Love it! It looks just great so far.  Cheeky after all this , I know, but perhaps the forearm muscle could be more elongated? At least it seems to me, heh.

Scuttles away.

That's a great looking mesh.

He certainly doesn't have Apollo's issue with being too doughy out of the box.

Really excellent work.  I hope to get as good with figure creation.  Well done. 

I'm attempting to map Lucas to M4, thanks to DPHoadley's tips and advice.

So far its going okay. Hoping it works out in the end.

~Shane

"I'm attempting to map Lucas to M4..."

You do know that M4's mapping is proprietary and can't be used for other meshes without DAZ permission?

I'd have to see that in writing. Got a link?

If that's the case, then the other figures that are being remapped to V3/V4, etc, are guilty of the same thing. 

If that is the case, not a problem. Saves me the trouble and time of having to go about it as the maps he currently has are better to begin with.

~Shane

Well I'd like the option of using both maps. At first there will not be a lot of options, over time sure. But the more options, the more renders, the more popular the figure.

"I'd have to see that in writing. Got a link?"

It's in the EULA you agreed to when installing M4. You can't distribute any part of the mesh or cr2 or base competing derivative work on it unless it is for clothing.

"If that's the case, then the other figures that are being remapped to V3/V4, etc, are guilty of the same thing."

Technically they are, but Posette and Dork are Zygote meshes so DAZ still owns their IP. I also think they are encoded so you have to own V3 or V4 to use the remaps.

There is also a difference between letting a remap of an old, obsolete mesh fly under the radar over allowing a brand new mesh to use their IP that will be in direct competition with their own products.

"If that is the case, not a problem. Saves me the trouble and time of having to go about it as the maps he currently has are better to begin with."

Just trying to save you a lot of work here, given how strict they were about using V4's original rigging as a starting point for weightmapping her.

You could still encode your mesh against M4, but that's usually more trouble than it's worth, unless you really need M4 texture compatibility.

I'm not encoding my models against anyone else's, that defeats the point of them being original.

I've been avoiding the idea of remapping him to match any other model anyway, but this seems to be what the community wants with all the newer models.

According to another thread here, the new Michelle figure is being remapped to V4. I doubt DAZ gave their permission on that.

Personally i think it creates too much stretching in inconvenient areas. 

But I'm not doing it if it violates the EULA. I don't really see how it would since it's not the same geometry or even the same pattern. 

There are texture converting scripts that do roughly the same thing with varying results. Those don't violate eulas.

~Shane

"But I'm not doing it if it violates the EULA. I don't really see how it would since it's not the same geometry or even the same pattern."

I'm not arguing with you. The community "wants" a lot of things.

Please ask them directly if anything is unclear. All I know is what they did shut down figures in the past because they used their mapping.

Just trying to help, and what you do with that info is totally up to you.

Here's a link to their Eula, btw:

http://www.daz3d.com/shop/license-agreement

It would be very useful if Lucas came out with the option to take M4 maps, indeed. But I wouldn't think it worth sacrificing your sanity, or too much of your time, or any worries over EULAs to provide it. Obviously his native mapping will be far superior.

I have a boat load of very high quality textures for M4. It would be nice to be able to use them on other figures. Of course, I'd expect some stretching... heck, they stretch pretty visibly on M4.

If it can't legally be done (though I don't see why not), it's far from the end of the world. We'll just have to persuade the best texture makers to support this guy. But I hope it can be done, and I certainly appreciate your efforts immensely.

He will include plenty of options anyway, it won't be difficult for others to create new maps, and for those texture artists who choose to support him, it's another avenue for them.

I hadn't thought about the eula issues, since it's becoming a trend with people remapping to incorporate older skins. But it makes sense if you think about it.

If it were up to DAZ they'd claim copyright on simply being able to use any figure in poser or DS anyway. So they're definitely going to look for any thread they can pick at to unravel the competition.

~Shane

The way I see it UV map switching like this... beyond the scope of legacy figures... probably needs to be handled by a script... on similar principles to the wardrobe wizard one, I guess...

As I understand it, Who3d is working on a UV map switching script. He has a thread going here about it. I think the originally intended scope of it may have been Genesis in Poser perhaps... but, even if I'm right in that... it surely has broader applications.

In any case, automated, user-side UV switching is apparently something that is provisionally feasible...? So I'd say don't get caught up in that yourself.

I'd say, effort would probably be better spent creating a realistic range of merchant resource, hi res skin texture creation kits, with a range real-world skin types on the menu, to make it easy for a range of character creators to create Lucas character packs?

Cheers

Quote - Please ask them directly if anything is unclear. All I know is what they did shut down figures in the past because they used their mapping.

Here's a link to their Eula, btw:

http://www.daz3d.com/shop/license-agreement

What figures have been "shut down" in the past due to mapping?

I'm still undecided on this issue. 

The EULA says nothing about uv maps. Texture maps, bump maps, etc, are not UV maps. DAZ only owns the texture maps that DAZ created. 

You do not need access to any daz figure in order to lay out uv maps that will use the same texture maps as a daz figure. Buying any texture map from any marketplace will provide you with the same layout.

I think I'm in the clear if I decide to go this route. 

~Shane

It was Lilin2 by Sixus1-Media which was mapped like V3:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2165790&page=1

Quote from a comment by Narcissus on page 1:

"Since the model is different it does not have the same UVS just has the same borders on it so that V3 UVS fits to it!
How can DAZ copyright the UVS of a completely original model/mesh!!!"

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Btw, now would be a great time to thank me for spending my time wading through the Rendo archive so that you can save weeks of work remapping your mesh.

And yes, you're welcome.

;-)

Again, do whatever you think you need to do.

After all, there's nothing more entertaining in the forums than a juicy copyright sh*tstorm.

:-D

BTW, AFAIK no copyright claim in the Poserverse was ever tested in court and I doubt it ever will. So if DAZ' doesn't like the remap, you theoretically might actually still get away with it.

It's just that Rendo and all the other marketplaces usually aren't happy if DAZ ain't happy, so they won't sell your stuff anymore.

Quote - .... What figures have been "shut down" in the past due to mapping?

I'm still undecided on this issue. 

First step should be to simply ask them (DAZ). If the UV maps are not copyrighted, DAZ will know that too, and just give their permission.Even if you do not get a formally written statement, you will know what policy they have.

Quote - The EULA says nothing about uv maps. Texture maps, bump maps, etc, are not UV maps. DAZ only owns the texture maps that DAZ created. 

The point is that copyright is automatic. The license main purpose is to allow you something that otherwise would not be allowed. If something is missing from the license the common copyright law applies. And the DAZ license is (deliberately?) vague about derivatives.

Quote - You do not need access to any daz figure in order to lay out uv maps that will use the same texture maps as a daz figure. Buying any texture map from any marketplace will provide you with the same layout.

Technically this is possible. But even if the texture from any marketplace allows you to create derivatives and distribute them, it only applies to the parts that are original, not to the part that the texture is derived from. If you could make a texture map without resorting to DAZ's UV map or a texture derived from it, then you would be clear to go (probably not possible with M4, but could be possible with UV maps for other geometric shapes, like cubes, tori etc.).

Quote - I think I'm in the clear if I decide to go this route.

The crucial question: Are UV maps copyrightable or not? If they are not, then there will be no problem. If they are, there is someone who has copyright for it. Independent of the fact, if they are copyrightable or not; the most interesting case would be, if you think they are not, and DAZ thinks they are, and you both are willing to fight it out in court. Then the judges will give a clear answer that everyone can understand and benefits from. The community will be very thankful for that :-)

Thanks for the info. 

I'm not going to risk subjecting nearly a year's worth of work to legal issues in regards to this. I've determined a method to approach the matter that will keep my content safe from the eula hassles and still make people happy. 

So, no reason to continue the debate.

~Shane

I don't understand why you are so reluctant to contact DAZ about this. They can tell you "Yes you can" or "No you can't", then there is no question about how you should proceed.

Coldrake

Quote - It was Lilin2 by Sixus1-Media which was mapped like V3:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2165790&page=1

erm no. she was shut down because of joint data, she could wear the same clothes as V3 due to matching joints and a V3 Morph, and that was why Daz asked for her withdrawl. the UV's were not mentioned at the time.

One thing I have never been able to do with a daz/poser figure is put there arms over their head and not look really sub par.

Maybe we can work out a creative common UV reference map, and a bidirectional converter for any special uv style... At least right at the moment I do not see any reason why thos should be disallowed.  Remaps do work in both direction right? so noone can deny a remap of a figure to the neutral UV format, and noone can deny a generic conversion framework either?

Erm, yes. The mapping was definitely part of the problem.

On Page 4 of the thread I linked to user Khai quotes a statement by Sixus (Les Garner) himself:

"It was recently brought to our attention that by releasing Lilin2 with joint parameters and uv's compatible to those of V3 is in fact in conflict with certain aspects of the Daz EULA agreed upon with purchase or download of the Victoria figure."

Emphasis added by me.

Btw, I sure wish that it would be possible to make a simple factual statement in a forum post without someone coming along and challenging it.

Are people just bored ?  Unable to read and understand a simple sentence ? So cynical that they think I pull a statement like "DAZ shut a figure down because it used V3's UV data" out of my ass just to have a good laff ?

Anyway, I'm out of this discussion.

Not my figure, not my problem.

*Joe. I was involved with Sixus1 at the time in several projects and discussed this with him at the time. sorry to upset you, but maybe if you asked me first before you posted the above? I wasn't trying insult you at all. but if you wish to ragequit over something so trivial, that is upto you. I won't stop you.

why spoil a nice, well elaborated new figure with impractical UV maps?

please do with the UV mapping as you have done with topology: simply make something reasonable. 

Quote - I don't understand why you are so reluctant to contact DAZ about this. They can tell you "Yes you can" or "No you can't", then there is no question about how you should proceed.

Because just by creating a human figure that functions in poser, I'm violating DAZ's eula. At least according to the thread Joe linked to. 

They're not going to give their permission to create a competing model that can utilize resources for their model. The question was not whether DAZ would approve, as I know they would not, the question was whether it is legal. Two very different aspects.

And like I said before, the issue is settled on my end. No reason to keep debating it.

I appreciate everyone's input.

~Shane

I find the M4 and V4 UV mapping diffult to correct seam issues.

My favorite UV mapping was V3 and M3, had no prob;ems with them.

I'll agree with 600405 on the mapping. :)

Quote - My favorite UV mapping was V3 and M3, had no prob;ems with them.

Yeah, but they're not square maps, and in order for UVs to work across the board they need to be square. 256 x 256, 512 x 512, 1024 x 1024, etc. 

Poser may not have a problem with non-square maps, but other apps do. 

~Shane

I see, something I wasn't aware of and always wondered why the mapping was changed so much. Always something new to learn on these boards. :)

Quote - > Quote - I don't understand why you are so reluctant to contact DAZ about this. They can tell you "Yes you can" or "No you can't", then there is no question about how you should proceed.

ExistentialDisorder wrote;

Because just by creating a human figure that functions in poser, I'm violating DAZ's eula. At least according to the thread Joe linked to. 

You must have read it wrong, that makes no sense at all. Of course creating a human figure that functions in poser isn't violating DAZ's eula, people are doing it left and right nowadays. DAZ has no say in what you create, as long as you don't use anything that belongs to DAZ there's no problem.

**
**

ExistentialDisorder wrote;

They're not going to give their permission to create a competing model that can utilize resources for their model.

I know they had an agreement with the the creators of Dina V to use Victoria's U.V's.

ExistentialDisorder wrote;

The question was not whether DAZ would approve, as I know they would not, the question was whether it is legal. Two very different aspects.

If you want to test the legalities of using someone else's work in your figure without permission instead of creating your own, that's certainly up to you.

Coldrake

Quote - If you want to test the legalities of using someone else's work in your figure without permission instead of creating your own, that's certainly up to you.  

It's not using someone else's work. It's lining up seams so that textures are interchangeable. There is a big difference between that and using someone else's work, and it's a more complex process than just laying out the UVs, because the geometry is not the same. 

I mapped Lucas in blender in one day. He has very little stretching. In order to remap him to M4 there will be much more stretching, and it will take at least 2 or 3 times the amount of work/time to get his seams to match M4. The only reason I was considering it is for convenience to users who already have a stockpile of textures and who have requested newer models be mapped to DAZ models in order to utilize older skins. It's definitely not a convenience to me, it just adds to my work load. 

Since there is a question as to the legality of it, and due to the added work involved, I'm not going to do it at this point. If later it's determined that there is no legal snag - which I don't see how there could be since it is not actually USING any daz content - then I will revisit the idea. 

~Shane

new figure, new maps, new ideas, new income for vendors :biggrin:

i'd say: leave DAZ stuff to DAZ, get rid of old habits, enjoy some new ones.

excellent figure modelling this is.  :thumbupboth:

between all that 'get-all-out-of-one-mesh' hype i almost lost hope seeing a model aimed to a realistic shape.

i really hope, this will become something usable.

Really? So does DAZ own a uv map space?? Islands? Etc?

Seems they are over-reaching a bit there.

Quote - new figure, new maps, new ideas, new income for vendors :biggrin:

i'd say: leave DAZ stuff to DAZ, get rid of old habits, enjoy some new ones.

 

This is a two way street. Some people want to use their favourite sets of what they already own. Some will say cool, a new figure, some will say I cant use anything I own on it. Best solution is conversion support from texture converter, Morphing Clothes and wardrobe wizzard.

Quote - new figure, new maps, new ideas, new income for vendors :biggrin:

i'd say: leave DAZ stuff to DAZ, get rid of old habits, enjoy some new ones.

Yes that is the best approach. It's been my intention all along to keep everything 100% original and fresh, so the UV mapping would be a step backward.

And if you think about it, whether it's legal to share maps or not, they do have a right to not want other people piggy-backing off of their work or derivatives of it, on any level, so I really don't blame them. From an ethical standpoint it is fair.

Ultimately the users decide these things. It's up to them whether Lucas or any other non-daz model is successful. The only way to do that is for more people to support independent artists.

Thanks for the compliments on the modeling.

~Shane

As a texture artist I'll go with any mapping you do and adapt if I need to. :)

Definitely best to do your own thing with the mapping I think.

(Although it would've been good to be able to use Muted Banshee's M4 skins on him).

Lucas is bearskin mapped. Head is separate. All one map.

~Shane

M3 and V3 were mapper similar and the G2 figures are, not hard to work wirh.

Quote - M3 and V3 were mapper similar and the G2 figures are, not hard to work wirh.

 

Yes, and since Laila shares the same geometry, she will have the same map. 

~Shane

who is a Laila?

The female I mentioned earlier in the thread. Lucas' counterpart. I built his mesh so that he's very morphable and I've been making refinements to it all along.

I'll show more of her when she's further developed. 

:)

~Shane

Clever man. I like the way you snuck that in there. Now we have even more to look forward to. :)

hehe.

Well, i've been sorting out how I should approach it. There's no sense in rebuilding an entirely new mesh, especially when it's just one person working on all of it. There are differences in the mesh to account for gender-specific bits, but overall they are based on the same mesh, and are both designed to take full advantage of poser's features. But I'm doing it alone, so the process has been slow going. It is a full time job tho, and I'm putting a good 8 to 12 hours a day in it every day that I can, when I don't have another job that takes priority.

~Shane

He he. Nice one Shane Very exciting news that! I'll look forward to seeing some more of Laila too then!

:bigcheesygrin:

Is that the female version you posted some pics of way back near the start of the thread?

Getting even more exciting. :)

BTW: I made a typo in my last post...it should have read "mapped" not "mapper". blush

Nope. I scrapped her a while back. She was hiddeous. lol.

No prob Blu, I knew what you meant.

~Shane 

For those out there that were interested in this and there's been nothing new since last year, I appologize. Honestly I had quit working on him for a while, for various reasons. I think that turned out to be a good thing though, cause when I went back to look him over, I wasn't happy with how he looked at all. 

So, Lucas has been completely resculpted from head to toe, and comparing it to the previous sculpt, I think this one is at least a little bit better. I thought I'd share a preview of the new sculpt for those who want to see and who maybe were a bit disappointed when I quit working on him. Still making some minor adjustments here and there, but unless I find something that's really wrong, I think this is it. I could nit-pick for another six months over imperfections if I really wanted to... And I might wind up doing that anyway cause that's just how I am, so I'm not making any promises at this point at how soons he'll be done (though I'm aiming for "soon"). 

Anyway, here goes. He looks a lot better with texture (spent a week painting that) but I'll save that for later.

~Shane

Yummy!