these days.

If you reference the near-industry standard V4, she has 50 in Body and ALL body parts (fingers included) with the exception of Brow &  Head which have 70.