EClark1894 :
I tried to think how to explain every thing to you where you would understand.
but it would take a book and I'm just not that good at explaining.

But certain things happen that changes every thing .
and it's a majority rule that make s the rules such as topology and how to make characters.

Main events in CGI time line.

: Started going good for PC's around 1995 give or take a few years .Max, Softimage, LW.
Buy trail and error the users made all the original rules.
Each app had it's own set of rules.
There was a lot of This vs That App.
Some where along the line we got Maya n C4D years latter.

: Softimage ,LW SubDed tri's to smaller Tri's but Max ,Maya,C4D did not.
So The 100% quad rule was placed in effect. buy all the users.
:weight maps
: zBrush displacement maps.
Changed everything 2001.
: retopologize. Changed a lot.

2014 most have multiple app's and there's a lot less This vs That App.

The hardest thing to model in CGI is a good character and a pretty girl is about imposable.

1998 maybe 5 could model Posetta.
2014 Maybe 50 could model Roxie.

Traditional Artists can name the 600 muscles and the 300 bone etc etc in humans.
But we can cheat with scans now ,so. that changes the rules again.

 The point I'm trying to make is rules change depending on Tech.
& wich tech you use .

DAZ uses unimeshes tech cause that's what works for them and there software and morphs.
for a all in one all purpose character.
It's one way to solve the problem of I need a lot of character fast n cheep.
as far as I know DAZ  and MakeHuman are the only ones that use a unimesh.
HiveWire3D might half to wait n see.

There's different rule to different app's & Artist.
& like the saying goes rules are made to be broken.
Dawn's modeled with some Tri's and a 30,000 polycount.
So you can SubD Dawn in Studio & Pro 14.
but if you have a older Poser that does not SubD ,Dawn still works.
So Dawns made for all the Posers n Studio's.

It's there solutions to there problems and that's fine. there problem ,there solution.
Poser makes different meshes .Roxie's own mesh & Rex's own mesh and that's fine also.

Some problems have multiple solutions.

Why the need to constantly praise Genesis 2 and it's morphs, I'm not sure who you're trying to convice. Yes you like V6, you've said it many times and quite loudly.

The underlining mesh is still only an adapted V4 lod as was Genesis 1, so it's bassed on a pretty old figure

@WandW: Thanks !

@adzan: Call it informercials or PSA's.  :-)

The moment a user asks about Genesis, there's usualy several posts of Poser purists discouraging him/her: "Too hard to use, not made for Poser, why bother ?, doesn't really work anyway, why not use Roxy ? Or Dawn. Wonderful figures !"

And none of that advise is based on any facts, but simply an ongoing anger directed towards DAZ.

I said it many times: I'm not "PRO" DAZ. I'm pro good Poser figure technology. Someone create a figure with better topology and better rigging than Genesis-2, and I'll happily delete it from my runtime and never use it again.

And then I'll start pestering everyone about "Figure-X" instead: "Everybody use Figure-X now, so much better than lame Genesis-2. Still using Genesis-2 ? Gee, what are you thinking ? That's old tech !"

:-)

Poser is a hobbyist tool. Not everyone can be a "figure expert". Not everyone "should" be a figure expert.

But those who aren't, shouldn't they be able to trust the more experienced users to tell them the truth when they ask for help ? Doesn't every user deserve to get all the information that is available ? Beyond any personal agenda ?

So far noone was able to disproof any claim I made. Noone could show Roxy or Dawn easily morphing into a gazillion realistic shapes. Or be as limber as Genesis out of the box. Or as anatomical correct.

Noone.

Just a vague: "Who needs this or that feature anyway, Roxy and Dawn are fine !".

I'm sorry, but I never was a member of the "I don't care" club.

Whatever I do, I want to get to the bottom of it and do it right. And sooner or later, you discover that everything is based on rules. Some can be ignored, some should be ignored, but some should better be adhered to.

If you are a professional and you build a realistic model of a human being that thousends of people are going to use, there is no excuse for bad topology.

Doesn't matter if they are mere hobbyist users, doesn't matter what they use those figures for, a children story or hardcore porn.

They deserve the best figures current technology can create.

Those who find that kind of honesty and incorruptibility annoying or not constructive are free to put me on "ignore". That's what that shiny new button under every post is there for, after all.

;-)

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2874173

I haven't actually checked so I don't know how much of V4 LOD is in Genesis.

But if one is derived from the other, so what ? Older users might remember that I disliked V4 (And M4 and K4) just as much as I dislike Dawn and Roxy now.

Because I think that compared to the 3rd gen DAZ meshes, the 4th gen ones stayed way below their potential. I especially disliked V4's magnet infested rigging which still made her bend not really much better than the previous figures. Besides, the 4th Gen figures were the first to be rigged in Studio and had "Studio only" features and reduced Poser functionality. (All the scaling was messed up !)

But the mesh itself was the "best" (Or at least not worst) part of the whole 4th Gen mess, and in hindsight V4, M4 and K4 were "interim" figures that filled the gap until Genesis tech could be rolled out.

And after 8 years, nostalgia sets in so I'll look at V4 and M4 and K4 with a kinder eye.

:-)

ANYWAY......

The 4th Gen LOD mesh isn't actually that bad.

I weightmapped both M4 LOD and V4 LOD for Poser, and combined with Poser's SubD tech they make nice meshes.

If you want to have a look, I put M4 LOD up for download some time ago. (See Link)

If you have PP-2014 or D3D's Morphingclothes, you can transfer all M4 morphs as well as Hiro 4 or Freak 4 over to M4 LOD.

Bends just as well as Genesis, but is 100% pure Poser.

Left is default Roxi in her default pose with her arms down. Right is my rework WIP after a couple hours of adjusting posture, scaling and proportion, adding a couple of magnets, and doing some light brush work in ZB. Still has a ways to go, but I think this is a decent start, and an example of Roxi's potential.

Her mesh does need refining. There's wasted geometry in some places, and not enough in others. It's difficult to give her much muscle tone because the geometry isn't there to support it. Using SubD doesn't make much difference in that regard either. 

I think her mesh is a bit too low resolution, but until I actually look at everywhere that can have geometry removed and then added to other areas, I won't know for sure. 

I'm thinking about reworking her geometry and re-rigging her after I get her shape finalized. 

~Shane

What a difference:) You did a good job on that.

I usually don't read threads like this because I am a dealer of cloth, not figures. Figures are just unimportant cloth hangers to me. But I went to the end of this thread and read a few posts and have a question to the OP.

If you are such an expert in figures why don't you "Dawnify" your figures then, your own or a modification. Is it impossible to add triax technology such as Dawn has done? The main reason we who use Dawn do it because she is compatible with both Daz and Poser. What we make for one platform is transferable to the other platform and vice verca, morphs and all. That is important not only because your content will be available for both platforms (but that too of course) - but even if you a only create for one platform it is still so incredible useful to be able to tap into the recourses of the other, during the "manufacturing".

Thts is the reason Vicky is not so smart.

JoePublic : Just so you know if I ever make DAZ Poser characters.
YOU will be DRAFTED to RIG them. !!!
Poser alt to hire you for Rigs.

I like Genesis 2, Dawn, Roxie equally. I like my meshes best thou ;)

Anyways
V6 anatomically correct pro bundle morph $124.95
M6 anatomically correct pro bundle morph $124.95
Stephanie anatomically correct pro bundle morph $124.95
Olympia anatomically correct pro bundle morph $124.95
Not in every ones budget.

AmbientShade : Nice morph ,Might want to have some fun with displacement maps & normal maps.

RorrKon those bundles were on special so many times and you could even pick them up for more than half that price. Eg my V6 Pro bundle is listed as $69.97 because I am a pc member. Can probably get it much cheaper if I add a coupon from the store. All depends how you shop.

Quote - JoePublic : Just so you know if I ever make DAZ Poser characters.
YOU will be DRAFTED to RIG them. !!!
Poser alt to hire you for Rigs.

Well, from what I understand, there's some kind of offer on the plate, but Joe won't give an answer.

Quote - Roxie's mesh isn't that bad. It's no Genesis, but with some refining, and not even all that much, it could get close. 

Left is default Roxi in her default pose with her arms down. Right is my rework WIP after a couple hours of adjusting posture, scaling and proportion, adding a couple of magnets, and doing some light brush work in ZB. Still has a ways to go, but I think this is a decent start, and an example of Roxi's potential.

Her mesh does need refining. There's wasted geometry in some places, and not enough in others. It's difficult to give her much muscle tone because the geometry isn't there to support it. Using SubD doesn't make much difference in that regard either. 

I think her mesh is a bit too low resolution, but until I actually look at everywhere that can have geometry removed and then added to other areas, I won't know for sure. 

I'm thinking about reworking her geometry and re-rigging her after I get her shape finalized. 

 

~Shane

I just finished watching Johnathan Williamson build a female torso in Blender and after hearing his explanations for why he does what he does, I actually think I agree with and understand your points. And you did a damn fine job of improving her. This is why I like this forum. You can learn so much.

Thanks Zev0. 

RorrKon: - I prefer to use displacement maps for fine details and to enhance what's already there. They shouldn't be a replacement for geometry because displacement maps are static and can't be deformed with a rig the way actual geometry can.

EClark: Thanks. Glad you like the result - and that you're learning. I've watched Johnathan Williamson's videos before too, and while they're good learning tools, he doesn't put a lot of detail in his mesh, probably because the meshes he builds aren't intended to be morphed a whole lot. Which is fine. If you don't need the detail then there's no reason to build it, just to smooth it out. But Poser figures require more attention to detail because of all the different shaping morphs they are expected to have, so they are a bit different breed of mesh than the average game or film mesh requires. And really, it just comes down to experience. The more time you spend experimenting with figure meshes and shapes, the more you learn what works and what doesn't work.

There is no single right way to build a mesh because every mesh requires its own topology based on its shape and what that mesh is expected to do. Beyond that, it's just a matter of not breaking certain rules of topology, in order to avoid problems later, or in other areas. That's why I equate topology to being a puzzle that you have to figure out as you go along.

~Shane

Thanks Shane. Yeah, I did see that Johnathan did leave a lot of detail out, but he did say that he would put more in if he needed to for changes and such.

Are you thinking of releasing that as a morph for Roxie? I'd like to get it just so I can study what you did.

Possibly. I haven't finished it yet, and there's a lot of adjustments to the rig that I'll have to do first. Mostly I was just playing around to test just how much Roxi's mesh can do. Her face needs more work, and her fingernails are atrotious. I reworked one, but decided to skip it til after I have everything else reshaped. Same with feet and toes. 

~Shane

Yeah, I morphed her feet myself a little so she could wear some proper heels. and I also wanted to shape her calves more. Poser women's calves stay the same even in heels, but in real women the calves get more distinctive and shapely when they wear heels. It happens in men too, but we don't wear heels much. But when we jumped or stand on our toes those muscles puff up.

Quote - RorrKon: - I prefer to use displacement maps for fine details and to enhance what's already there. They shouldn't be a replacement for geometry because displacement maps are static and can't be deformed with a rig the way actual geometry can.

~Shane

I was thinking with displacement map you could detail muscles tendons etc etc as detailed as any mesh.
normal map ,same as displacement map just lower polycount.

Quote - I was thinking with displacement map you could detail muscles tendons etc etc as detailed as any mesh.
normal map ,same as displacement map just lower polycount.

Yes, that's true. But tendons flex and distort when a body moves, causing shadows and contours that aren't present in a relaxed state. Displacement maps don't represent this change due to their "always on" static state. So I use them to represent skin pores and wrinkles and things like that, that don't change a whole lot when the muscle beneath the skin changes. Geometry takes up less resources than maps these days, so its actually better to have a higher res mesh and use maps to enhance the geometry, instead of being a substitute for it. But for game characters, and models that require a lower poly count, displacement is a perfectly valid alternative.

~Shane  

Quote - Displacement maps don't represent this change due to their "always on" static state

They're only static if you make them so. You can make the displacement amount modulated by joint position. Or even by the phase of the moon - you know, for those werewolf tendons.

Quote - > Quote - Displacement maps don't represent this change due to their "always on" static state

They're only static if you make them so. You can make the displacement amount modulated by joint position. Or even by the phase of the moon - you know, for those werewolf tendons.

Interesting idea. But how complicated would that be to set up in Poser, for every joint rotation, and every combination of joint rotations, for each joint?

Because an arm flexing is a different kind of flexing when it's up in the air above your head, than when it is down at your side, and different still when you're bent over, due to tension placed on it from the other muscles in the body. 

And then there's the issue of pokethru in clothing, since clothing would have a different set of maps and doesn't respond to the displacement that exists on the model its conformed to. 

~Shane

That approach might be more use for finer detail like skin folds rather than large scale muscle movements. In his book Stop Staring Jason Ospira demonstrated using a displacement map hooked up in Maya to control brow wrinkles for frown expressions. So I'm thinking of areas that need fine dynamic detail like hands, faces etc where that level of detail would be harder to model in and deal with in rigging. Don't know if that would be a practical approach though - could a displacement map be applied as a kind of decal, like applying a tattoo to a figure?

This thread makes me want to finally take a shot at playing with Genesis2 in Poser. I have to confess I know nothing about DAZ studio and I'm really lost with all the requirements to get Genesis into Poser.

Can anyone point the way to a decent Idiots step-by-step Guide to Genesis/Poser?

Thank you.

I don't know if it's for Idiots, but here's the official guide...

http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dson_importer/poser/userguide/dson_installation_requirements/tutorials/dson_installation/start

RorrKon

is like Zev0  says, you can spend 800/1000 dollars and have a pair of male and female figures (super hd of course )  with clothes and some scenarios (until daz not have competition and you start charging to use it again - microdaz-) and use the figures of G2 for a year or  a half year until it comes "G3" with double sweetness and half the calories

well as say , ( which not a poser user  but is always busy looking at this forum and misinforming with their sophisms) you can sell a kidney (do not worry you have 2) and you will come out a lot cheaper

Quote - RorrKon

is like Zev0  says, you can spend 800/1000 dollars and have a pair of male and female figures (super hd of course )  with clothes and some scenarios (until daz not have competition and you start charging to use it again - microdaz-) and use the figures of G2 for a year or  a half year until it comes "G3" with double sweetness and half the calories

well as say , ( which not a poser user  but is always busy looking at this forum and misinforming with their sophisms) you can sell a kidney (do not worry you have 2) and you will come out a lot cheaper

Kidneys ,LOL between LW,C4D,zBrush,Poser,DAZ Studio. plugs & content I have no internal organs left.
& maybe 1/2 pint of blood.

Now I need http://www.allegorithmic.com/ & http://quixel.se/

Anyone want to buy a wife ? she's a good cook . ;)

It also goes back to JoePublic's original post and might even serve as more evidence for those who don't think Joe's example applies to human shapes. 

First image, on the left is Roxie's default butt. Notice how most of the geometry runs in straight rows. 

On the right is Roxie's modified butt. No geometry was added or removed. 

~Shane

~Shane

Roxie's mesh is 26,082 polys total. 

G2F's mesh is 21,098 polys total. 

Yet, Roxie is not capable of acheiving the same level of deformation in her default state due to the improper edgeflow of her mesh. This is just one small example of many, many other areas.

Hopefully this will help some people understand the importance of topology a little better.

So far I've reduced her mesh by over 1,000 polys, most of which came from her fingers and toes. That's 1,000 polys I can spend in other areas and still have many left over.

~Shane

What do you mean, "reduced"? I know you can't delete any verts.

Quote -What do you mean, "reduced"? I know you can't delete any verts.

Correct. In order to retain morph information the geometry can't be altered in any way, it can only be stretched and shrunk.

Just by spinning those two edges, it breaks all morph information in the original figure. But the original figure is useless to me as-is, so if she's going to take up my runtime space, she's going to be optimized and look good.

I've reduced her geometry by removing unnecessary polys. Morphs will not work until I transfer them back or build new ones. Her rig will work because I can transfer it from her original rig with my modifications. Her mapping will retain the same shape and islands, only the modified topology will lay a bit differently. I can do that in blender.

~Shane

Hmm, so you're saying that if I delete a vert in her ear, for example I could put it back in a tail and the morph would still work?

No. Once you change any verts, all morphs in the entire figure are broken. Putting it back doesn't help. At least I don't think it does, since it would have a different number and still change the vertex order.

You would need a script like PML or something similar. 

And, any modifications like that would be for personal use, you couldn't redistribute it without permission from SM, or without RTEncoder - which for me personally, I've never been able to get it to function. It crashed my PC when I tried using JoePublic's David3, for example. And I haven't bothered trying to figure out what the problem was. 

Sometimes, even RTEncoder isn't enough or allowed though. For example, HW3D doesn't allow it for Dawn. *Unless they've changed that rule recently. So you still have to get permission first.

~Shane

Oh okay, I thought you were making a morph for Roxie.

Great job there, Shane ! That's quite an effective demonstration how important every single edge and vertice is.

But if you're hellbent on reworking one of the Poser girls, wouldn't it be more effective by starting with the original ?

Seriously, I'd hate to see your talent and knowledge and time squandered on a mesh that has been mangled and messed up in the past as much as Roxie has.

Much better to start with a clean canvas.

Pic shows MIKI-1's edgeflow. A long, long time ago I manually "de-subdivided" her head (actually did that again when MIKI-2 was released) in an attempt to create a "low res" Miki. Then I ran the body through an auto-reducer. It created a very messy all-tri mesh, but actually worked in Poser. Lol.

I think that got her down to 17.000 polygons. My point is, even with just her head and especially her teeth, inner mouth, etc reduced plus her original body, MIKI is in the 40.000 poly range. Looks like her body is also more or less just a frozen SubD 1 mesh, so a completely "de-subdivided" MIKI mesh would make a really nice start for an up-to-date Poser figure.

With some of your "re-topology" magic added ?

At least MIKI-1 has a photorealistic default bodyshape, some nice textures and some great clothing to start with. Plus a great head sculpt with excellent expression morphs.

MIKI-2 would be practically the same. Identical mesh, slightly improved UV maps. She just had a "waist" and two "buttock" groups added.

"No. Once you change any verts, all morphs in the entire figure are broken. Putting it back doesn't help. At least I don't think it does, since it would have a different number and still change the vertex order.

You would need a script like PML or something similar. 
And, any modifications like that would be for personal use, you couldn't redistribute it without permission from SM, or without RTEncoder - which for me personally, I've never been able to get it to function. It crashed my PC when I tried using JoePublic's David3, for example. And I haven't bothered trying to figure out what the problem was. 

Sometimes, even RTEncoder isn't enough or allowed though. For example, HW3D doesn't allow it for Dawn. *Unless they've changed that rule recently. So you still have to get permission first."

Yep.

Everything he said.

That's why I get angry and frustrated when people say I simply should give Roxie or Dawn "more time".

Once the topology is messed up, you cannot repair it WITHOUT breaking every single body morph, the weightmapping and every JCM there is.

A private third party can't "fix" such a figure, because RTE encoding is a mess and people hate it. And some companies like Hivewire don't even allow it to be used at all.

Making a nicer face morph or making a better texture or injecting a joint "fix" morph are something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from improving a figure's topology.

It's basically a completely new figure you create, even if the shape is still the same.

So, that's why for me a figure that hasn't anatomical correct topology right from the start is absolute, 100% useless to me and I won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

If the topology is bad, its game over before the race has even started.

That being said, PoseMorphLoader, D3D's Morphing Clothes as well as PP-2014 allow you to "re-project" morphs back into a modified mesh.

But the transfer isn't 100%, especially when the topology was changed, there are rounding errors, so the morphs are softer, less detailed. Sometimes the projection misses vertices so they stay "glued" to their original position while the rest is morphed.

But even if you manage to get the morphs back into the modified mesh, you're facing the encoding problem.

It's "OK" for a freebie, even though many people still don't want to mess with it, but it is an absolute no-no for any commercial project.

Quote -
Oh okay, I thought you were making a morph for Roxie.

Yes, that is what I'm doing. I can convert the Roxie morph I've been working on so far, to an injectable FBM. 

That's separate from the reworking of her mesh tho. 

The reworking of her mesh serves a somewhat different project, inspired by the morph that I started for her the other day.

Thanks for the compliments Joe.

Unfortunately I don't have access to Miki 1. I don't think she's even still available. I have Miki2 and Miki4. I might have Miki3 somewhere, but I haven't found her yet. 

however, even if I did have Miki1, I'd probably still prefer to work with Roxie's mesh because it's a whole lot easier to rework 20K polys than it is to rework 40K polys. 

Is Miki1 and Miki2 the same mesh? I've heard some people say that it is and others say that it isn't.

I can transfer Miki's shape to Roxie's reworked mesh with ZBrush. For that matter I can transfer any of the figure shapes to Roxie's reworked mesh in ZBrush.  

I can also remap her to Miki 2's maps, if I decide they're better maps than Roxie has (I haven't looked at them in a long time so I'm not sure). 

Or, I can transfer Miki's skin texture to Roxie's maps in zbrush.

The only real reason I chose Roxie is because her mesh is very simple compaired to all the other meshes. It's poluted with unnecessary geometry, but that's easy to clean out, especially on a low res mesh. And I can use Miki2's topology as a reference if I need to, but I do have my own methods of constructing certain features. After working with topology as long as I have, it gets easier to look at a mesh and see what it would look like at a lower resolution, at least in areas. Of course some areas are much more confusing than others.

~Shane

So MIKI-1 clothes can be easily converted by just adding MIKI-2's grouping.

Yeah, I understand your reasoning.

Although...If you plan on doing such a thorough conversion, why not start with the low res figures that come with PP-2012 and PP-2014 ?

Picture shows a crude attempt to make the PoserPro-low res girl a little more humanoid.

Lol.

You'd have to re-check yourself, but AFAIK these are "public domain", so everything you do with them is yours to keep. So no encoding necessary if you redistribute them.

And the low res female is just 8600 polys, so that's plenty of room to build your own topology.

Anyway, good luck !

:-)

Hmm. Where do you find those figures?

All I see is the Project Human figures, and the Poser Pro Tutorial figures.

Not sure what the poly count is on the Project Humans but the tutorial female is over 31K, higher than Roxie, but has very similar mapping and topology, almost makes me wonder if they might be the same mesh. Are they also open source?

Then there's the Poser 4 lo res figures but I doubt that's what you meant.

~Shane

Found them. They're in the 2012 library, not the 2014. Only the med-res tutorial figures are in the 2014 library. 

Interesting.

~Shane

Poser pro 2014 Content -> Figures -> Poser Pro 2014 Content -> Poser Pro -> Male

From the EULA:

• “Unrestricted Content” means Content included with or part of the Program that is specifically identified in the Documentation or listed in this EULA as Unrestricted Content. The following figure geometries and their associated textures are Unrestricted Content: low res male, low res female, medium res male, medium res female.

a. To reproduce, prepare derivative works based upon, distribute, publicly display, and publicly perform the Unrestricted Content for any lawful purpose other than to create a product which is intended to compete with the Program or to create new content which is intended to compete with the Restricted Content.

Thanks.

Quote - a. To reproduce, prepare derivative works based upon, distribute, publicly display, and publicly perform the Unrestricted Content for any lawful purpose other than to create a product which is intended to compete with the Program or to create new content which is intended to compete with the Restricted Content.

Hmm. Ok so based on that wording, wouldn't any figures created from the low res open source figures be considered competition with the Restricted Content figures included in the program? That's what it sounds like to me. 

~Shane

*It is absolutely and utterly forbidden to touch the Poser Pro Lo Res Figures inside or outside of Poser or any other app!

=> They are "mine" and "mine" only. LOL. <==*

V4 will shoot you down !
Roxie will knife you !
Dawn will hang you afterwards !

Ha, I posted a lot about them as they are soooo easy to work on and with.

(Click to enlarge)

Here you have 3 layers of clothing; Jacket over pullover over pants over figure.
All fitted in a single fitting session to test 3 layers of clothing in a single operation..

Scripts=> Partners => Schaderworks => Postwork Manager.