Quote - The solution is probably a tutorial of how to use the morph brush:) I do not see a solution without them or a third party editing the actual morph.

This is potentially a problem for every morph in genesis
If there is not goinig to be a solution for it, I doubt that many people will use genesis in Poser

Yes maybe it is a bit exagerated. But the whole problem is that exagerated morphs are going to stick out like a sore thumb in poser.

Quote - If that morph looks good with SubD?
Quality control just went on vacation.
No human has knees like that.

A 35 year footbal player after a serious knee injury perhaps.

Yeah Wim, we have another opinion about Poser heaven.

The subdivided mesh works as designed - whether you like the morph is a totally different matter and has nothing to do with quality control

All knees are different - this is just a representation of one of them. To see that, just google knees

Quote - If that morph looks good with SubD?
Quality control just went on vacation.
No human has knees like that.

I agree with the sentiment, but this is a misplaced criticism. You're not supposed to render the control cage. The morph is morphing the control cage, not morphing the mesh.

With Sub-D, a cube (8-vertex) control cage produces a sphere mesh. If you move some of those vertices, you change the shape of the sphere to something else. But at no point do you argue that the cube doesn't look like the ellipse you're trying to make with it. That's just irrational.

Here we have people looking at a control cage, inappropriately, as if it were a mesh and complaining that it doesn't look right.

Exactly! It doesn't look right. It's not being used correctly. It's a control cage, not the actual figure. You can't use it in Poser this way.

Either the exporter needs to export the actual mesh, or we need Sub-D added to Poser.

Does the knee behave when you set the crease angle at 180° on thights and shins, and render with smoothing ON?

That should give +/- the same result as DS?

Quote - > Quote - The solution is probably a tutorial of how to use the morph brush:) I do not see a solution without them or a third party editing the actual morph.

This is potentially a problem for every morph in genesis
If there is not goinig to be a solution for it, I doubt that many people will use genesis in Poser

 

 

Well we will have to compile a list of bad conversion morph areas for starters. S5 knees is definately one of them. If Daz is serious about getting Genesis to work in Poser, maybe they will release a morph fix pack for various characters.

Quote - Does the knee behave when you set the crease angle at 180° on thights and shins, and render with smoothing ON?

That should give +/- the same result as DS?

It will not - it's a control cage for Catmull Clark Subdivision algorithm. Poser cannot render this, just as it cannot render Crysis, even though much of the underlying geometry files have much in common.

Sheesh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Catmull-Clark_subdivision_of_a_cube.svg

Quote - Does the knee behave when you set the crease angle at 180° on thights and shins, and render with smoothing ON?

That should give +/- the same result as DS?

The first picture was with smoothing on and crease angle at 180 for all of the three figures.

But I agree with BB - the exporter should not have exported a mesh which is pretty much identical to the control cage. Let's hope this will be changed

BB

Wim did not show the cage.
He showed the mesh "as is" in DS, and in Poser in his second screengrab.

I showed a exported Genesis mesh, "as is" in Poser as poly distribution reference.

We do not get the cage in Poser.
We only get a exported mesh from DS.

Posers Smoothing and DS SubD have been giving similar rendered "end results" as shown by DAZ in their own forums when Genesis first became exportable to Poser users.

@wimvdb But if that process was to happen, wont it change the way the morphs look? I'm sure they will loose shape in one or more areas.

Quote - BB

Wim did not show the cage.
He showed the mesh "as is" in DS, and in Poser in his second screengrab.

I showed a exported Genesis mesh, "as is" in Poser as poly distribution reference.

We do not get the cage in Poser.
We only get a exported mesh from DS.

Posers Smoothing and DS SubD have been giving similar rendered "end results" as shown by DAZ in their own forums when Genesis first became exportable to Poser users.

Actually I posted both the cage (in ds4) and the mesh

The picture I posted at 7.04pm was rendered with smoohting on and angle 180

And you can see that genesis looks good - the other 2 don't. And they are nowhere near to what they look like in DS4.

Quote - @wimvdb But if that process was to happen, wont it change the way the morphs look? I'm sure they will loose shape in one or more areas.

No, I don't think so, the morphs will be more like they were designed. Normally you would design the morphs with a higher subdivision level and scale down to 0 or 1 for export. So the higher resolution would be more towards the design as the low level

On the left knee the 3 red circle points that are too far forward.

On the right knee, the uneven poly distribution cause the bad morph.
Compare the sizes of the RED and the Green poly's.

Bad morph, period.
No Smoothing or SubD can ever change that.

Quote - No Smoothing or SubD can ever change that.

Sorry - smoothing can't change it, but SubD can and does.

Vilters you seem to refuse to understand SubD. This is important:

The mesh DOES NOT pass through the points of the control cage. The control cage points are like magnets. They attract the mesh, but do not define where the mesh is. They defines points of influence on the mesh.

To get a knee cap, you have to deviate the control points exactly as that images shows them.

In Poser smoothing, the mesh does pass through the original points.

It's a key and important difference, and if you can't accept it, then you're going to remain very confused by the discussion.

We do not get the cage, we do not get the magnets, we get a mesh and that is all.

Updated Wims screengrab.

I colored all concerned poly's here.
The reds are too large, the greens are too small.

The blue points are too far forward.

If, and I say, IF, the yellow points had been morphed also, there would never have been a problem in the first place.

Well, I appreciate what you're saying, but I think we're having a communication difficulty, not a difficulty with the mesh.

What I'm saying - the exporter is doing something stupid.

What you're saying - the morph sucks.

To be honest, I am basing my argument on first principles, rather than direct evidence. I cannot be bothered with launching DS4, even though I got it for free.

I will bow out because I am honestly not able to examine the evidence myself - only what you guys present me here.

Addendum: I keep trying to unsubscribe from this thread because it is a major time sucker and I literally cannot afford the time.

Everybody - shut up.

The cage is, or can be, a mesh itself, which can be in OBJ or whatever format, and you build a SubD cage with, usually, exactly the same tools as you build a model that is going to be used directly - it's question of what is done with that mesh that makes it a SubD cage, not that it's some other kind of thing in itself.

Paloth - Thanks for that, I thought I understod what BB was saying and you post explains it well.  It does however make me wonder about Daz's definition of 'Poser Heaven'

Ok, let's make things more complicated.

I did some more tests here. DS4 has 2 resolutions Base and High res. It has also div level 0, 1 and 2. The instructions say to choose High-res and Sublevel 0.

So I exported both the base and the high-res version of the figure and both are identical in Poser. They are NOT indentical in DS4s viewport. The exported mesh most closely resembles the base version at level 0 - And - -if BB is right - that is the control cage. The High-res version with level 0 does not have the sharp edges and would have looked much better in Poser.

So may be this is just a bug in the exporter using the wrong version of Genesis

Has anyone used the exporter in DS4.5?

Quote - The cage is, or can be, a mesh itself, which can be in OBJ or whatever format, and you build a SubD cage with, usually, exactly the same tools as you build a model that is going to be used directly - it's question of what is done with that mesh that makes it a SubD cage, not that it's some other kind of thing in itself.

Fanf***ingtastic point. Thank you. Brilliant. I should have said this.

@ meatSim the one hour a day hobbyist need pros to make stuff for them.

If your a pro are you gong to work for "V4" or "V5" ?

Gentlemen, and I mean that is the most friendly way. Honestly I do.

I
DO
NOT
CARE !

The end result in Poser SUCKS. :-(

All this is mathematically completely correct.
And you are all 100% correct.
But the end result for Poser users SUCKS!

If this is the future?
If this is what SubD brings???
I'd rather not see it in Poser.
Thank you.

@ Paloth
Again, mathematically 100% correct.
That is why I set Posers Smoothing to 180° crease angle and render with Smoothing ON.

If that does not solve the problem? 
The problem lays deeper. As is in this case.

I was just about to ask vilters if he's ever used Blender. The lattice works much like what's been described. Not the mesh but a sort of mesh that attracts points (magnet like) in the underlying mesh. It's used to change the mesh without actually destroying the original. When the lattice is removed or turned off the mesh returns to normal.

Laurie

Vilters,

If you listen to an MP3 file as if it was a .WAV file, it will sound like totally shit.

That does not mean that MP3 is a shit format.

It means it's not a WAV file.

That's all. MP3 is awesome. It's the equivalent to your low-poly holy grail, only with sound.

So is Sub-D.

Poser doesn't suck! Genesis wasn't made FOR Poser, so why does Poser suck because something that was made for another program doesn't work in it? That's just stupid.

I should be pissed that I can't use my Oster Blender blades in my Cuisinart Food Processor. Or my VHS tapes in my DVD player. See how assinine that is?

Laurie

Quote - Poser doesn't suck! Genesis wasn't made FOR Poser, so why does Poser suck because something that was made for another program doesn't work in it? That's just stupid.

I should be pissed that I can't use my Oster Blender blades in my Cuisinart Food Processor. Or my VHS tapes in my DVD player. See how assinine that is?

Laurie

Damn, I knew I was doing something wrong, what else do my Oster Blender blades work in or have I wasted my money.

The format can be good, if it is correctly applied.

The cage does not do what it is supposed to be doing.
Or there is a problem with the cage.

The blue points are moved too far forwards.
And the yellow ponts are forgotten in the operation.

=> Creating the uneven poly distribution => Thus creating the problem.

Why did that happen?
THAT should be investigated.

Jeez its just S5 knees that proved problematic. The rest of the Genepool are ok.:)

And that's Poser's fault? Sounds like something that's supposed to be exported from DS isn't exporting. Hardly Poser's problem.

Laurie

In 1999 there was a $60 plug that gave truespace sub dividable meshes.

Maybe poser could get that plug.

Quote - Jeez its just S5 knees that proved problematic. The rest of the Genepool are ok.:)

No they aren't. There are more of these problems in other areas and with V5 and M5 morphs as well. But as I said - I think the wrong object is being exported

Correct laurieA

It is an exported problem and NOT a Poser problem at all.
Poser reads the exported mesh correctly as it is exported.

The problem is in how the mesh was created, morphed, and or exported from DS.

Like any other morph.
You can do a "hard" select. Selecting only one point, one edge, or one poly.
Or you can do a soft select of vertices, edges, or polys within a certain fall off zone.

Or the morph was created with a hard setting?
It certainly was not created with a soft setting because in that case the yellow vertices would have moved also. => Problem gone.

Or the fall off zone was set too narrow?

Is the horse dead yet, poeple?

No. Some sick bastard keeps reviving it. It wants to die..

And Lord knows, I want it out of MY misery!

Quote - Is the horse dead yet, poeple?

Apparently not.......

LOL. Give it a few more posts, then shoot it in the head if there is no hope.

Quote - Is the horse dead yet, poeple?

I think I hear a "Neigh!"

Quote - > Quote - Is the horse dead yet, poeple?

I think I hear a "Neigh!"

Oh, BOOOOOOOO. (I should have heard that one coming a mile off. Damn, but I'm getting old and slow!)

@Basicwiz

Sir, with all respect, 
I see this as a "HARD" but very to the point discussion.
And I highly valued every opinion posted so far.

Best regards
Tony

Still, if the only outcome of this conversation is the discovery that the CR2 converter is not exporting properly, then it's been worthwhile. I think that may be worthy of further investigation.

I did not see a problem apart from the usual noise

Tony,

My point in asking was not that the discussion was not worthwhile... simply that the same things are being said over and over and over and the concepts are not being understood.

I agree that we have discovered a very valuable peice of information, via BB's discuusiion of what the exported mesh actually is. Nowe the question becomes "What can we do to change this?" I see THAT as being the productive path in furtherance of the thread.

$.02, no problems and fouls.

Maybe the base resolution mesh in poser may also explain some of the pokethrough issues.

I'm not following, wimvdb... how so?

There are smoothing scripts available in Poser that can "average" a morph for those not wanting to use the Morph Brush to do it manually.

Of course the best solution would be to fix the exporter so that we would get the actual SubD mesh and not just the cage.

(Or even better, if we could get a fully functional SubD 1 mesh, as morph transfers between different Subs of the same mesh are no problem at all for Poser.)

Wim??
RIGHT, completely correct.

I also had this happen in the cloth room.

When you render at crease angle 180° and Smooting ON, and have a thight fitting clothing fitted, that fits perfectly close to the figure in preview?

Well, at render time the figure comes poking through because of the calculated Smoothing can round out the figure mesh into the clothing.

I even send an example of this happning to SM.

Smoothing rounds out sharp corners.

Understand. Have had this happen as well.