ghomma, "Is that clearer now ?"

Yes. And I could have been clearer myself. What I meant was not to transfer the old UV map to the new in some way but to save the material selections. It is the selections that is 90% of the work. Once you have the selections saved it is a breeze to make the UV map. So when you retop the selections one by one you keep control and can make the new selections very similar to the old - any faults.

It was not me who did the first map for the tri version, it was the map such as it came from Marvelous Designer. Usually MD's maps is first class (because you START with the patterns, not the normal other way around). But in this case there are problem because the right front of the jacket touch the left and the meshes intertwine. In the quad version this will not be a problem.

Wow, that's a bad UV. 

What I used retopology for: I wanted to make a sculpture of a lion for one of DPHoadley's victorian buildings. I modelled it around the Poser 4 lion, but the topology had to be different. It still ended up with too many polys - entirely due to my limited skill, but the process in Blender was actually fun. I look forward to doing something like that again.

Quote - Wow, that's a bad UV. 

It is between horrific and flat out fugly.

Here is a quick texturing, more of a concept like, using the bashed UV maps. The whole thing has taken about 3-4 hours, including the retop. It is many things to do if it were to be a real model, seam borders is the most important but never mind. (also there is no bump, displacement or normal maps in this render)

Today are many new ways to model different from the classical box modeling, ZBrush, Voxel based system as 3DCoat, Marvelous Designer, Sketchup, that are great fun to use but produces horrible meshes. Retop is a way to solve this elegantly something like the Gorodian knot actually. Each one solves this differently, I am very interested to hear about other methods for retopologizing (is that a word? :), especially with pictures before and after and not only 'this tools is good'. 'software xx is better'..and so on.

I dont currently have any screen shots to share but I do want to put my 2 cents in for Zbrush. The retopo tool is super easy to use and you can learn it in under an hour with no previous exp of ever doing a retopo before... if you are not careful you could flip a normal here or there but its easy to fix. Creating new edgeloops and adding thinkness to a one sided piece is also as easy as clicking a button and just playing with the resulting thickness... the new border and the newly extracted/extruded face are then given a different group so they are easily selectable later for finer manipulating... But, what I like is that its so easy to just spend a little bit of time getting the basic new topology down and then just dividing and obtaining all of the fine detail from the original in just a few steps.

Now, for me, it's not even a fair call 'cause i havent used anything else... but then with Zbrush to maya and back again, I don't feel like I need to.

just my $0.02

phionix,

Well I'm always willing to try ZBrush which is a great program. The retopology is a bit complicated but as long as it works so.. Better the program you have than the one you don't have!

I used the following process,

1)  With your tool selected and in edit mode, go into the tool palette and make a zsphere
2)  Go to Tool>Rigging>Select Mesh and select the mesh you want to retop
3)  Go to Tool>Topology>Edit Topology
4)  Add points in edit mode, move points in move mode, remove points by alt click them (press "a" to preview)
5)  When finished go to Tool>Projection>Projection adjust the Project Range until it looks good (check with "a")
6)  Go to Tool>Adaptive Skin>Density and set the density slider (higher density=higher quality)
7)  Click Make Adaptive Skin in that same subpalette. You will now have the new version in the tool palette.

It works but the thing I want to ask is, what happened to the groups? As I have explained the material selections are important. Normally when you are sculpting an organic entity in ZBrush (ie an alien creature :) you don't want seams, but with clothing seams are an important part of the design. So how do I preserve the seams in ZBrush?

You will have to make new groups, but it's so easy to do with your new low poly retopo-ed mesh... As for seams, you mean uv map, right?? You make a new map... But see, when you know you're going to retop a mesh, you wouldn't bother setting up the UVs on the 1st one I begin with... So it's not like it's double the work. Now I happened to like zbrushes auto uv method, and then I like to go into Maya and tweek and edit this auto setup with mayas uv tools (more control). If you mean something else by "seams" you let me know.

"If you mean something else by "seams" you let me know"

No I meant seams, of course you set up the maps to follow the seams anything else would be stupid. But I guess that to redo the UV is no great matter on a low-poly model.

Attached Link: Half the shirt in about 10 minutes or so.

Very impressive, especially how you did the ! So far Topogun 2.0 is the king no doubt about it but what feature was it that was not in the 1.0 version? Anyhow I order my copy!..

On second thoughts, even if the 'grid' was a nifty trick it only saves a few minutes and defeats the purpose of the seams. It is important to have seams at the top and bottom on the arm. But even more important is that topogun does not keep the material zones. Redoing the UV maps is no great matter with a lowpoly mesh true, but then comes the retextureing. The texturing takes more time than all the other steps together. In C4D I can create the UV maps with a single mouse click if the zones are intact, a single click for each material that is. And then I can use the same texture maps with just some minor tweaking.. When I get more time I will make an video and show the whole process  how to distribute packages that are both  dynamic and conforming at the same time.

In zbrush you can apply your texture as polypaint... Then you can take that polypainted obj, redo or adjust UVs, then create a new texture map( or disp or bump or normal). It's come in pretty handy a few times. Of course others could have a similar approach but again, I havnt used others.

phionix,

We have one expert in Topogun, one expert in zBrush and one user with CD4, now we are getting somewhere! Time limits stops anyone from being well versed in all the programs, but working together gives power! Wait until I have done my video, and then I will be more than curious to read the comments. ( I have to do the texturing to to show what I mean and that takes a little time).

vintorix,

Why do you want to retopo the clothing?  Did your orginal clothing have UVs and textures yet?  Or is your plan to do all that after retopo?  Most retopology I ever do is for creating a lo-res base mesh from a detailed object that I've baked a normal map from to then apply onto the retopo mesh.

You can transfer texture from a hi res to a low res mesh in Topogun, even a poly painted mesh from ZBrush -you do need to UVMap the low res mesh though. So after you retopo, you export out to OBJ, UVMap, then reimport to Topogun. As for topology of the mesh - you have total control of that. You can add or remove topology in Topogun however you want. So there's nothing stopping you from placing edges where you think seams will be. The demonstration idea was purely about how long it would take to do it, not so much about the topology itself.

Also, when doing retopology work for public consumption, I find it's easier to set up material zones AFTER I UVMap the newly made low res mesh. The way I do it, my UV islands are always exactly the same as my material zones (with the exception of eye sockets). This makes it a simple thing to select and assign material zones.

When retopologizing a textured ZBrush mesh for personal use, I don't bother with material zones, as it's usually the texture that's important to my need more than zones themselves. I may go in and assign the eyes or teeth their own zone but that's about it.

Quote - vintorix,

Why do you want to retopo the clothing? Did your orginal clothing have UVs and textures yet? Or is your plan to do all that after retopo? Most retopology I ever do is for creating a lo-res base mesh from a detailed object that I've baked a normal map from to then apply onto the retopo mesh.

Same here - unless for some reason I started out in ZBrush (as I did with a recent model for work) and I need a cleaner topology. That's what retopo work is all about - making a simpler, cleaner mesh for final production or for animation. If the starting mesh was clean already, there's little point in doing a retopo.

ShawnDriscoll, "Most retopology I ever do is for creating a lo-res base mesh from a detailed object that I've baked a normal map from to then apply onto the retopo mesh."

Yes that is the normal way to work with zBrush for example but this is different.

You can make a dress in Marvelous Designer in 10 min with first class UV maps that can be used in Poser as dynamic cloth directly. However the triangular mesh is unsuitable as a base for conforming clothing. It must be retopoligized, so the planned workflow is this,

1. Make cloth in MD
2. Do texturing in Blacksmith or Bodypaint or whatever, after where you have one piece of Dynamic Clothing

then,

1. Retop keeping all material zones intact.
2. Make new UV map (from the material zones)
3. Minor tweaking to make the texture fit the new map

Voila! You can now distribute your piece in both Dynamic and Conforming format.

 Edit: You must think outside the box! :)

Just for the record, even if the UVs and textures must be totally redone there is still a need. It is a skill that you just need to have,

1. To make meshes simpler, (from zBrush)
2. To convert to quads from tris (from Marvelous Designer)
3. To make mesh cleaner, more beautiful (from Sketchup. Yes, beautiful mesh is more valuable :)

And doubtless in many other cases too.

"3) To make mesh cleaner, more beautiful (from Sketchup. Yes, beautiful mesh is more valuable :)"

you keep saying this.. and as a Sketchup Modeler, I can produce "beautiful" mesh easily.. it's not the program at fault but the operator. any modeling app can produce crap mesh if you don't use it right. I model in Quads, I get Quads. that simple. so how about you drop the crap and get on with the subject?

Even if I live untill I'll be hundred I never understand all this belligerence in the Poser forum. I love Sketchup too, and use it for all my architectural work, in combination with C4D. I have had many a fight in the Cinema forum defending Sketchup. Kaibach has written three posts in this thread so far, all aggressive, I wonder what is his problem? Why don't you send me a fairly complicated Sketchup model, and I tell you what is wrong with it.

"Even if I live untill I'll be hundred I never understand all this belligerence in the Poser forum. "

read your own posts at all? I realise your primary language may not be english, but you always appear to want to fight. your posts are full of little digs, you are argumentative, etc.

sorry for reacting to YOUR way of talking to the rest of us. and no, I won't be sending you one of my models just to fuel your desire to fight - yes thats how you come across to the rest of us vintorix - I want to learn about the subject of the thread.

Quote - However the triangular mesh is unsuitable as a base for conforming clothing. It must be retopoligized

Understood.  I didn't know you were doing comformed clothing.

Quote - > Quote - However the triangular mesh is unsuitable as a base for conforming clothing. It must be retopoligized

Understood.  I didn't know you were doing comformed clothing.

The mesh is unsuitable because the mesh itself or because is made of traingles ?

?

But still, the triangular mesh looks more like natural cloth. So why can't you have both?

That is the whole point, you can.

Why retopology?

Why control gravitation, be invisible, fly through the air like a bird? These are things people has dreamed about since the beginning of time. Control gravitation, be invisible, fly through the air like a bird is still impossible though.

But retopology is within the reach of the average modeler.

Quote - But still, the triangular mesh looks more like natural cloth. So why can't you have both?

Quad mesh is easier to model and consume less memory, but triangle mesh are better for conforming and dynamic clothes and any deformable object because its normal are always correct after the deformation. A quad  after a deformation can produce a degenerate quad and so have wrong normals and can produce undesired illumination or black spots in the rendered image.

"triangle mesh are better for conforming and dynamic clothes...because normals are always correct after the deformation"

ha ha,  talk about sense of proportions! Nothing is easier than to correct wrong normals except perhaps tying my shoes. Beside, the tools in C4D for retopology has never given  me a wrong normal.

Edit: But the most compelling argument is that there is not a single cloth model in the marketplace that is not made in quads, not one.

Quote - ha ha,  talk about sense of proportions! Nothing is easier than to correct wrong normals

You cannot correct the normals of a degenate or not planar quad, three normals can be good but the fourth is always bad, you only can select which one will be the bad one.

Quote - Edit: But the most compelling argument is that there is not a single cloth model in the marketplace that is not made in quads, not one.

Yes I know and almost all the clothes that I have are made by quads, but just go to the cloth room, pose a dynamic cloth and see all the abominations that happen with the quads in some parts of the cloth. Of course in most of the cases the abominations are not visible in the rendering with the camera angle you use. And when are visible you must change the camera angle, use magnets to hide or correct  them or use Photoshop. With conforming clothes happens the same at the bending zones.

Dynamic cloth should be triangulated.  The triangular models right from Marvelous Designer simulate 5-6 times faster in Poser.

As for conforming clothes as everyone uses quads you would be a Don Quichotte to question it. Deforming is not the only issue overriding everything else.

Maybe I am Don Quijote, but I don't see any reason why conforming clothes cannot be made of triangles

"I don't see any reason why conforming clothes cannot be made of triangles"

May I ask, have you tried? Because I have,

Hashshashin Warrior for M4
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/details.php?item_id=63535

Irish Maiden Dress for V4
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/details.php?item_id=63397

It was not an exhilarating experience. Never again please! :)

I shall see which is the problem with your Vicky dress.

A conforming cloth is nothing more than a posable figure. A figure can be made with quads or triangles and it doesn't make any difference. I even subdivided Vicky4 breast to have better breast morphs, so her breast is made with triangles now.

After that rather disappointing experience I bided my time, waiting for MD's team to deliver a quad library. But it didn't arrived in June as promised and gradually it dawned upon me that no one had succeeded with what they were trying to do.. In other words, they won't make it. So I decided to learn retopology no matter how hard it was. Surprisingly it wasn't difficult at all.

I did a quick test with the bodice, that is made of triangles. The only problem that I found was with the shoulders movement. The collar present a little problem and chest and abdomen works well.

What I found with your mesh has nothing to do if is made of quads or triangles. First problem is that the mesh is not welded and so, it can sepparate the partes with some bendings. The joints for the collar need a small adjustment and the joints for the shoulders are wrong, the bending of the shoulder have no effect on the collar and maybe chest too and it must have in this cloth.

Beside this, is a nice cloth

It was my first conforming for what its worth. But it was so many problems with that relatively simple mesh. If I shall make cloth, I want it to be of the most advanced kind, with all kinds of details and embellishment, seams, pockets, belt, lace, embroderies, etc, after all I am not here to play! So it has to be quads, sorry.

The problem is not the mesh itself, the problem is to setup the joint zones that are a headache!

"The problem is not the mesh itself,"

I can not see why you say that. I had 1001 pronblems with the mesh which I wouldn't have had with quads. In the end I was too fed up with all of it to fiddle with the joint editor. I am of the opinion that modeling shall be fun.