ok we get it. you've posted this five times now...

Quote - And.....let's go for 5. Do you pride yourself on littering posts of a different topic with your stuff? CYNTHIA is the name. ;) Got a render? I do like your image, but...different thread dude....you can start your own for free last time I checked ;).

Laurie

We were arguing as to the merits of texture vs geometry!  Or did you miss that part!

Then someone insisted that I prove that I know something about modeling?  For some reason my post got uploade multiple times because of the bmp I inclosed.  Only after I converted it to a jpeg did it finally load.  As for all the rest, it is usual to draw on diverse fields of experience when engaged in debate!

Oh, arguing was what it was...gotcha.

Any Cynthia renders? Get it back on track? Critiques? Remaps? We're talkin Cynthia now... ;)

Laurie

well Hoadley I looked at you modeling. a good start on the house, I'll be interested to see it when it's completed and the textures applied. as to the ship, I cannot comment since thats a wireframe mess with no details visible..

*now back to the point of this thread.

BTW, BVH is still working on the Cynthia figure, right? It's not finished?

Laurie

Quote - Oh, arguing was what it was...gotcha.

Any Cynthia renders? Get it back on track? Critiques? Remaps? We're talkin Cynthia now... ;)

Laurie

Yes, we started out with a discussion as to whether Cynthia's vagina had been authentically modelled!  I said that the actual modelling could be less than perfect if it had  good texturing to make up for it!

Others rather heatedly disagreed with me, to which I responded with some personal examples of some less than perfect modelled figurs that had been vastly improved by some really good textures!

After this, someone else insisted that I prove that I knew something, anything at all, about modelling.  To this, I endeavored to respond with some examples of articulated figures that I have modellee from scratch!

 Followiing this, a certain BMP file hanged my post such, that it eventually uploaded 5 times!  And that's the whole story!!

dph

I seem to remember some talk about money and what not for a remap for an unrelated figure, but oh well ;) I'm gonna go back to ignoring you now ;).

Will BVH be making any regular clothes for the figure? I know he doesn't really do regular but one can dream ;). Maybe I can shoot him an email and ask about the ankles too. Maybe he's not gotten that far yet.

Laurie

And I still say that a good texture will hide the percieved flaws of the Clitoris and the Labia Minora, etc.!

Quote - I seem to remember some talk about money and what not for a remap for an unrelated figure, but oh well ;) I'm gonna go back to ignoring you now ;).

Will BVH be making any regular clothes for the figure? I know he doesn't really do regular but one can dream ;). Maybe I can shoot him an email and ask about the ankles too. Maybe he's not gotten that far yet.

Laurie

That was in a different thread, about my V3 remap of Judy!  And no, I didn't start the discoussion of my models here, others did!  

Quote - People look at different things. I thought the ankles looked fine. They didn't bother me at all. But now I see it.

Whoops! Sorry

Quote - > Quote - I seem to remember some talk about money and what not for a remap for an unrelated figure, but oh well ;) I'm gonna go back to ignoring you now ;).

Will BVH be making any regular clothes for the figure? I know he doesn't really do regular but one can dream ;). Maybe I can shoot him an email and ask about the ankles too. Maybe he's not gotten that far yet.

Laurie

That was in a different thread, about my V3 remap of Judy!  And no, I didn't start the discoussion of my models here, others did!  

I stand corrected - you're right. I apologize. On with the discussion ;).

Laurie

I wasn't intending to start a page long debate here. I just am a strong believer in form. I may not always get it right myself but I do believe it is just as important, if not more so, than textures. That said, let's just all agree to disagree and get back on topic. 

I'm not the market for Cynthia but I am excited that she exists. Any new figure is a welcome figure as far as I''m concerned. I hope she does well and I look forward to seeing more of her. :D

Well, there's a quick and easy way to see if textures are more important than form.

What's that new Blackhearted morph for one of the Poser figures?  Anastasia, right?

Now, if I remember, the base model which Gabe reworked was totally fucking butt ugly before, right?  But, following the logic of the "All you need is a good texture argument", you should be able to put the BH Anastasia texture on the original, untouched base model and it will suddenly look astonishingly beautiful, right?

Yeah, thought not.  I think that's 1-0 to the Form team.  :) 

Quote - Well, there's a quick and easy way to see if textures are more important than form.

What's that new Blackhearted morph for one of the Poser figures?  Anastasia, right?

Now, if I remember, the base model which Gabe reworked was totally fucking butt ugly before, right?  But, following the logic of the "All you need is a good texture argument", you should be able to put the BH Anastasia texture on the original, untouched base model and it will suddenly look astonishingly beautiful, right?

Yeah, thought not.  I think that's 1-0 to the Form team.  :) 

LMAO. Hard to argue with that.

I don't know about you guys, but I think both the texture AND the mesh are pretty important. 

Ok guys, really, let's just let it go and move back on topic. (A flashback from my old mod days kicking in)

I think there's some aesthetic areas that Cynthia could improve on. Mostly the thickness of the fingers and the short neck. I think extending the neck a little more is in order but maybe that's more a personal taste thing.

Also....and I can't believe I'm saying this....her breasts need to be rounder. Not bigger, not more or less full, not smaller  - just the curve needs to be rounder. If you look at the shot of her sitting on the moon with her arm raised, the shape of the breast has an odd flat angle to it.  In addition, her ankles and feet lack definition.  She will probably be great once she's completely finished but for now anyway, she still has some room to improve. 

Correct, Cynthia is not finished. I don't know what her default texture will be like. BVH made some useful normal clothing for his Angela and Joshua figures (not just the fetish stuff but a business suit and lab coat). That's no problem though, I have Blender and Marvelous Designer and I can make my own.  I can even make a skin texture that suits my purposes. I don't need anything hyper-realistic. In a graphic novel, the final image is quite small, so I only need a moderate level of detail. And whether she has anatomically perfect genitals or not is of no consequence to me. I don't like the way the very low-poly figures bend at the knees and elbows. And I don't like the blocky look I get when I try and put an expression on a low-poly figure's face or when I change the face in the face room and it comes out looking like a cubist cartoon.

Modelling organic shapes is very difficult and different from modelling buildings or mechanical objects. I have huge respect for anyone that can model a semblance of a human figure, and I think the Baron has done very well. Even if he leaves the ankles as they are, I still like her.

I have used the original Alyson more than I have used Anastasia. She is not pretty, but she is versatile and useful.

Yup, as Teyon says, any additional choice of figures is a bonus in my book.

I look forward to seeing how Cynthia develops...

...I hope she'll end up robust enough to withstand decapitation by Vilters too. LOL :lol:

If not, I feel some guillotining renders coming on...

Quote - > Quote - Well, there's a quick and easy way to see if textures are more important than form.

What's that new Blackhearted morph for one of the Poser figures?  Anastasia, right?

Now, if I remember, the base model which Gabe reworked was totally fucking butt ugly before, right?  But, following the logic of the "All you need is a good texture argument", you should be able to put the BH Anastasia texture on the original, untouched base model and it will suddenly look astonishingly beautiful, right?

Yeah, thought not.  I think that's 1-0 to the Form team.  :) 

LMAO. Hard to argue with that.

Good call

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Well, there's a quick and easy way to see if textures are more important than form.

What's that new Blackhearted morph for one of the Poser figures?  Anastasia, right?

Now, if I remember, the base model which Gabe reworked was totally fucking butt ugly before, right?  But, following the logic of the "All you need is a good texture argument", you should be able to put the BH Anastasia texture on the original, untouched base model and it will suddenly look astonishingly beautiful, right?

Yeah, thought not.  I think that's 1-0 to the Form team.  :) 

LMAO. Hard to argue with that.

Good call

So, what you all are saying is that by my remapping of Posette and Judy to take V3 textures, nothing was improved at all, by the improvement of texture quality!

Is it me who's crazy, or is it you guys!?

dph

Nobody's saying that.

Quote - So, what you all are saying is that by my remapping of Posette and Judy to take V3 textures, nothing was improved at all, by the improvement of texture quality!

Is it me who's crazy, or is it you guys!?

dph

Not at all... well, maybe we're all crazy? :lol: (I can only vouch for myself there of course)

But there's clearly a big improvement as a result of your remapping dph

IMHO both texture and mesh are likely equally important aspects... but that's just my view of course...

...and I think this raises a good point around any new figures too.

They surely need a pretty darn healthy supply of good quality textures in order to stand a chance of a good level of uptake?

It's lack of decent skin textures to choose from that will limit how much I use any figure... ultimately... I reckon.

Quote - ...and I think this raises a good point around any new figures too.

They surely need a pretty darn healthy supply of good quality textures in order to stand a chance of a good level of uptake?

It's lack of decent skin textures to choose from that will limit how much I use any figure... ultimately... I reckon.

Which is why I made a FREE remap of Antonia for V3 textures.  Anyone wishing to use Antonia and has a large archive of V3 textures can now do so.

So it goes without saying that any creator who wants his fugure to succeed should make some variation of it that is Texture Compliant with some popular figure!  That way he can tap in on some already extant resource!

dph

"So, what you all are saying is that by my remapping of Posette and Judy to take V3 textures, nothing was improved at all, by the improvement of texture quality!"

Higher quality textures definitely improve the figure's appearance in many cases. OTOH, depending on the pose etc. they can't make up for the shortcomings in terms of bending etc. At some point, improved textures are going to yield diminishing returns on a 'less sophisticated' mesh. Putting a big bore V8 in your Yugo will make it go faster, but at some point the suspension, tires etc. will become more important than the powerplant. I have no doubt that you could create a texture for a single polygon that would maybe look like realistic genitals from one angle, not too close up, on a good day if you squint. No texture IMO is going to make a lo rez stub geometry look real from a variety of angles, body poses, morphs etc.

It's important not to shortchange either one. Even the best female genital options usually suffer from what seems to be rather rudimentary texturing. Part of the problem may be a lack of free resources in that area - it would take some serious hand painting skills. I'm no texture or mapping person but it seems to me that the  features would need to be separated with the labia minora, mons and perhaps other features being separate on the map.

Quote - So it goes without saying that any creator who wants his fugure to succeed should make some variation of it that is Texture Compliant with some popular figure!  That way he can tap in on some already extant resource!

dph

This sounds like a reasonable premise to me certainly. I have no notion at present of the technicalities involved here... but...

...personally, I have mostly V4 and M4 textures.

If any new figure I get accepts those textures via an alternative UV mapping for it, then that would certainly garner that figure a lot more usage from me... at least until I develop some more skill painting my own textures, I guess...

...or unless the new figure actually came with a hefty amount of skins available for it.

Cheers

Quote - So it goes without saying that any creator who wants his fugure to succeed should make some variation of it that is Texture Compliant with some popular figure!  That way he can tap in on some already extant resource!

dph

Yes. I think you have hit upon one of the major stumbling blocks for new figure acceptance. We can convert clothes, once Xdresser or WW provides the plugin, but textures are another story entirely.

It is not only the static geometry that is important, but also the ability of the mesh to support morphs. It is possible to get a few expressions from a low poly figure (Posette for instance), but it takes a lot of fiddling and I tend to give up and use a figure with more polygons and better morphs. Morphing should be easy, that is what Poser is about. Here is where Vilters's requirement for polygon distribution becomes important - the face needs a lot of them - other areas can be sparser, but not the face. The topology must also be good, with loops in the right places to shape the face naturally.

With 3d programs that allow one to paint directly on the mesh - or project photographic images onto the mesh, I think it has become much easier to produce skin textures for 3d figures. I hope that a wide variety of textures for the new figures will become available. I am not really in the market to buy skin textures, but I share what I make.

Sorry 'bout this, Teyon; I've been misunderstood so I need to clear it up.  This is the last I'll say on the subject.  In this thread.  :) 

All I'm saying is, a great texture on a manky mesh is the same as putting lipstick on a walrus and expecting it to look like Nigella Lawson.

As for Posette - the model is basically decent to start with - apart from the bending - and accepts morphs quite well.

Judy with V3 textures is still a damn ugly model with great textures but with the right morphs, it can look great.

A lousy texture on a great model doesn't detract as much as you'd expect, although it certainly doesn't enhance it.  A surface, contrary to my buddy Vilters' assertion, is, IMO more than just the textures applied.  It's the angles, planes, folds, bends and curves plus the texture. 

She has a pretty face. I guess she looks alright. She shows her resolution tho when you really look at her facial profile. Her navel is really high on her stomach, but she has pretty ankles at least. No idea how she morphs tho. If you're posting it, I'm sure it's low res...lol. The thread really is about Cynthia tho ;).

Laurie

Quote -
Why continue with obsolete limitations ????????????

Poser can handle 8192x8192 textures with ease. My personal standard.
Need more room?
Poser can handle 16K textures with ease. => need RAM

ONE single texture map; is user friendly, is content creator friendly, is material room friendly.

one single map is full body normal map/displacement map friendly.

people have asked 'why dont we see full body displacement maps?'.  this is why.

the simple answer is that doing a full body displacement map with the body textures split up into 4 different maps is a nightmare, and noone wants to bother. im not even going to get into the superfluous seams that people are putting in their UV mappings these days.

despite all the BS that has come from Daz lately, people are are still following them like sheep and letting them set the standard. so now everyone splits their limbs onto a separate map.

im hoping for a utility that allows swapping in a new UV mapping on a figure without having to do any crazy .pcf encoded .obj distributions. then people could go on making whatever inefficient UV mappings they wanted, and if a texturer wanted to they could simply re-UV map the object and distribute the .uvs with an 'injection' script. they and other merchants could call those new .uvs with a readscript in their MAT pose -- it would swap out the object .uvs for the new ones and then load the textures/shaders.

either that or it would be much easier if people could just get with the program and stop making a dozen different maps for one figure.

This is what I call poly distribution.

LauriA, I can hardly believe you like her as she has :

In grand total.
Including taxes.
The whole of exactly 6.300 poly's.

And all of her expressions can be seen at
Ever 3.2.9 at turbosquid.

Expressions are here if the link works. Preview available at 2800x2800.
http://www.turbosquid.com/HDView/index.cfm/ID/536626/r/2/i/14

@ BH

I am fully with you on single map figures.

See how Eve is mapped??? :-)

That is what I call a Map too.
I have been experimenting lots lately on single mapped figures at 8192x8192 and it is like a new world going open.

Now try to get SM to go single map..............................

it is a material room Godsend to work single map too.

Quote - This is what I call poly edge flow.

This is what I call poly distribution.

LauriA, I can hardly believe you like her as she has :

In grand total.
Including taxes.
The whole of exactly 6.300 poly's.

And all of her expressions can be seen at
Ever 3.2.9 at turbosquid.

Expressions are here if the link works. Preview available at 2800x2800.
http://www.turbosquid.com/HDView/index.cfm/ID/536626/r/2/i/14

That looks to me like it's a 3ds Max figure!  Max hates high poly figures, and uses various methods to get very good results from very low poly figures!  However, Poser unfortunately isn't built that way!

And, since she's being sold by Turbosquid, anyone who wishes to buy her will need to take out a 2nd mortgage!

its far too low poly for rendering work.

vilters, answer a question for me....

V1 and V2 were 30,000 polys and were released in 1999 and 2001 respectively.
V3 is 75,000 polys and was released in 2003.

most of us in that era were on slowass single-core CPUs not even reaching 1 gigaflop, with 128mb of RAM - 192 or 256 if we were lucky.

we are now sitting on quad, six and eight-core 64-bit processors that would qualify as supercomputers in the Vicky 1 era.  ive seen 16GB of DDR3 for $65 shipped.  4GB is pretty much the min. standard nowadays. i can squeeze over 70 gigaflops out of my overclocked Phenom II X6 and many would consider it a budget processor.

drumroll
so.. heres the million dollar question...

why on earth would i suddenly want a 6000 polygon figure in 2012, when i have 50x the processing power and memory i had back when i was rendering 30-75k poly figures without incident?

and whats the point of struggling with a pathetically low-poly figure to try and fake detail via hi-res textures and displacement maps when it would likely use lower resources to just up the polycount of the base mesh instead?

i understand your passion is low-res figures. and thats great:  low-poly modeling is an art in itself. but campaigning for us all to move to sub 15k poly figures in 2012 when weve been rendering 75k poly base figures for a decade on much slower hardware is absurd.  not to mention most clothing modelers dont even care about polycount or mesh optimization at all. what is the point of a 6k poly base mesh when youre loading 200-300k polys of clothing onto it?

i follow what you are doing with interest, and respect what you do, however you need to realize that you are way way out on the fringes with this ultra-low-poly obsession of yours :)

Does 'lipstick on a pig' come to anyones mind when we are talking about great textures on craptastic models?

@BH

Computing power was never a problem here.

What IS the problem is Poly pollution.

Everybody is building Lo Poly figures (all figures start Lo Poly).
And then subdividing and subdividing because Poly count sells.

Poly count sells.

Poly edge flow and or poly distribution do not sell.

While a good mesh does not NEED all that poly count.
It is a good mesh. Period.

Hang a good texture on a good mesh, and I do not care for Polycount, as it does not need it.

When I see 10 Poly edge loops between breasts or between the buttocks?
 I know what time it is.
Time to move on.

If the builder does not care to clean up his/her mesh after subdivision?  I do not care to buy it.

I am a fierce believer of Poly distibution.
My hair comes up when I see Poly count being used as a sales argument.

It is NOT.
And never will be.

Quote - Does 'lipstick on a pig' come to anyones mind when we are talking about great textures on craptastic models?

As a Jew and an Israeli, I prefer to say 'eyeliner on a camel!'  Especially condsidering the lustrous eyelashes that camels have!!

And on a side note for those that do not know me.

I have nothing against Hi Poly.
Let that be clear once and for all.

But Hi Poly HAS to be justified with topology.

If you buid Hi Poly?

Then USE THEM; But respect Poly distibution.

Nobody needs 30.000 poly inner mouths.
Nobody needs 5.000 poly ears, navel area's.

If you subdivide? Clean your mesh afterwards.

Happy Posering.
Tony

So out of the box, are the vickies, especially Vicky 2&3! Vicky 2 unmorphed is butt ugly! However, with the Daz juggernaut supporting her, she caught on! People made morphs, push button characters, and numerous textures for her!

So is the same with Judy! However, with good Textures, and the care of loving hands like ken1, we have the following: Ken1's JudyV3 Liliana standing next to out of the Box Vicky2V3.

What is initially 'Butt Ugly' isn't neccessarilly doomed to stay that way!

Quote - And on a side note for those that do not know me.

I have nothing against Hi Poly.
Let that be clear once and for all.

But Hi Poly HAS to be justified with topology.

If you buid Hi Poly?

Then USE THEM; But respect Poly distibution.

Nobody needs 30.000 poly inner mouths.
Nobody needs 5.000 poly ears, navel area's.

If you subdivide? Clean your mesh afterwards.

Happy Posering.
Tony

When I remapped V4, I was outraged to discover that she had something like 300 polys between each of her toes!  Who needs that many polys between toes, except maybe a foot feteshist!

However, with my further studies of modeling in my 3ds Max course, I discovered something interesting!  If I take the 17K poly V4 in the free version of Daz Studio, import the object into 3ds Studio Max, and then apply the Turbo Smooth modifier, it ends up with the EXACT SAME MESH as the marketed version of V4.  

In other words, V4 started out as a nice little compact mesh, and then was indiscrimatel y modified with a  trubo smooth modifier!

Speaking of deformed vaginas.  lol.  I think you forgot to close that before you stood her back up.

ohhh em gee

Quote - Speaking of deformed vaginas.  lol.  I think you forgot to close that before you stood her back up.

ohhh em gee

Argue that point with Ken1, not with me!  And what has standing up got to do with it?  She's not a statue!  But, frankly, I happen to like her that way!

dph

Quote - @ BH

I am fully with you on single map figures.

See how Eve is mapped??? :-)

That is what I call a Map too.
I have been experimenting lots lately on single mapped figures at 8192x8192 and it is like a new world going open.

Now try to get SM to go single map..............................

it is a material room Godsend to work single map too.

We've done single maps for chracters and creatures in the past. Just pointing that out. Maybe they aren't the characters or creatures that get the spotlight but it's not like putting things on a single map is not something we're capable of or have done in the past.

:scared: oh.

Yes david..
As I wrote before :
All figures start Lo Poly and then they are demolished by SubD.
Few clean up the mess afterwards.

@Teyon
Yes sir I know.

I only use single map figures. :-)

In grand total.
Including taxes.
The whole of exactly 6.300 poly's

Regarding Eva, it is deceptive to declare that she is 6300 polys when she has clearly been subdivided into god knows how many tens of thousands of polys. Even the wire frame reveals this is happening. How often have you seen a polygon with smoothly curved edges?

What some have mistaken for “low poly” is actually a cage that accesses a gazillion polygons indirectly.

.