I wanted to try setting up a figure with the shoulders down at 45 degrees to see if there could be better shoulder deformations over a wider range of movements. While I was at it, I decided to twist the shoulders out 45 degrees and bend the forearms as well. I exported the posed figure from Poser and sculpted improvements in Zbrush. The finished result was imported into Poser as a morph.

With the figure posed and the morph activated, I exported the obj. Then imported the obj, in a new scene and brought it into the Setup Room, loading a skeleton from a previous, T posed version.

Not having done this sort of thing before, I assumed that it would simply be a matter of rotating the skeleton’s shoulders and forearms to match the new pose. Unfortunately, strange things happened. The dials did not bring the skeleton’s arms to where they should be. While it is possible to set this up manually by moving the bones and joints, this would entail redoing the fingers, which is something I really wanted to avoid.

Is there a way to do this with the dials in the Setup Room? Does anyone know why posing a skeleton with dialed values in the Setup Room doesn’t fit the pose of the figure?

Kim Goosens did something similar with Girl. The problem is, its a nightmare to make clothing for, because sleevesm pant legs and shoes all need to be modelled rotated to accomodate the default figure obj.

Many people refused to even make clothing for her as a result, because it was twice the amount of work.

The problem is, its a nightmare to make clothing for, because sleevesm pant legs and shoes all need to be modelled rotated to accomodate the default figure obj.

I didn't consider that. The twist definitely would be a problem. Where do you stand on an arms down at 45 degrees default?

Honestly? The reason people model figures in a T position is to make clothing and accessories easier. You have to also consider morph creation as well. Trying to do things like that with a non standard posed mesh is a huge pain in the rump.

Thats why all video game models are also modeled in a T pose.

With the rigging advanced features we have now and proper grouping, theres no good reason why you can't get a model to pose well, other than not wanting to learn the tools we already have available.

It's not really a problem if you have an app with decent rigging. eg in the app I use (Softimage) I could model in the 45 degree pose, rig it like that, then pose the rig to a T-Pose and set it as the new default/neutral pose (so that all rotations are zeroed out) Everything I make after this, clothing, JCMs etc will all reference the neutral pose and work just as if I had modelled in the T-Pose to begin with, giving you the best of both worlds.

Of course Poser's rigging is basic at best so you can only do so much.

With the rigging advanced features we have now and proper grouping, theres no good reason why you can't get a model to pose well, other than not wanting to learn the tools we already have available.

Without throwing anyone under the bus, it seems that the professional standard for "posing well" these days sometimes involves unnatural mesh distortions, particularly in the shoulder area. It would take the combined efforts of Snarly Gribbly and colorcurvature to produce a script that could help solve this with "3 dimensional JCMs." I hope that happens.

Of course Poser's rigging is basic at best so you can only do so much.

I'm still surprised on occasions by how the weightmapping behaves. I've been chipping away at this project off and on for the last two years without ever being satisfied with the results. Then I play with other Poser figures and realize that they have some of the same problems. 

Everyone was raving about how well antonia's bending was. I know she bends a hell of a lot better than I do.. LOL!

You also have to consider what the final goal of a render is. 90% of the time, figures are clothed in some fashion, and if they are, bending in many joints becomes a non issue, because you can't see them anyway.

You all are certainly free to express your opinions and I am not hinting otherwise...but if the original model was rigged with the arms at 45 then nothing would have to be "accounted for", you are modeling around the default stance...45 degrees. Because some might have a different opinion doesn't mean they don't want to "learn the tools available", maybe they are thinking outside the box and trying to push development.

Suggestions and new thoughts either fail or prosper, but to try something new shouldn't be lessened becase it's new. imo

I'm going to try another version with just the arms at a 45 degrees default. I doubt that anyone except "Paloth" will be making costumes for this figure even if the arms are straight to the sides. As for Walk Designer, there are only a handful of Poser animators and I’ m not one of them.

I'd love to se it when you're ready Paloth.

This will be a good experiment Paloth. You may want to rig 2 versions with 2 different base obj's to see how the shoulders look side by side with the same pose. Sorry, don't mean to come off as it's easy for me to add work to your day(s)...just an idea is all.

Quote - You all are certainly free to express your opinions and I am not hinting otherwise...but if the original model was rigged with the arms at 45 then nothing would have to be "accounted for", you are modeling around the default stance...45 degrees. Because some might have a different opinion doesn't mean they don't want to "learn the tools available", maybe they are thinking outside the box and trying to push development.

Suggestions and new thoughts either fail or prosper, but to try something new shouldn't be lessened becase it's new. imo

If it WAS actually new. Girl was released how many years ago now, 3-5? I would say using the new falloff zones on a standard figure would actually be more "new experimentation" then revisiting something that many pointed out as a technique which created more problems then it solved.

Or creating new unique grouping to enhance posability. No one for instance has ever released a figure with dual palm groups so hands could be curled, as in real life.

Wasn't "The Girl" posed with the arms down and twisted out? This would certainly cause problems with costumes, but mainly because of the twist out. My workflow doesn't suggest that it would be more difficult making a costume with arms down at 45 degrees. Modo has lots of action centers to chose from and you can set workplanes to selections. As for morphs, I don't understand why these would be troublesome. The arms would be closer to the body, but you could still get at them. I've managed tighter poses in Zbrush. It's possible that the FBMs might even pose better.

On the other hand, this may just lead to another failure. This isn't an experiment to advance Poser. It's an experiment aimed at getting my figure's shoulders to bend properly. I'd use stone knives and bearskins if that would work.

A two part grouping for the palm is something that I've considered, having noticed how my hand actually bends.

I applaude your effort your Paloth.

I'd love to se it when you're ready Paloth.

Thanks for your interest, ToxicWolf. I thought I'd be finished well before year's end, but now I'm not so sure.

*I applaude your effort your Paloth. *

Thanks for your support, DarkEdge. Oh, and thanks in advance to ****Gareee for attempting to warn me away from this in case if it doesn't work for me. 

Thuis is for when the figure was rigged from a t-pose, correct?

Yes. This has the t default pose.

I seriously don't understand.

There is no way to rig a realistic looking shoulder without a JCM.

The only problem left with Poser rigging is an "only if" functionality to automatically add a third JCM to two other JCMs:

1.If arm side-side +50, add JCM-1 at +50.

1. If arm up-down +50, add JCM-2 at +50.

2. If arm side-side +50 AND arm up-down +50, add JCM-1 +50, JCM-2 +50 AND JCM-3 +50.

So, as an "up-down" JCM can mess up a "side-side" JCM, one simply creates a third "blender" JCM that is manually dialed when necessary.

(Or you create a mor-pose that not only poses the figure but also adds the necessary JCM morphs. I'm doing this for several years, btw.)

Once SnarlyGribbly manages to turn ColorCurvator's "3D-JCM" code into a proper GUI, we will be able to automatically blend as many JCMs as we want.

But as I said, even without it, there is absolutely no need for fancy "rigging trickery", as you already can do whatever is needed to make joints look exactly the way you want.

You just have to spend 5 seconds applying the necessary blender JCMs manually for certain poses.

(Or simply do a few strokes with the morphbrush.) ;-)

So, as an "up-down" JCM can mess up a "side-side" JCM, one simply creates a third "blender" JCM that is manually dialed when necessary.

• That would work, of course, but it is a makeshift solution. Ideally, this sort of thing should be built into the figure. An end user might find it nettlesome to have to locate and apply a bunch of corrective blenders manually instead of simply using the dials and pose tools. If Snarly Gribbly comes through with the GUI for colorcurvature's script, it will be a revolutionary breakthrough for quality bending.

In the meantime, I will continue to work for the best bending that I can get with the current technology. I'm wondering if a combination of weightmaps, JCMs and an “arms down 45 degrees” default would produce a wider range of natural bending. It is a rare event when human arms are pointed straight out to the sides and rarer still when arms are lifted above the head.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to test this for a while. I've made a revision to the default figure that changed the vertex count and I will need to salvage and transfer all of the head morphs to the new version.

Apollo had his arms down at 45 degrees instead of the old T-Pose.  You might take a look at him.  Compared to M3, I always felt like he bent much more naturally.  It was also nice to make clothing for him, as it didn't require a JCM to avoid bolder shoulders when the arms were down (something M4 and even some Genesis stuff might still need). Draping things on him as a part of the modeling process was also nice, as you got much more natural fits with his arms down at 45, you could then rig the draped clothing and retain much of that natural detail.

Apollo 2005, indeed, has an “arms down at 45 degrees” default. (The arms are also twisted out from the body. (I wonder if this is older than "The Girl.")

Did you have any difficulties with the arm twist default distorting sleeves?