I guess it would pop up a dialog, to select the blend ratio, as a prompt perhaps, right after the material group picker dialog is ok'd?

This could save a lot of copying and pasting, no?

I appreciate the logistics of this idea - and the array of user choices implied by it - may override it feasibility...

...what about if the add / blend material button simply loaded in the material files nodes... but didn't connect then up to the existing nodes? That would save the copy / paste exertions at least? You'd then just need to rewire as you saw fit... (which makes it more of an advanced user feature, sure)

baginsbill and wolf359, I was merely responding to the question, not hating anyone, not trying to ruin things for animators, just trying to participate.

I do know what weight mapping is, one of the developments I alluded to when I mentioned "considerable improvements". But some of the products available here, like shoulder fixes, thigh bend fixes and buttocks fixes, give better fixes to those particular areas than weight-mapping does but do not work with weight-mapped figures and  do not work with one another, so just participating in what seemed to me be a wish list, I was hoping for some all-encompassing fix.

 Anyway, thanks for reminding me what a tank of bile this place is.

GeneralNutt, from my experience with Pose2Lux, it is an impressive product. But, by the developer's own admission, it loses a lot in texture translation. It's a free product with the developer working on it as he has time, so this is very understandable, but should someone with more resources, like Smith-Micro, take up the product and produce something like Reality2, that would be something I'd plunk down money for. And thanks for being civil.

Oh, and I am aware of EZSkin, though I have not yet tried it. I have seen in the galleries people squeezing out much more realism than I have accomplished, but that is almost always done over some backdrop as though it were a photo studio. Most of the pictures I do involve a lot of background and prop items, so I was hoping for a level of realism that extended beyond just skin.

Quote - Lastly, as a casual user (if $2,000 plus a year is casual) I would like some sort of newsletter on trends, changes and improvements in the Poser world. Most of what I get I glean from this forum and most of what is discussed in this forum is as if you are already in the know. 

Just some thoughts frim the bleachers.

Shorterbus, I like your newsletter idea... I think such a thing should be neutral of marketing motives ideally and community oriented... so perhaps best not produced by SM directly, as it were... or any of the marketplace sites...?

...but still no reason a community produced newsletter couldn't be sponsored or funded to some extent by SM and the commercial interests (even if just through sideline advertising)... what's good for the goose and all that...?

...and kind of extending from that... maybe SM helping by sponsoring / resourcing some of the community development initiatives in some way... if that helped them along, might not be a bad thing? Or maybe it would... I don't know.

EZSkin is great. Its a real time saver and also keeps you on the right track with regard to implementing what are established "best practices" for using the new SSS shader tech.

But its still just a tool, to help achieve a realistic result...

...if you're looking for realism in other materials in your scenes, then, as I 've found, trying to keep up with (and indeed just plain cribbing off) what the likes of Bagginsbill (as a prime example) is up to here, is probably your best plan...

;-)

Quote - I do know what weight mapping is, one of the developments I alluded to when I mentioned "considerable improvements". But some of the products available here, like shoulder fixes, thigh bend fixes and buttocks fixes, give better fixes to those particular areas than weight-mapping does but do not work with weight-mapped figures and  do not work with one another, so just participating in what seemed to me be a wish list, I was hoping for some all-encompassing fix.

 

Not sure the exact fixes you are talking about but I have tried the 'Perfect' range of fixes and also the breast modification system from RNDA and they all work quite happily with V4WM.  My base character has all of these and has done so for months with no problem.  It is a personal choice and some users will prefer V4WM alone however, my base figure is scaled to a suggested five foot and is very petite, particulalry for a heroine, which is why I use the extra fixes. Some of the 'Perfect' series allow you to amend how much impact the fix will have and gives me some ablilty to tweak standard poses for V4 when used with V4WM. 

Monkeycloud, Hornet3d, thanks.

I own some of the "Perfect" fixes and used them, but I think by the time weight mapping came around I had already switched to Ironman13's fixes which, for reasons I can't recall, I liked better. But it's good to know I can go back to them. I've been travelling quite a bit lately and unabe to fire up Poser for a while, but if memory serves, the shoulder fixes which I relied on heavily, do not work with weight mapping, and definitely many of the buttocks fixes.

It might be an idea for theses "fixes" vendors to make fixes specifically for WM's.

something like Zbrush added to the program would also be nice to be able to really morph figures and edit the mesh like that would be great.

I think it is time Poser began compeating with daz studio so much of what daz studio can do should be placed in the next poser update if they don't do this then alot of us are just going to go daz and poser will die a silent cold death.

I finally got Mike 4 looking really decent with a iceman morph someone posted at sharecg that gives him a wieght mapped like effect where his arms no longer look stiff like a doll and many of his problems are fixed by it, I would use Daz but after trying the demo I had to put it down, it is way more complicated to use then poser even though it does alot more it takes forever to learn,  one of my largest complaints with poser is the quality of figures that are being released with the product, I have have yet to see them release the product with figures superior to daz, which is pretty sad.

maybe daz will end up owning poser one day and give it a real overhaul lol.

Quote - baginsbill and wolf359, I was merely responding to the question, not hating anyone, not trying to ruin things for animators, just trying to participate.

And so was I just trying to participate. You didn't mention V4WM or EZSkin, and so I guessed that you either had not heard of them or you hated them - those freebies, not a person.

Just because I don't have time to carefully wordsmith every response doesn't mean you can assume I'm an ass. I didn't read anything nasty in wolf's response either. It seemed like you thought animation has consumed considerable effort by SM, and I agree with wolf - it has not. Not for years.

Contradiction is not confrontation - if you perceive it as such perhaps its because you're being confrontational.

Quote - I do know what weight mapping is, one of the developments I alluded to when I mentioned "considerable improvements". But some of the products available here, like shoulder fixes, thigh bend fixes and buttocks fixes, give better fixes to those particular areas than weight-mapping does but do not work with weight-mapped figures and  do not work with one another, so just participating in what seemed to me be a wish list, I was hoping for some all-encompassing fix.

This is news to me. A lot of people have said, one way or another, that almost all the bending problems were fixed by V4WM. Could you show some examples of problems that persist? I'm not saying there aren't any.

Quote -  Anyway, thanks for reminding me what a tank of bile this place is.

Actually DAZ forums are a tank of bile, IMO. Every time I offer any information there that happens to contradict anything, I get reactions like yours. Stuff like that keeps me from helping people over there. I got chased away just this week. Everyone has a right to an opinion, but that includes me, too, please.

Quote - something like Zbrush added to the program would also be nice to be able to really morph figures and edit the mesh like that would be great.

 

Yup... that'd be nice alright ;-) Really nice. Especially if it came as a free upgrade!

I kind of suspect I might just have to save up and buy ZBrush though...

EDIT: But, otherwise, I would like to see slightly more responsive, more intuitive morphing tools.

I really haven't use the morph tools very much as yet because, if I'm honest, I have found this feature a bit tricky to get to grips with. But that may just be my lack of time and patience to date...

Quote - something like Zbrush added to the program would also be nice to be able to really morph figures and edit the mesh like that would be great.

 

The best approach to this would be for someone to develop a GoZ plug-in for poser. I'm not sure it has to be SM that does it, just someone who knows how to code decently. 

~Shane

Quote - > Quote - something like Zbrush added to the program would also be nice to be able to really morph figures and edit the mesh like that would be great.

 

The best approach to this would be for someone to develop a GoZ plug-in for poser. I'm not sure it has to be SM that does it, just someone who knows how to code decently. 

~Shane

I'd certainly like to see that... at least once I actually have ZBrush...

Quote - This is news to me. A lot of people have said, one way or another, that almost all the bending problems were fixed by V4WM. Could you show some examples of problems that persist? I'm not saying there aren't any.

I mentioned in another thread that V4WM is curiously missing elbows.  I'm not skilled enough to fix the elbows myself.  However, I got from the thread that no one else is either because it stems from a limitation of the mesh imposed by Daz who would not permit certain changes -- a limitation that apparently didn't exist with the original version (which has bad, but existing elbows), but which for some reason that I do not have the technical knowledge to understand had to be altered when weightmapped.  In any case, I don't use the figure for that reason: other fixes work for me without me having to convert the clothing.

I was criticized for pointing the flaw out, but I have learned that one should be very cautious in displaying such ingratitude towards a free product.  Therefore, I apologize in advance if my mentioning that this item is (in my singular opinion) not quite perfect is offensive to anyone.

Sigh...

PS: Why no JCM here? In fact, isn't that what a "bulge map" is in the new weight mapping system?

Moriador, I remember that thread... as I think Phantom3d pointed out in the thread at the time, there are alway going to be some limitations when weight mapping a mesh that was never designed with weight mapping in mind.

I think this fact really exemplifies just what a great job was done in overcoming this and applying the weight mapping to V4, especially given the distribution method limitations too...

But personally, I don't see that it is invalid to use additional morphs (whether personally sculpted or from a product, if such works okay with the weight mapping - e.g. as Hornet3d points out some of the Perfect series do) to tweak the figure shape, in addition to the weight mapping enhancements?

Overall the weight mapping of V4 provides plenty of enhancement on its own, in my experience of using it.

But in my book, whatever works to get a job done, is surely fair enough...

Quote - PS: Why no JCM here? In fact, isn't that what a "bulge map" is in the new weight mapping system?

A bulge map is a lot different than a JCM, a morph can move a vertex in 3D space, a bulge map is fixed to an axis and origin. Animateable bulge maps could have fixed it, but there were problems with them at the time of release that excluded them from being included, same goes for animated joint centers.

It was also decieded not to do any more updates to V4 WM so that content for did not need to be updated with every update. No one would support a character that was constantly being altered, and I would not blame them a bit for that either.

Quote - I mentioned in another thread that V4WM is curiously missing elbows.  I'm not skilled enough to fix the elbows myself.  However, I got from the thread that no one else is either because it stems from a limitation of the mesh imposed by Daz who would not permit certain changes -- a limitation that apparently didn't exist with the original version (which has bad, but existing elbows), but which for some reason that I do not have the technical knowledge to understand had to be altered when weightmapped.  In any case, I don't use the figure for that reason: other fixes work for me without me having to convert the clothing.

I recall someone was working on a JCM to fix this; was it you?

BB, that's a lovely pose...

Quote - Moriador, I remember that thread... as I think Phantom3d pointed out in the thread at the time, there are alway going to be some limitations when weight mapping a mesh that was never designed with weight mapping in mind.

Yes. That's what I just said, [ETA: what I was just trying to say, I mean -- sorry I wasn't clear] essentially.

Quote - I think this fact really exemplifies just what a great job was done in overcoming this and applying the weight mapping to V4, especially given the distribution method limitations too... But personally, I don't see that it is invalid to use additional morphs (whether personally sculpted or from a product, if such works okay with the weight mapping - e.g. as Hornet3d points out some of the Perfect series do) to tweak the figure shape, in addition to the weight mapping enhancements?

Hey, if someone were to make such a thing to deal with this specific issue, I'd use it. But AFAIK they haven't, and given my skill set, I find it easier to fix up old V4 (and not have to convert clothes) than to deal with this issue.  Other people's experience and preferences will obviously vary.

BB, the image is lovely, and you can see how absolutely beautifully the shoulders bend.

Quote -
I recall someone was working on a JCM to fix this; was it you?

I remember that, but don't think it was anyone in this thread started it... it didn't get anywhere, anyway... I don't think.

I have thought of getting the Perfect Arms product to try out with V4WM, on this point...

However, looking at the animation in the product description it probably wouldn't do the job... as it seems to be correcting the movement of flesh on the inside of the elbow joint and not the issue with prominance (or lack thereof) of the elbow bone.

The former, the inside flesh, is dealt with pretty well by the weight mapping in my opinion... its the outside, elbow bone that arguably needs an additional, small morph / JCM to help it jut out when the elbow is bent...?

Quote -
BB, the image is lovely, and you can see how absolutely beautifully the shoulders bend.

Yup... definitely... I think the shoulders are my favourite part about V4WM. There's a huge improvement in that area I think...

Quote - > Quote - something like Zbrush added to the program would also be nice to be able to really morph figures and edit the mesh like that would be great.

 

The best approach to this would be for someone to develop a GoZ plug-in for poser. I'm not sure it has to be SM that does it, just someone who knows how to code decently. 

 

~Shane

GoZ for Poser is coming. :-)

Quote - GoZ for Poser is coming. :-)

Excellent news for existing and prospective ZBrush users alike... thanks thinkcooper ;-)

I would like to have a painting room with some drawing and painting tools to allow direct modification to the surface maps etc. Great for makeup, tatoos etc.

Also, as the app is capable of rendering in buckets, how about some simple way of distributing the rendering load across several machines arranged as a rendergarden.

Figures: Publish a set of standardised bones and sections ( head, torso arms etc) under a royalty free licence as the start of a standard setting exercise, then let anyone develop meshes for them. This should facilitate swapable body parts.

I still like Posette. Boost the no of polys a bit and give her a decent hi res skin and violá.

I'm not sure if its workable, but could Poser incorporate 3rd party renderers like vray or maxwell ?

While someone like BB can give more definative answers, I can address a few of these points.

A painting room: Take a look at the size of the code on Gimp or Photoshop. That is what you are asking to be added  into Poser. That's an awful lot of overhead to drag around for functionality that will be used only a tiny percentage of the time. Gimp (The Graphic Image Manipulation Program) is available free and gives you plenty of paint tools to modify your maps.

Reendering in buckets: This is what I THOUGHT we had in the current multi-computer scheme, but I'm told it is not. The current distribution is (I think, subject to correction) only useful in animations, rendering full frames on different machines. I'm with you and am wanting to see distributed rendering, but I have a feeling it is a true bear in terms of programming. I have no idea what sort of code overhead we are talking about here.

The idea on the figures... I have no idea about. I don't model. Perhaps some of the modeling artists have an opinion on this.

How about SM providing a rentable renderfarm? Nice side earner for 'em.

I would really like to see swapable body parts. Don't like the head? Just change it.

It would mean that instead of a provider having to create a whole new mesh, they could just supply the bit that they specialise in. Sort of like hair, only more integrated.

New boobs? No problem.

It could work for animal or fantasy creatures as well. Chimera? Minotaur? Just pick 'n mix.

For figures it is quite simple actually; Error free figures will do.

Most current (including and going back to our beloved Posette) have welding problems.
Have rigging problems a beginner to average "home user" can not correct. ( or should we call them: "the casual user" )

Problem free Low, Medium and High Poly figures with good Poly distribution will do.
Problem free will do fine thanks. I can morph :-) Bu the initial figure has to be problem free.

As all latest figures where High res, some Low Poly would be welcome. (Aj, here we go again, I know. :-) )

As for a paint app. Mmmm,
Make an inventory of what you would need?
To paint skin?
Lips?
Brows?
Lashes?
Skin color variations as on nose and cheeks, elbows, knees... handpalms and feet?
Body hair?

As basicwiz says; too heavy if you want to make it realy usable.

But a "body" room would certainly be a welcome improvement for some.

This discussion has lost contact all contact with realty so I might as well join in. I wish that Posers's material room would be like Substance Designer.

Oh hell - if we're gonna do that, I want it to finally have a "Make Art" button that works, so that 98% of the user base only needs two UI elements (viewport and the big Make Art button) and only a small menu to load items, save renders, and a scary-looking "Advanced" item that opens the complete UI.

It'd save a lot of time on SM's part...

ROFLMAO 

I was thinking of something more like C4D's Bodypaint, which removes the tedious switching and juggling between aps. like Poser Gimp and uvmapper. See http://www.maxon.net/products/bodypaint-3d/why-this-package.html

It doesn't have to be a fully blown image transformation app, with all bells and whistles, just as long as it does basic editing and manages the images properly, e.g. preserves the original and keeps track of copies. (BTW Gimp 2.0 which has much more power than would be required takes up 34M on my hard drive. Hardly boated)

While we're at it, I would also like support for stereo 3d. I'd love to create stereo animations in Poser.

It may have been mentioned and I missed it, but I would like more ability to customise the UI. Make fonts, tabs & icons bigger (or smaller for those who want to do that too). Some of us have vision problems and aren't getting any younger. ;-)

Quote - Sigh. Why is it so hard to understand that....

#1: Poser is not a PRO application. It's made for and used by hobbyists.

Maybe Smith Micro didn't get the memo, I'm pretty sure the version I use is called Poser Pro 2012.  That, IMHO, entitles me to expect a certain level of usefulness.

Quote - A painting room: Take a look at the size of the code on Gimp or Photoshop. That is what you are asking to be added  into Poser. That's an awful lot of overhead to drag around for functionality that will be used only a tiny percentage of the time. Gimp (The Graphic Image Manipulation Program) is available free and gives you plenty of paint tools to modify your maps.

R

I'd simply like a painting room to be able to mask and blend existing materials, as we are also discussing in another thread.  In your example, you would select two existing skin materials, one with tattoos and one without, and simply use the paint to tool to control which material was applied where.  This can be done to an extent already with the existing material room, but the primary map that controls distribution of materials can't be painted in Poser.  That would be a minimal, but useful, implementation of paint within Poser that would not require a full blown image editor be wedged in.

Yup, that's pretty much what I had in mind. It would be a boon to be able to easily add displacement maps to whatever part of the mesh you fancied.

I find the latest python scripts fix a lot of the poser shortcomings.  The only things I really feel I need are:-

1. a drop to surface command instead of drop to floor

2. ability to have tons of figures in a scene and not get sluggish eg for crowd scenes

3. A camera that can render through walls easily with just a click and a what you see is what you get preview of same.  A bit like hither and yon but for rendering too.

Quote -

1. A camera that can render through walls easily with just a click and a what you see is what you get preview of same.  A bit like hither and yon but for rendering too.

Now THAT would be a nifty feature!

Quote - 3) A camera that can render through walls easily with just a click and a what you see is what you get preview of same.  A bit like hither and yon but for rendering too.

YES!

Quote - > Quote -

1. A camera that can render through walls easily with just a click and a what you see is what you get preview of same.  A bit like hither and yon but for rendering too.

Now THAT would be a nifty feature!

WOW - I'd vote for that as well.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote -

1. A camera that can render through walls easily with just a click and a what you see is what you get preview of same.  A bit like hither and yon but for rendering too.

Now THAT would be a nifty feature!

 

WOW - I'd vote for that as well.

I'm all for Esthers request, but given the enthousiastic reactions to it - you do know that this functionality (accept for preview) is already somewhat available for render? Turn off the visible in camera option for the object and it won't block the camera (and still be visible in reflection and for IDL calculation).

Esthers proposal is much better, but in the mean time turning off the visible in camera option is a bypass

Quote -
I'm all for Esthers request, but given the enthousiastic reactions to it - you do know that this functionality (accept for preview) is already somewhat available for render? Turn off the visible in camera option for the object and it won't block the camera (and still be visible in reflection and for IDL calculation).

Esthers proposal is much better, but in the mean time turning off the visible in camera option is a bypass

 

This does not work if all four walls are modeled as one piece, which is common in a lot of older props and sets.

Quote - Could it maybe work by making anything between a value a and a value b on the camera z-axis invisible? Similar idea to hither and yon I guess... as Esther was saying (at least how I'd interpreted what she said)?

That was exactly what I was thinking!

Quote - > Quote -

I'm all for Esthers request, but given the enthousiastic reactions to it - you do know that this functionality (accept for preview) is already somewhat available for render? Turn off the visible in camera option for the object and it won't block the camera (and still be visible in reflection and for IDL calculation).

Esthers proposal is much better, but in the mean time turning off the visible in camera option is a bypass

 

This does not work if all four walls are modeled as one piece, which is common in a lot of older props and sets.

Yes, that is a limitation. I usually solve it by going into the group editor and creating a new group for that wall and spawning new props for it. But that can be tricky. Having Esthers solution would eliminate that problem. Fortunately most props in the last few years have separate walls and there it will work.

Certainly... I've just been having this very issue with a scene just now... if there was a way of improving this along the lines Esther suggested that would be good.

Your solution sounds better, wimvdb, than my current one though... which was to change the camera angle ;-)

Quote - > Quote - > Quote -

I'm all for Esthers request, but given the enthousiastic reactions to it - you do know that this functionality (accept for preview) is already somewhat available for render? Turn off the visible in camera option for the object and it won't block the camera (and still be visible in reflection and for IDL calculation).

Esthers proposal is much better, but in the mean time turning off the visible in camera option is a bypass

 

This does not work if all four walls are modeled as one piece, which is common in a lot of older props and sets.

Yes, that is a limitation. I usually solve it by going into the group editor and creating a new group for that wall and spawning new props for it. But that can be tricky. Having Esthers solution would eliminate that problem. Fortunately most props in the last few years have separate walls and there it will work.

 

I've been doing this for ages, and the new "view in camera" checkbox in PP2012 is a godsend.  However, while most props do have separate walls, sometimes you still can't get the angle that you want unless you turn off visibility in two adjacent walls -- and most walls are a huge part of the prop, so you're limited in those cases if you don't want to render at least some blank spaces.

Quote - I don't really see much difference in IK vs other apps but I haven't done much with them so I can't really say. 

~Shane

1. There is no IK-FK blending.

2. No animatable/switchable Pivot points that allow rotation around arbitrary points.(->foot-roll)

3. The solver has massive problems with jittering, especially if the chain contains more than 2 bones.

4. No real control for Ik-Chain orientation. (You can use 'side-side' for this, but it doesn`t work reliable)

5. Problems with IK-Chain flipping.

The IK in poser is (in my humble opinion) generally for character posing, not animation.

Doesnt mean you cant use Poser for quality character animation, but it's hard.

all i need from poser is a Genesis like figure..one that it can be a troll and a woman at the same time...one that could have M5's perfect symmetry...

that's the one thing i ask from SM considering Poser...

The display of the inner and outer matspheres keep changing. Usually it is normal but sometimes I get these circles with lines, arrows and rings on them. This makes it much easier to manipulate the spheres. I'm not sure what is making the display change but I wish I could make them display this way always.

Quote - > Quote - I don't really see much difference in IK vs other apps but I haven't done much with them so I can't really say. 

~Shane

1. There is no IK-FK blending.

2. No animatable/switchable Pivot points that allow rotation around arbitrary points.(->foot-roll)

3. The solver has massive problems with jittering, especially if the chain contains more than 2 bones.

4. No real control for Ik-Chain orientation. (You can use 'side-side' for this, but it doesn`t work reliable)

5. Problems with IK-Chain flipping.

 

The IK in poser is (in my humble opinion) generally for character posing, not animation.

Doesnt mean you cant use Poser for quality character animation, but it's hard.

 

What he said.

The Euler flip toggle from Messiah would be a godsend for when you twist things into pretzels. Gizmo's would be nice, and expanding the animation pallette/dopesheet to allow for more work within same would be excellent. Honestly, I'd be tempted to add an 'animation room' to the app, that way those who fear or have no interest in that part of it could ignore it in toto.....and those who don't and do could have a separate  workspace they could configure without futzing around with the memory dots. And maybe a python room, where you could keep multiple scripts with GUI's stored and ready (if possible to do without getting into crash territory).

 But Poser's animation systems =need= some work to make it easier to make motion with....

I am so down with the idea "IK Loops - so we can do tracks, hold objects with 2 hands, airhoses, etc" because I use Poser to animate.

Also, this may be pushing it but any 3d animation company that could build a motion capture system in their software like (IPI mocap desktop) has hit the jackpot in my book.

What Wolf359 said in their first post and...

The entire market now rests on Gen 4 DAZ people who are years old.

How are you going to get brand new customers to buy Poser? Another complicated new advancement they can't figure out on their own - an advancement that is rarely used?

You can no longer depend on DAZ to supply the content base of a person. Poser has to make a 2014 Posette/Dork or die

I wonder just how many people out there have no idea about Poser or 3D as we know it and are yet to discover it.  I doubt if it interests them they would not buy it because it does not have the the latest, greatest, super bendable figure, assuming of course there was any concensous on what the latest, greatest figure was. 

Living in the UK I wish all those who have such an insight into the future would turn their minds to the finacial promlems we have in Europe.  Get that sorted and then we can look at Poser or Daz, safe in the knowledge people will be able to afford anything still on the market.