So when I rig Diamond in Poser pro 14 ,I rig her with JCM's, right ?
she's a subD mesh so backward compatibility isn't a issue.

I'm still not clear how ya rig her in Daz Studio do I rig her like V6 or V7 ?
if I rig her like V6,will DSON work in Poser ? 

so how do you make a Unity,Unreal Diamond version ? she alt to be quads or tris ?
what polycount should she have ? do ya rig her in poser for Unity,Unreal and export a .fbx or something like that ?

If you rig her with traditional sphere rigging with JCM's in Poser she will work in Poser and Studio, 

To get her into a game engine, export her as FBX and just import her into the game engine. If the engine requires triangles most will do that for you automatically when reading the winding order.

If it is already low poly count figure I would not worry about poly count unless it goes over 64k when triangulated. Some engines only support 64k per wire frame and if it goes over that it is split into two wire frames.

In DS you can rig her using classic Poser Rigging (V4), TriAx (V5 or 6), V7 (Dual Quat) or with General Weight Maps. FBX export from DS will convert the first two to general weight maps and will, if I understand it correctly, leave Dual Quat as Dual Quat.  The format does not understand JCM and including morphs in the export significantly increases the weight of the figure. I know some additional work is done to move morphs across for the Morph3D store (AFAIK, that does include JCM), but I do not know what that work entails. 

Thanks a lot for the info :)

Does Poser & Daz Studio support zBrushes GUVTiles or Mudbox's PTex mapping ?

In Poser & Daz Studio can you rig a army tanks tracks to work ?

Thanks

Thanks a lot for the info :)

Does Poser & Daz Studio support zBrushes GUVTiles or Mudbox's PTex mapping ?

In Poser & Daz Studio can you rig a army tanks tracks to work ?

Thanks

DAZ Studio and 3Delight do support PTEX, though Iray does not. (Strange since NVIDIA and Pixar collaborated on the white paper.  I am not sure what GUV tiles are. 

Both Poser and DAZ Studio can rig tank tracks, Most realistic means that I can think of involves soome complex ERC links but that would probably not translate out well.

  the mesh isn't mine I'm just using him as a example.he came with zBrush

zBrush can make standard maps or PTex looken maps .

zBrush has had the PTex looken maps long before I ever herd of PTex. 

 http://docs.pixologic.com/reference-guide/tool/polymesh/uv-map/

good thing NVIDIA and Pixar are on the same page ;)

it alt to be easy enough to rig in poser and daz studio .can't be no worse then rigging in the 90's.

but I thought I would start with some thing simple a Tank then a Mech and then Diamond ,that's the plan anyways.

Say we have a mesh made up of 100 different parts in Poser Pro 14.

Can we have only certain parts of the mesh to subdivided and other parts of the mesh that do not subdivided,

Can we do that ? 

Say we have a mesh made up of 100 different parts in Poser Pro 14 & Daz Studio.

Can we have only certain parts of the mesh to subdivided and other parts of the mesh that do not subdivided,

Can we do that ? 

GUV tiles are just mapping by polygon (where each polygon is broke off from the whole and UV mapped) if I recall. So yes, Poser would likely support that but your end users will hate you for the rest of your natural existence.

Poser allows for partial subdivision via bodyparts. For example, if you don't want the eyeballs to subdivide along with the body you simply select the eye, go to the properties for it and choose Subdivide separately from figure. If it's a prop, it gets tricky. I don't know if Daz Studio supports partial subdivision.  Poser does not currently support PTex.

Why does end users hate GVU's ?

If end users hate GVU's then wouldn't they hate PTex also ?

GUV's are not placed in any order that a user can edit directly. The polygons are taken by vertex order I believe and placed on the UV tile. So you could have a polygon from the foot next to a polygon from the chest. It's nearly impossible to edit in a traditional paint program. And yes, PTEX equally so, which is why most apps convert the PTEX data to standard UV information when sharing files between programs. This will probably continue until more programs adopt PTEX (assuming more programs will).

oh you mean merchants that made textures for the tank wouldn't like GVU's.

but it wouldn't matter to the end user thou right ? 

but for texturing my Tanks n Mechs I'd advise allegorithmic ,quixel :)

Teyon Wrote:
"So yes, Poser would likely support that but your end users will hate you for the rest of your natural existence."

Would be a great way to get revenge on a client who asked for a UV-Mapping service though :-D

Teyon Wrote:
"So yes, Poser would likely support that but your end users will hate you for the rest of your natural existence."

Would be a great way to get revenge on a client who asked for a UV-Mapping service though :-D

 Screaming For Vengeance

oh you mean merchants that made textures for the tank wouldn't like GVU's.

but it wouldn't matter to the end user thou right ? 

but for texturing my Tanks n Mechs I'd advise allegorithmic ,quixel :)

Well merchants and end users - assuming we're talking the Poser community. We've found that not only merchants edit characters/textures/props/sets/etc. It was surprising to discover just how many Poser users get their hands dirty with the intricacies that are involved in creating content without the intent of distributing that. Which is why it's something that has to be thought about. Could you use GUV's for your texture output? Sure but you have to consider how useful it will be to the people you're providing the model to, should they feel compelled to edit it at all. That said, you're the one making it and you should do what feels right or is easiest for you. If there is one thing I've learned about this community - and perhaps the 3D community at large - you can't please everyone. You're more likely to please nobody before you please anybody and the odds of pleasing everybody is slim.

They say the hardest boss to work for is the public.
and I know they argue on any and all the app's forums.
They all have this vs that app also and a lot of RTFM.etc etc
humans ....

Sure I could have made a normal tank with the 5 main parts.with UVMaster and Textured 8 hours a go.
and thrown it in the stores for $10.00,$20.00 but what would be the point.
or
I could make a wicked tank the likes DAZ Poser have never seen 
with 100's n 100's of parts that frankly when I started I have no idea how it's even possible to map n texture.
so if I pull this off ,then I've manage to grow as a CGI Artist.

I know for sure GVU's or "zBrush VUMap" are same as UVMaster so I can map it with GVU's and they will work in any app including DAZ Poser.
I'm not 100% sure but I think allegorithmic ,quixel will be able to texture it.

GVU's & allegorithmic ,quixel alt to map n texture it in a few days.
UVMaster & Photoshop where talking months to texture it.

All I want from the public is for them to really love it or really hate it.
as long as they don't consider it average ,I'm good. 

 Baba O'Riley

Hey RorrKonn, I hope this is the thread you meant or else it will really be OT.   As for the illustrated look  in Garden Surprise first I used Topaz Clean https://www.topazlabs.com/clean to prepare it and then I used this filter forge effect https://www.filterforge.com/filters/11155.html  but I did more adjustments in saturation and overlayed and blurred selectively in Photo-paint.  I didn't really tweak the filter much and I didn't use the layer at 100% opacity either.   Mainly I just fiddled till I got the look I wanted.   I had a great method for illustrations and comics with the filters included in Photpaint and had even saved it as a script but forgot to backup all my custom scripts and nibs and when I upgraded my pc and re-installed  PP they were all gone.   Being too lazy to re-create it I just resorted to ready-made scripts so as you can see it's really quite simple now :)

Hey RorrKonn, I hope this is the thread you meant or else it will really be OT.   As for the illustrated look  in Garden Surprise first I used Topaz Clean https://www.topazlabs.com/clean to prepare it and then I used this filter forge effect https://www.filterforge.com/filters/11155.html  but I did more adjustments in saturation and overlayed and blurred selectively in Photo-paint.  I didn't really tweak the filter much and I didn't use the layer at 100% opacity either.   Mainly I just fiddled till I got the look I wanted.   I had a great method for illustrations and comics with the filters included in Photpaint and had even saved it as a script but forgot to backup all my custom scripts and nibs and when I upgraded my pc and re-installed  PP they were all gone.   Being too lazy to re-create it I just resorted to ready-made scripts so as you can see it's really quite simple now :)

Oh ya good thing it's simple ;)
I thought maybe custom shaders .
but I'm a fan of Topaz Labs,I've collected Clean & Detail so far.eventually I'll collect them all.

My back up's are scattered on multiple devices I know there some where,maybe but it's a lost cause to find them.
Good thing where organized ;) 

Thanks for the info.

 

 

  the mesh isn't mine I'm just using him as a example.he came with zBrush

zBrush can make standard maps or PTex looken maps .

zBrush has had the PTex looken maps long before I ever herd of PTex. 

 http://docs.pixologic.com/reference-guide/tool/polymesh/uv-map/

good thing NVIDIA and Pixar are on the same page ;)

 

it alt to be easy enough to rig in poser and daz studio .can't be no worse then rigging in the 90's.

but I thought I would start with some thing simple a Tank then a Mech and then Diamond ,that's the plan anyways.

 

Looks like Atlas mapping. As Teyon said not a good choice. Anything will read it, but without a 3D Paint program, nobody can edit it. It is generally frowned upon in this market. 

this is a ruff draft example so you all get what I'm talking about but all of dark gray tank will be replaced buy the mech parts temporally shaded in blue.

so there will be 100's n 100's of parts to the tank. so all of the tank will look like a mech.

so regardless of how it's map .a 2D app will be all but worthless and don't see a 3D painter being any better. 

so if allegorithmic ,quixel is the only practical way to texture it. I don't see how it's mapped makes a difference.

@RorrKonn
It's because it's practically impossible to texture over it when using a 2D editor.  Compare it to the UV map of a figure, the eyes and head and body etc are laid out in a specific order so it's doable to texture it in 2D.  But if you converted that same figure to GUV and exported the UV map, there's no way you'd be able to paint over it (in 2D) cause the tiles are all over the place, it's mapped for efficient use of space rather than efficient painting.

I reckon that's why Teyon said your cutomers would hate you for the rest of your natural existence if you used it :-P

You're ok if you have a program that handles GUV for painitng, but most people don't.  I think the uptake of programs for painting 3D objects is oddly very far behind considering how many people use 3D programs.  In the early days it was seams that were the problem, but even now after that has been sorted, I still don't think enough people own a 3D painting program as they should.

• I could have worded that better, I believe it's mapped for least amount of distortion, but it still makes better use of space (but no good for 2D painting).

Even thou seams aren't a problem in a 3D texturer  .Sharp angles are a very big problem for 3D texture .

So a 2D or 3D texturer is worthless for the mech tank.

If your going to paint over the mech texture ya half to have allegorithmic ,quixel .

you can't compare the mech tank to a 1 character map.

even if you compare the mech tank to a 1000 character maps. characters still don't have sharp angles.

When ya making stuff ya just never know what ya half to worry about.

If I left that one shape in the tank . 

Do ya think people would interpret it as a nazi thing ?

I didn't realize those where your grass blades meshes.

I forgot to comment about your retopolgy comment but I know a lot make there stuff in zBrush and then retopologize it Zremesher it.

but I'm not modeling the tank to be retopologize.the red mesh is the final mesh.

I'm still working on the tank Treads ,making them more 3 dimensional in stead of so 2 dimensional.

If I make it in the just none rounded cube style "blue mesh" polycount 75,000.but I don't like the look.

If I bevel the edges "red mesh" polycount 150,000 and you can SubD the mesh.
So I'm making the tank with bevels.

I could make a 500 to 5000 polycount tank and texture the low polycount tank with the 150,000 polycount tank renders and use them as textures.

500 polycount treads wouldn't role

5000,150,000 polycount treads could role if the app can make it so.

Hmmm, some kind of IK thing would have to be used to make them work. I'm not aware of any way to do it, but animation isn't my strong thing other than trying to model with proper edgeloops for blendshapes and such. It's a lot to learn. I'd just displacement map the organic shapes onto a medium res mesh, but it's your experiment and you probably have a completely different workflow and toolset than I do. I always make everything with Poser/Carrara as the destination, model up to a medium resolution from a basemesh, uv map the fixed lower res mesh and adjust after subdivision, and sculpt higher res displacement maps. Probably an outmoded workflow (I don't retopo for instance) but I use older tools.

Carrara has a tanktread motion style IK plug-in written by Fenric. I'm sure that C4d has similar (mocca? Clueless), Poser or DS? Shrugs.

Careful with the bevels, you don't want to create the kind of bevels that generate tris. Causes smoothing artifacts with poser. Use control loops. Adds a lot of polys though. And a massive amount of work cause there's no way to really automate the process.

Another thing, you want to think about uv mapping your base repetitive shapes from the start, before it gets away from you. As it is now you're wading into a nightmare.

With any kind of phong style smoothing algorithm the proximity of the edge loop or control edge to the target edge is going to determine hardness of the edge. So, the further the control loop is away, the rounder the edge. This isn't taking into account the crease angle however, which is another adjustable variable.

Hard edge modeling for Poser 101, splitting verts not considered, nor smoothing groups.

What can I say ,I've never been any good at following the rules.

I would normal map a character but the mech tank is getting zBrush VUMaps
even if I mapped the mech tank the normal way if ya didn't have software that could burn shaders in to textures
like allegorithmic ,quixel you couldn't make textures for it anyways.

ya the bevel makes tri's at the ends but I don't have problems with Tri's but I know the SubD rule that SubD meshes are to be 100% quads
but to make the mech tank 100% quads would rase the polycount to 600,000 .so 100% quads aren't worth the 600,000 polycount price.

CGI is a magical world for me so I try different app's with different work flows. 

I don't think there's a wrong work flow.As long as your having fun. :)

Gotcha, if you're not concerned with the peculiarities of a particular renderer than it's a moot point. Probably silly to worry about how you models might look when people try to use them anyway, as long as you're having fun. Lol.

Btw, you can 3d paint hard edge models just fine, not sure where you're getting that you can't.

Not to beat a dead horse but I just want to point out that if you're not concerned with what the actual purpose of what those bevels are doing for your model, why use them? Save a whole lot of polys, patching a tire with scotch tape will get you just as far as not patching at all. Might as well save the tape.

Just in case you're curious when I refer to smoothing artifacts I'm talking about just regular old rendering/viewport preview basic stuff not subD.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phong_shading

Beveled edges actually help eliminate bloating from Smoothing being on.  Unless you turn it off, your model will bloat and look horrible. It might save polys, but most users don't ever turn it off so it's better to bevel them.

A control edge is a type of bevel, 3dfineries. It works better in poser than your standard tri at the corner bevel. Here's some images that I made to try to explain what I'm referring to (from a thread mini tutorial made years ago here on the forum). I think maybe you haven't read fully through my comments.

Ah, yes, I must have missed something.  Really good explanation too!

I am making the Mech Tank to render in any app .

The  Mech Tank will work SubDed or not SubDed.
The bevels are to make the not SubDed Mech Tank look better then just a straight edge cube.
The bevels are to make the SubDed  Mech Tank SubD correctly.

2 right ones are beveled .bottom ones SubDed. 

I know about pong shading n all. 

I need the paint brush to follow the mesh not just paint in the direction it's painting in. 
Do you know of any 3D painter that does not over spray at the edges and deform the texture ?

Hmmm, forum is acting strangely. Let's try this again. Hard surface model I made; 100% quads, no split verts. It's high poly in the detailed areas but I don't like how split verts look so its a trade off. No smoothing problems.

Yup, Carrara and photoshop, paint on layers and mask. Or use alpha brushes without being sloppy.

Your model is not going to render the same in all apps RorrKonn unless you adopt a method that works properly in all apps under the basic conditions. Name dropping and just saying it is so does not make it so. Ok, bored now. Seeya.

It just seems like you're just trying to find an easy way out for everything to me. UV map the model. Use conventional modeling practices. As Bagginsbill would say "stop faffing about".

 EldritchCellar I understand what ya saying in your tutorial and it's a fine way to model but it will raze the polycount.

There's no nGons in the tank. 

I understand what ya saying about bad shading on low polycount meshes some app's normals will help with the bad shading. 

So if normal can't fix it SubD's will. :)

And why would anyone want to subD a tank in the first place? "Hmmm, let me subD this telephone booth... just because?"

Please correct me someone, but am I missing some logic here?

Don't get mad at me and call me lazy cause you not understanding me.

Forums are not the best for understanding and I'm not the best at righting and explaining my self.

Name dropping I didn't get.

But there's a lot of meshes I want to make and I don't have a lot of time to work on them so I try to find the fastest best way to make them.

I try to make my meshes as low polycount as possible.

Ah, I see you want to rely on subD as a fix. Gotcha. Crosspost.

Ok, guess I'm just old fashioned.

 Just cause we have 2 different philosophy's does not make any one wrong