Traci, I know what you said, but at the same time you have to look at it from a perspective buyers view.

I could post even more about the character, and it would start an absolute firestorm.

People are entitled to their opinions, even if they have not bought the character. You can call it bashing if you want too. But it all comes down to their opinion.

No one should support this level of work, and I am sorry that I did. I took the video for what it was then bought the figure, Once I had it I quickly realized that I had been dupped.

Let them pile on the bashing wagon on this one, because in this case we need all the people we can get on it.

I asked about a refund, guess how that is going? Well, it will probably be my last purchase here.

My decision has nothing to do with supporting vendors and everything to do with misleading advertising and this level of craftsmanship. .

I used to think the Rendo would not allow things like this in the store. Freebies used to be tested, and I know that for a fact because I made a mistake in one years ago and they asked me to correct it.

If I had to correct a freebie, how the did this happen on a paid product??????????????????????

Second this!

The inner crotch/hip area that David pointed to looks like it might just be an area that got overlooked in weightmapping, so it's possible that it could be fixed in a service release relatively easily.

I don't have the figure so I can't test it myself.

Asymmetry is a problem with Poser. I doubt the model was built asymmetrical, however I know from personal experience and other top vendors I've spoken to in the past, that Poser will randomly knock a model out of symmetry depending on how the model is saved into the library. It happens in very small increments and in various ways, and not all the time. It's been an on-going issue for many versions that makes content creation all the more frustrating, that S-M has yet to fix or even acknowledge. 

I'm curious about this talk of Z-Brush tutorials. If it is in regards to the hair, or something else. I can't think of anything that would actually require z-brush to be used, unless you're wanting to make custom morphs of the fibermesh hair.

Overall she doesn't look like a bad figure. Better than several others that have come out in the recent past. She's at least on par with Roxie and Dawn, from what I can see.

Lets just try to be civil when discussing the various issues, and keep the conversation productive. I'm sure Sixus would be interested in hearing about the various issues people are finding. Just like with software, even after several months of beta testing, the real test only comes when it goes live.

"Asymmetry is a problem with Poser. I doubt the model was built asymmetrical, however I know from personal experience and other top vendors I've spoken to in the past, that Poser will randomly knock a model out of symmetry depending on how the model is saved into the library. It happens in very small increments and in various ways, and not all the time. It's been an on-going issue for many versions that makes content creation all the more frustrating, that S-M has yet to fix or even acknowledge."

What? First I've heard of this... unless you're referring to posers native scale causing slight translations when importing and exporting back and forth between apps (without using pml or go plug)... only solution I've found is scaling to 1000 and subtractive morphing.

One more thing to worry about with using poser. Apologies for ot.

I have the figure, and it is far more than a weight map issue. It is not going to be easy to fix because it is a compounding issue starting with the mesh, then the weight mapping (or lack there of) and then the asymmetrical jcms that are all over the place to correct all the issues under it. If there was no QC before it was released, there is no reason to fix it either.

While it may not look like a bad figure at first, it is... Don't get me wrong, it could have been a good one, but it is far from it in its present state. First impressions are everything, and this is a freaking disaster. I would not even send this to a beta tester let alone have the balls to put it in a store.

Here are some screen shots, limits are on. This is the default character and just issues on the right side. Keep in mind that the issues are different on the left side and I am not going to even bother posting those.

I could do a few hundred more screen shots of crushing meshes and comparisons to the differences between the left and right side, but I will just stop.

If this is 6 years work, I don't know what to tell you. Someone needs a new line of work.

What I can tell you, is that anyone that buys this is not going to be happy. Part of the plus of Poser is doing renders that don;t need post work, and this Figure needs post work before you even load it.

The tutorials are a separate product, intended for content makers, to guide them through the process of producing a piece of rigged clothing for Scarlet. A bodysuit is included, and this bodysuit may indeed be modified and used to produce commercial or free content. The product includes more than two hours of video and I presume some written documentation as well. I didn't buy it because I am not yet sure how much I shall use this figure, but the description of the topics covered makes it clear that the assumption is that the user will be starting in Z-brush.

...I didn't use Marvelous Designer to make the clothing - I am so Blenderised now, I didn't even think of using it. As to the pose - her zero pose is a kind of A-pose,  but the arms are slightly bent and forward, and there is a lot of curvature in the back. The pose she loads up in, is not the zero pose. You need to explicitly zero this figure.

Hmm. so Blenderized you did not even think about MD? Oh dear! We really must have a serious chat with you to get you back in the fold, LOL!.

Anyway, thank you for the info on the pose. T pose is disastrous but light arm bending may even be an advantage. It is the natural pose of an arm and when the sleeve is cut straight it will give some nice natural folds to the mesh in the elbow area. 

I had noted the back curvature which indeed may cause problems.

The images by shvrdavid are they zero pose? If not are there images of the zero pose? 

The mesh shots on the first page are with joints zero'd

Shvrdavid, whether people are happy with their purchase depends on what they want to do with the figure.

If examining the wire mesh is your thing, you're totally justified in being unsatisfied.

But it's amazing how those distortions seem to vanish in the final render, especially if you use subd. For my purposes -- renders -- the figure is fine and far more useful than most.

What's concerning is the trouble peeps seem to be having with rigging clothing for the fig. If it's as hard as it sounds, it doesn't bode well.

FTR, I've bought PLENTY of stuff in the MP that had serious and major issues, from missing polys (not backwards, just completely absent), to meshes that looked like scrambled eggs (way, way worse than what Poser game dev does when it reduces polys) to stuff that hadn't even been UV mapped. QC has always been hit or miss here, and it's not just popular vendors who get a pass. Still, I do think you should be able to get a refund. It's just silly and, I imagine very annoying, that you can't.

It makes me wonder if maybe there just are a lot of people acting as testers who don't pay attention to mesh anomalies or don't even know what a mesh is supposed to look like. Those wireframe shots do not look normal. Something is very wrong there. Are other people getting the same results?

I was thinking maybe the folds around the wrist are intended to be skin wrinkles and would look better once Sub-D'd or rendered.

...

I don't know...

From what I've seen, the problem with testers is that because the market isn't very large, one tends to to use too few.  I saw it firsthand in V4WM, where it looked great ti us on tht Team because we'd been looking at the bending, but as soon as it was released people noticed that she needed JCMs for the elbows.  Likewise Dawn had bending issues on her initial release, and shvrdavid eventually tore out all his hair trying to create a weight mapped Poser G2 (not Genesis 2!) Female because of the asymmetry of the body mesh.

These were all fundamental flaws that affected the usability or ability to create content  (and thus the viability) for the figure that could and should have been caught in the testing phase, but weren't...

It's a pity Vilters doesn't team-up with someone and create a Poser figure, the rigging would be efficient and spot-on.  He creates some of the scairest looking figures I've seen, but when it comes to rigging and the ins and outs of all that stuff - I think he's a perfectionist.

The mesh shots on the first page are with joints zero'd

Thank you

It makes me wonder if maybe there just are a lot of people acting as testers who don't pay attention to mesh anomalies or don't even know what a mesh is supposed to look like. Those wireframe shots do not look normal. Something is very wrong there. Are other people getting the same results?

I was thinking maybe the folds around the wrist are intended to be skin wrinkles and would look better once Sub-D'd or rendered.

...

I don't know...

Now that I'm looking with the same doc type at similar poses -- oh, yeah. Those distortions are definitely there. Exactly the same. They mostly kinda vanish when sub'd and rendered. Mostly. And this may also depend on the pose and the light. They could be drastic in some lighting situations. Shvrdavid is definitely onto something. I can say one thing for certain, though. Scarlet won't be starring in any porn movies until her gens have undergone some restorative surgery. They're, um, well... seriously... lopsided. I'm not at all bothered by that. But I can see why it might be a real problem for some, philosophically, even if they never intend to do close-up crotch shots.

I tried to make her lower eyelashes longer. Here is how they look with the morph set to 1.

Until these issues are resolved I don't think the figure can accept any additional content made by 3rd party. If they start developing on the figure as is, and it gets corrected via an update, they will most likely have to redo whatever they made as well. This is a serious issue.  One would think in those 6 years the developer would at least look at the figure in wire-frame to spot these issues. Hell, if users can spot them in the space of less than 2 days, I wonder.....Was this even tested?

It makes me wonder if maybe there just are a lot of people acting as testers who don't pay attention to mesh anomalies or don't even know what a mesh is supposed to look like. 

LOLOL. I had to re-download this product in order to show it because, well, let's just say it's unusable and unfixable, as far as I'm concerned. You'd have to be blind not to notice something wrong with the mesh. Granted, it's very old. So maybe Rendo didn't have testers at all at the time. It's obj format and needs to be imported into Poser, but readme claims it was tested in Poser 5. But really, it shouldn't have lasted more than a couple of days on the marketplace before it was yanked. As it was, it was on sale for years. I think it disappeared after being on clearance for a very long time.

I tried to make her lower eyelashes longer. Here is how they look with the morph set to 1.

No Comment. I don't want to lash out any more criticism. I said my bit.

@ moriador:
Well, that's the result when one uses tri's instead of quads in modeling... and then doesn't check the output.
I also do have a couple of such unuseable models in my collection; mostly freebies though.

@ Zev0
So, you won't lash out about the lashes? :P

Until these issues are resolved I don't think the figure can accept any additional content made by 3rd party. If they start developing on the figure as is, and it gets corrected via an update, they will most likely have to redo whatever they made as well. This is a serious issue.  One would think in those 6 years the developer would at least look at the figure in wire-frame to spot these issues. Hell, if users can spot them in the space of less than 2 days, I wonder.....Was this even tested?

All we need is a symmetrical mesh. I would be happy just to get that. I don't even care if it is rigged at this point, because it is very obvious that whoever rigged it doesn't have a clue. I seriously doubt we will even get that at this point thou. Every step of the creation of this character is flawed, and it is advertised like it just the opposite. So I am posting a challenge to the creator. Post a symmetrical wire frame, and I will rig it and post the CR2.

But, you also have to give the character away from that point on, and refund everyone that bought the sad attempt your selling now.

We will wait and see if they can even come up with a symmetrical mesh...................................

Someone PM me if they even do that much...............

We had a classic car show here in town this afternoon, so I was admiring freshly restored cars. Man, some true artist there. A true WHAW show.

@ Pumeco

Long time ago, I bought 3 items from "at the time" very respected vendors. I was so dissapointed to the point that I "swore" to never - ever buy content again.

And I "swore" to report whenever I see something out of order to protect customers to fall in the same trap.. By now, and we are 2015 in my book, some of us can "see" right through a product. And I WILL report and  WILL open my mouth to protect other buyers from falling in the same trap. And, NO, I do NOT have to "buy" to open my mouth when I see something.

The word has fallen : Beta - testers.

Some try to get in the beta test circuit just to get the figures / content / apps for free and or sooner then the others. They will fill your inbox with praise on how good you are, just because they are so afraid to be kicked out again.

Others, report, document, and often get kicked out for opening their mouths. So? Its up to you? What kind of opinions do you like?

The problem is ALWAYS the same. ALWAYS.

The beta testers get the product when it is in its final stage. And then when  they find a basic issue (if they dare to report it) it is WAY too late to repair, or one has to "undo" " 2 to 3 years of work. 

Poser, and most other 3D apps, only need 2 things to function: The obj file and the cr2 (Or the equivalents of those.)

If a beta tester finds an issue with the initial obj file? => BANG ! => Years of work down the drain. => All morphs, and everything that followed behind them => Washed away.

This is an issue I have mentioned a few times: Get some motivated bata testers FROM DAY ONE ! And listen to them.

Content creators do not need YES-YES sayers. They need valued, argumented, documented and motivated feedback.
EVERY beta tester should have seen what David is showing in the screengrabs.

***About Scarlet.
***We are not talking about a novice here. There should be years of experience globalised in that figure. So we can be open and critical.
YES, there are some good features in that figure. Yes, some things are well thought out..

The problem, as usual, is WELL before all that great stuff..=> The basic obj file, and the basic rigging.

And, NO, I do NOT have to buy to see and report what I think.

@ modiador:
Well, that's the result when one uses tri's instead of quads in modeling... and then doesn't check the output.
I also do have a couple of such unuseable models in my collection; mostly freebies though.

Oh, it gets much worse. I've seen plenty of models made in tris. None with such huge conglomerations of extremely dense polys stretched out to such extremes next to very low res areas. It looks, to me, like it was ripped from somewhere and just packaged up as is. No one who wasn't suffering a serious cognitive disability or utter madness would model like this, surely. LOL. (Damn image saved with the selection highlighted, even though I didn't have the obj selected. Sorry.)

Aj Nanette, I just see your lashes experiment.....

How about we stick at the subject at hand. Those wire frames have nothing to do with buying a character then discovering you were blatantly ripped off.

How about we stick at the subject at hand. Those wire frames have nothing to do with buying a character then discovering you were blatantly ripped off.

My point was that the MP doesn't have particularly great QC, something which you brought up. I could just go back to disagreeing with you, since you seem so hostile to agreement. LOL.

QUOTE shvrdavid:
So I am posting a challenge to the creator. Post a symmetrical wire frame, and I will rig it and post the CR2.

But, you also have to give the character away from that point on, and refund everyone that bought the sad attempt your selling now.
END QUOTE

I don't think this will happen.
This figure clearly was released to earn money, so maybe it'd be a better idea to charge Sixus for the rigging (if he ever accepts your offer), and then let him sell his "Scarlet SR1" for the benefit of us all.
I don't think that this will become freeware once the issues have been fixed - precisely because they were fixed!

Peter

P.S.:
Blimey! This thread is moving along faster than I can type... :D

Those long tris usually come from automatc 3D generation software. Feed some pictures, and let the software create the obj file. => That's what ya get.

I will not rig Scarlet for release if someone else is profiting off of it directly. I have never charged for anything Poser related and I am not going to start now.

The challenge is up to the creator, if they choose to remain silent that says more about them than if they speak............. 

We had a classic car show here in town this afternoon, so I was admiring freshly restored cars. Man, some true artist there. A true WHAW show.

@ Pumeco

Long time ago, I bought 3 items from "at the time" very respected vendors. I was so dissapointed to the point that I "swore" to never - ever buy content again.

And I "swore" to report whenever I see something out of order to protect customers to fall in the same trap.. By now, and we are 2015 in my book, some of us can "see" right through a product. And I WILL report and  WILL open my mouth to protect other buyers from falling in the same trap. And, NO, I do NOT have to "buy" to open my mouth when I see something.

The word has fallen : Beta - testers.

Some try to get in the beta test circuit just to get the figures / content / apps for free and or sooner then the others. They will fill your inbox with praise on how good you are, just because they are so afraid to be kicked out again.

Others, report, document, and often get kicked out for opening their mouths. So? Its up to you? What kind of opinions do you like?

The problem is ALWAYS the same. ALWAYS.

The beta testers get the product when it is in its final stage. And then when  they find a basic issue (if they dare to report it) it is WAY too late to repair, or one has to "undo" " 2 to 3 years of work. 

Poser, and most other 3D apps, only need 2 things to function: The obj file and the cr2 (Or the equivalents of those.)

If a beta tester finds an issue with the initial obj file? => BANG ! => Years of work down the drain. => All morphs, and everything that followed behind them => Washed away.

This is an issue I have mentioned a few times: Get some motivated bata testers FROM DAY ONE ! And listen to them.

Content creators do not need YES-YES sayers. They need valued, argumented, documented and motivated feedback.
EVERY beta tester should have seen what David is showing in the screengrabs.

***About Scarlet.
***We are not talking about a novice here. There should be years of experience globalised in that figure. So we can be open and critical.
YES, there are some good features in that figure. Yes, some things are well thought out..

The problem, as usual, is WELL before all that great stuff..=> The basic obj file, and the basic rigging.

And, NO, I do NOT have to buy to see and report what I think.

But she does only have 3 texture maps, with minimal seam splits, Vilters! :D  Seriously, though -- your efforts probably aren't appreciated by the buyers. But it's people like you that spur many creators to make great models. So: thank you. I think your tone is a bit harsh, but I take that as a sign of sincerity. I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of your critique, though. One must be extremely brave to create a human figure for Poser.

Nevertheless, even accepting that serious flaws exist -- which Shvrdavid has pretty much demonstrated unequivocally -- I actually still really like the figure. Seriously. Maybe I'm just demented (I'm not as young as I used to be). But she looks good in my renders.

The point about third party add-ons is a real concern, however, regardless of how much individual buyers might like or not like the original figure. You can't make content for something that needs an update that will render your content obsolete or unusable. Which makes me sad. :(

@ moriador:
QUOTE: "Oh, it gets much worse. I've seen [...]"

Good Lord! That mesh makes me nauseous even by looking at it! :D

(Hint - when capturing a preview, select "Universe" before saving out the preview - that might work)

-P-

• OK OK, just read shvrdavid's rebuke, so back to Sarlet now ;)

Are there pose controls in the figure?

Just an idea, but with some figures out there that use pose controls, not using those controls can cause problems. They're not intended to be posed the way classic figures are by moving individual parts. So I'm thinkin maybe something similar is the cause for the mesh distortion. IE, you're holding it wrong.

That is, if no one has thought to check this.

I was going to say that I was beginning to regret that I started the thread but having given it some thought am not, at least anyone that buys it now has enough information to make up their own mind.

We have not heard from the creator but I do think he has been given a rough ride.  If it has been put on the market in full knowledge of the problems just to make money then maybe the rough ride is deserved, but we do not know that is the case.  If there is indeed a full range of add-ons and this is six years work then I can't begin to imagine how the creator feels on reading this thread.  There is a lot about the stated aims that I agree with and I know I can find a use for Scarlet, she is not a V4 killer but then I am beginning to doubt that there will ever be one. 

There are a lot of theories on what will make a good figure but over the last few years they have remained just that, theories. After reading a lot of this thread I question if there is anyone around with the skills to make such a figure that is stupid enough to try and risk having a good few years of their life trashed in public.

Sorry I know it will not go down well with some, but considering what we have had from SM and others regarding figures I still think Scarlet, who appears to be the work of a one man band, is a valiant attempt.  I am not unhappy at the $30 I have spent and therefore I am not going to add to those who want a public stoning. 

Sound and Fury signifying nothing.........

For those of us that don't do wireframe renders, she looks fine.

I don't do renders of NIATWAS, so most of the complaints I have seen are irrelevant to my needs.

I'll be picking her up sometime in the next few days.

Ambient, there are pose controls to raise the arm, and you have to use those to do so because they joints themselves do not drive the jcms required to do so.

If you just use the collar and upper arm joints to raise it, it totally collapses the joints.

Other than that there are not any other controls as far as joint rotations go..

Hmm...Very messy indeed...Did some testing of my own. Main issue is the groinupper thigh area that distorts badly even with a simple sit pose with the legs spread out slightly. Upper body isn't as bad.

Zev, make a copy of the Scarlet CR2 and strip out the morphs, then look at the weight maps.

After you do that, weight map the right thigh then try to mirror it to the left side.

@ moriador

All my free time goes into testing Poser, figures and props for free, and for the benefit of the whole community. After some years, one "knows" what and were to look for.
My "tone" depends heavily on the client and on the environment.

Here we have an experienced builder that comes with a product. The expectations are higher as usual for a novice builder.

The quality of a product starts at day 1, with the very first polygon. => And from this day 1; creators should get some motivated beta testers.
The obj file, the rigging, the texturing all have their role to play.

Loose symmetry, in the obj file, in the rigging, in the dependencies, in the magnets, in the morphs, and basically, you'v lost the figure.
Loose symmetry? => GO BACK.

Before building the very first "character" or "expression" morph, the basic obj and the basic rigging has to be checked over and over again, by at least a dozen motivated beta testers for at LEAST a month.

The errors are NOT in the innovations, but in the basics of the basics.

My "tone". As said depends on the individual, and the evironment.

When Sixus says: Forget GC?  Blood pressure rises, little hairs on the neck stand up. Does Sixus really want us all to go 5 years back in time?
Or did he just say that he did not know how to set them up?

When some find my remarks "bashing". 
Sorry, from a long time creator, one can expect a better quality. And most of what surfaces in this tread was visible in the previews.

Breasts. LOL. Some know that breasts are a sensitive point. LOL.
BEFORE modifying Posettes breasts, many-many moons ago, I did a "breast" study that took more then a year. And I have been modifying 3D figures breasts ever since. Some are "full", perky, pointy, sagging, lifted, ha-ha-ha-, some are plastic.
By accident, my "demo girl" has sagging breasts. => And they will stay there. LOL. She was build after a "real woman" and tja, they are "there". Sorry, I"ll tell her you don't like them there. => Have helmet I can loan?

If your renders look good? Call Scarlet an artistical succes.

Technical we see obj file errors, we see rigging errors, we see material errors, we see morph errors.
Things we did not expect from an old time creator with some years behind his belt.

And now, sleep well on both ears, I am bugging out of here.
Night all.

There is nothing wrong with Scarlets breast geometry and it can be morphed quite well into anything you want. The included morphs don't really do it justice. Neither does the default shape. Only thing I would have eliminated is the amount of extra squashed polygons between them. There is no real need for them to be so dense.

@Zev
Have to say I'm quite puzzled about the density of the whole figure, not just the breasts.  Compare her to Roxie for example, who is as fine an example as you're going to get of a modern Poser figure designed for efficient use of subdivision.  Scarlet is a very heavy mesh from the looks of it.

@Vilters
Believe me, others appreciate why you like to be orderly and serious about this stuff, there's me for starters.

Asymmetry is a problem with Poser. I doubt the model was built asymmetrical, however I know from personal experience and other top vendors I've spoken to in the past, that Poser will randomly knock a model out of symmetry depending on how the model is saved into the library. It happens in very small increments and in various ways, and not all the time. It's been an on-going issue for many versions that makes content creation all the more frustrating, that S-M has yet to fix or even acknowledge.

I've seen this firsthand. Seen things that I KNOW where symmetrical were not once they were run thru Poser. AFAIK, its been a problem since at least Poser9/PP12.

Jesus H. Christ the quote font is fuckin' annoying. Back to hardly lurk mode.

Laurie

QUOTE LaurieA:

Asymmetry is a problem with Poser. I doubt the model was built asymmetrical, however I know from personal experience and other top vendors I've spoken to in the past, that Poser will randomly knock a model out of symmetry depending on how the model is saved into the library. It happens in very small increments and in various ways, and not all the time. It's been an on-going issue for many versions that makes content creation all the more frustrating, that S-M has yet to fix or even acknowledge.

I've seen this firsthand. Seen things that I KNOW where symmetrical were not once they were run thru Poser. AFAIK, its been a problem since at least Poser9/PP12.
END QUOTE

Laurie, Poser sometimes saves out a mesh obj. file when you save a figure to the library, even when there's no need to do so. But when you reload that figure, it will load the other .obj file instead of the original one, and I think that's how errors accumulate.
Poser has problems with saving very small numbers like 0.00001 and often "rounds" these: I think that's the source of the problem.

So check your .pz3 or .cr2 file for mesh reference, and change it back to the original mesh .obj file instead of what Poser created.

This is actually one annoying "feature" of Poser:
I could understand it if the grouping, or texture groups, were changed... But with an unchanged mesh I see no reason for such behaviour (except annoying us, creating errors like you described, and also eating up disk space for every new iteration of the same character, by saving a new mesh .obj file for every single iteration).

Peter

@ moriador

All my free time goes into testing Poser, figures and props for free, and for the benefit of the whole community. After some years, one "knows" what and were to look for.
My "tone" depends heavily on the client and on the environment.

Here we have an experienced builder that comes with a product. The expectations are higher as usual for a novice builder.

The quality of a product starts at day 1, with the very first polygon. => And from this day 1; creators should get some motivated beta testers.
The obj file, the rigging, the texturing all have their role to play.

Loose symmetry, in the obj file, in the rigging, in the dependencies, in the magnets, in the morphs, and basically, you'v lost the figure.
Loose symmetry? => GO BACK.

Before building the very first "character" or "expression" morph, the basic obj and the basic rigging has to be checked over and over again, by at least a dozen motivated beta testers for at LEAST a month.

The errors are NOT in the innovations, but in the basics of the basics.

My "tone". As said depends on the individual, and the evironment.

When Sixus says: Forget GC?  Blood pressure rises, little hairs on the neck stand up. Does Sixus really want us all to go 5 years back in time?
Or did he just say that he did not know how to set them up?

When some find my remarks "bashing". 
Sorry, from a long time creator, one can expect a better quality. And most of what surfaces in this tread was visible in the previews.

Breasts. LOL. Some know that breasts are a sensitive point. LOL.
BEFORE modifying Posettes breasts, many-many moons ago, I did a "breast" study that took more then a year. And I have been modifying 3D figures breasts ever since. Some are "full", perky, pointy, sagging, lifted, ha-ha-ha-, some are plastic.
By accident, my "demo girl" has sagging breasts. => And they will stay there. LOL. She was build after a "real woman" and tja, they are "there". Sorry, I"ll tell her you don't like them there. => Have helmet I can loan?

---

If your renders look good? Call Scarlet an artistical succes.

Technical we see obj file errors, we see rigging errors, we see material errors, we see morph errors.
Things we did not expect from an old time creator with some years behind his belt.

---

I get what you're saying. On the other hand, I'm not sure how threads of this sort will affect creators like Teyon. If he reads this, he'll won't be able to have a bowel movement for a month. In many ways, there's a self-defeating effect for us in our enthusiasm for perfection and quality and the way it plays out in the forums. It's almost gotten to the point that if you want to release a human figure for Poser, you have to be so thick skinned as to not care at all. And that's not an improvement. How many people have started to make a figure and given up because undergoing this kind of scrutiny just isn't worth it? I personally know of more than a couple. Would a friendly environment not be more encouraging to those who actually have the skill to make such a thing? Or might we actually be driving these people away to use their talents elsewhere? I'm with Hornet and ssgbryan and glitterati on this one.

And for all those in this thread who have the technical skill to pass a solid critique, why not get together and release your own figure?

Already did that? And what was the result?

PS. The eyelash issue is the result of the transmap not being lined up quite properly. The transparent part stretches to make the lash appear to be moving when you morph them. Nothing to do with the mesh itself, though. If you move the lower lash transmaps up a tad, it helps a lot. But the maps need a bit more tweaking to work well. That at least should be relatively easy for Sixus1 to fix.

And for all those in this thread who have the technical skill to pass a solid critique, why not get together and release your own figure?

Already did that? And what was the result?

I have already done that, and the results were mixed.

I am still working on a few as well, just not for Poser as it stands right now.

The difference is, I didn't charge a dime, and you can tie the ones I helped with into a knot before they go haywire.

Oh, and we fixed some of the issues, tested them for months with a beta team, etc..................

Explained ourselves, and were active in a huge thread, etc.....

Silence from the creator so far on this one............

As for the GC issue, Poser should NOT have made GC on the default. For people who just moved from a non-GC to a GC workflow with absolutely no warning, they got hit in the face with errors that they had no idea how to fix because almost ZERO content is adjusted to take GC into account. Very few people have been listening to Bagginsbill talk about GC for the past five years. They were totally unprepared for the change. Even forum regulars still ask questions about GC, for goodness' sake. And vendors apparently got inundated with support requests for old content over the issue -- even if their new stuff was GC compliant.

If you disagree, that's reasonable. But one thing that should not be default is Poser setting normal maps to GC 2.2 when GC is on. And, at least on my version, it does. If they should always be GC 1.0, then it doesn't make sense that they default to 2.2, does it? Since we don't have Les's actual words on this, it might be this that he was referring to. Let's cut the guy a break and not get on his case over hearsay, shall we?

Um, the Scarlet CR2 is setting the gamma on the normals maps to "scene", instead of specifying "1"

@moriador. A lot of the criticism comes from the claims the creator made. Want to make bold statements? You better back it up. So tell me, is this figure the way Poser was meant to be? After six years there is no reason it should have been released in the state it was. How are content creators supposed to support something that is broken? Sorry, there is no excuse. Want something to take off? You as a creator have a responsibility to make damn sure the figure is ready by the time it's released. First impressions last. Also the testers in this case are to blame as well. Quite frankly I don't even think they bothered to test it, because if we can pick up shit that they missed in a matter of minutes then there is an issue.

Um, the Scarlet CR2 is setting the gamma on the normals maps to "scene", instead of specifying "1"

Yes. I know that. I was the first one to point that out, if you recall. But scene is Poser's default, even if you have GC on. It shouldn't be. Same with anything plugged into bump, displacement, and transmap nodes. Why do they DEFAULT to the incorrect setting? That seems dumb to me.

Who cares why they default, it is wrong in the cr2. You build for the program, and don't make excuses after the fact.

@moriador. A lot of the criticism comes from the claims the creator made. Want to make bold statements? You better back it up. So tell me, is this figure the way Poser was meant to be? After six years there is no reason it should have been released in the state it was. How are content creators supposed to support something that is broken? Sorry, there is no excuse. Want something to take off? You as a creator have a responsibility to make damn sure the figure is ready by the time it's released. First impressions last. Also the testers in this case are to blame as well.

"This is the figure the way Poser was meant to be." Okay. It's over the top exaggeration. Do we criticize every vendor who does that? Because promos are filled with over the top and hyperbolic language. I'm sorry that people got duped into thinking this was the greatest best thing ever. I do hope you're not that gullible when you go shopping for anything else in life. Seriously. I'm not trying to make excuses for the creator. It's just that successful promotional language has never been downright honest. Not here, not anywhere. If anything, the real problem is that those who have solid reasons for dissatisfaction are not getting a quick and easy refund. And I think they should.

Who cares why they default, it is wrong in the cr2. You build for the program, and don't make excuses after the fact.

Sure. But why are we picking on one vendor? Should we make a list of the 4000 others whose products -- even recent products -- aren't GC compliant? I don't see anyone else being fingered today? Why not, if it's such a big deal?