Nails60 posted at 6:03AM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355317

...The problem with render engines is you must consider what type of program poser is. It is a content manipulation program. . IMHO poser must have it's own renderers, which users and content creators can rely on for continuity going forward....

and another "Thumbs Up"

Nails60 posted at 6:12AM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355317

I've tried using Reality for poser. Every scene I had to modify lights and materials. Now if this was the same for these other render engines can you imagine the nightmares for content developers as they get constant requests for support asking how to use content x with renderer y.

So how many vendors did you contact for Lux render support? I'm guessing none.

As far as having someone else write the render engines and then them suddenly stop working. I don't see that happening even if the next version of the render engine is completely new.

Sure if the end user updates it to a version that wont work, it wont work. And we're right back to a similar position like you were in with Lux, and never contacted a single vendor. That isn't the vendors fault, there is nothing for them to support.

Sure. leave the render engines that are in Poser, in Poser. For basically what you talked about. Commonality, stability, ease of use, etc But stop nerfing it so freaking bad, just to please the minority. There is a reason that most Poser users know other programs. And it isn't because the service packs for P8 that we call P11 are "state of the art"

LaurieA posted at 9:56PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4354120

Afrodite-Ohki posted at 9:45AM Sat, 22 June 2019 - #4354118

LaurieA posted at 9:41AM Sat, 22 June 2019 - #4354115

Rendo can't afford to make the same mistake that SM made and that is Content Is King. So unless they're willing to hire content makers that are every bit as capable as the Daz figure creators seem to be then they better come up with another solution. A large part of the reason Poser was doing so poorly is because the content for it was terrible. I'm not one that really likes plugins myself, but Daz figure compatibility in a plugin would be ok with me IF it's not the horrible thing that is DSON for Poser (which was always slow and buggy when I had it installed in Poser). Why not make a great plugin that allows Daz content and then people can choose to get it if that's what they want? I don't think anyone is asking for Poser to be DS 2.0. I think people are asking for the ability to use Daz figures in their program of choice - Poser. I don't see the problem. I think Poser would benefit having other things too - exporters to Unreal, Unity, other render engines. It has the potential to be really great in the right hands. Why not allow it to be all that it can be?

Maybe, instead of listening to people that are ok with Poser's status quo, they should be asking FORMER Poser users why they switched to DS? ;)

Laurie

The thing is, the way a lot of people here are speaking, they're talking as if the priority of Poser should be get it compatible with Genesis specifically. Which would make Poser development a slave to Daz3d, AND make it no point in paying the price for Poser when a person could just get DS for free doing the same things.

Enabling Poser to have addons so that someone could come up with a Genesis loader - sure, that would be cool. But the people working on Poser should be focused on making Poser better, independently of what Daz3d is doing.

Only because that has been the most-asked-for-thing by Poser users...and for years. It's going to come up, so at some point it's going to need to be addressed. I don't think anyone wants to be negative about it (I'm certainly not), and I'll probably continue to use DS for Daz figures to be completely frank, but there are people who really want to use those figures but don't want to use DS. They can use them in CC, why not Poser? It's not a horrible request. LOL

Laurie

Late to this.

I think what Poser users wanted was not so much to use Daz figures in Poser but to have figures that look as good as the latest Daz figures, are easy to use, and are supported by heaps of vendors. That can kind of be done without supporting Daz figures (directly). Dawn was/is a step there. PE, too. La Femme is young, but she's certainly in that direction. I just wanna make art :D

What I hope for is: Stability. Everything scriptable. Full Cycles support. Plugin API should be first class, bug free, well documented, free to use. (blender bridge, external render engines, etc.)

Anyway, I'm super optimistic about this. SM Poser never made sense. Rendo Poser does. Improvement, right there :D

shvrdavid posted at 10:28PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355275

I have read a lot of this thread, and there seems to be some general misconceptions about render engines, in general. One is that Superfly is Cycles. Well, yes it is... Cycles from about 4 years ago...... Cycles has advanced miles since then.

One thing I would like to see in the next version of Poser, is api support for whatever render engine you want to use. There are so many free engines out there it is scary. Cycles, Iray, AMD Prorender, etc, just sort of scratch the surface.

Adding the proper api support has many advantages. Top of the list, is that you might not have to do anything to Poser to use the next version of (insert any) render engine. Things like new versions of CUDA for example, would be updated in the render engine and not be bound to the base program. Another thing is driver issues. Who has a better chance of getting driver issues fixed? Rendo or a render engine? Yeah, that's what I thought... lol

Next is that the end user can choose what engine to use, based on the hardware, content, experience, etc, they happen to have.

Binding a render engine into a program is an issue, and all you have to do is look at any program that has done so when the next version of whatever render api comes out.

Leave the render stuff in the engine, and write a program api to talk to them. Yes many programs have built in engines, Firefly in Poser, Cycles in Blender, etc. The difference is that programs like Blender have the api set up to add basically any render engine you want to it. Most 3D packages do this with proper api setups.

It is time that Poser do the same, and stop embedding engines into the program that can't easily be updated when the engines are.

Plus, it's great that your entire GUI is not tied up for the minutes or hours of the render. I also loved in Luxrender being able to change the lighting during the render. Man, that saved so many re-renders. Tweak the intensity and temperature of all the lights individually, if you set it up to be that way. niiiiice. Plus, renders can go off to external engine. Which can attach as many network slaves (local or remote) as you have access to.

thoennes posted at 12:13PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355325

Plus, it's great that your entire GUI is not tied up for the minutes or hours of the render. I also loved in Luxrender being able to change the lighting during the render. Man, that saved so many re-renders. Tweak the intensity and temperature of all the lights individually, if you set it up to be that way. niiiiice. Plus, renders can go off to external engine. Which can attach as many network slaves (local or remote) as you have access to.

Are you using Poser Pro 11? "Render in Background" allows you to keep working in your scene while the render is taking place. Queue manager and "Render in Queue" allows network rendering.

shvrdavid posted at 1:44PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355320

And it isn't because the service packs for P8 that we call P11 are "state of the art"

Not certain what you are saying here. Are you implying that there haven't been any improvements or features added since Poser 8?

I fear that is what he is saying Deecey. Basically P11 is P8 + SuperFly.

Some things have been added that nobody was asking for, while all major enhancement requests and major bug fixes are all still open.

I am afraid I more or less have to agree.

Honestly, I am angry at myself. I should have been pushing way harder and way more aggressive to get a permanent fix for 31615. I am too soft. I should have kicked doors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poser#Program_history

P11 is P8 + Superfly is just rubbish. Sorry, but FFS.

Seriously?

Yes, Tony. Sometimes looking in a mirror DOES work wonders. Jesus, there were more improvements than Superfly and your beloved Fitting room.

Poser 9/PP2012 (Sep 2011)

• Vertex Weight Maps • Vertex Weight Auto Transfer • Weight Map creation tools • Grouping Objects • Constraint channels and constraint objects • Light emitting objects • Expanded context menus • Morphing tool tablet support • Frame selected object • Orbit selected object • Scene category in library • Multi-select drag and drop support from library • Subsurface scattering • Rendering performance improvements • Realtime OpenGL scene preview • Faster dynamic hair • Pre-render texture caching • Python 2.7 support • Improved Collada support

Poser 10/PP2014 (late 2013)

• 64-bit native application • New UI • Bullet physics • Fitting Room • Comic book preview mode • Pixar subdivision surfaces • Parameter Change indicator • Recent Render palette • Upload to Facebook and StuffIt Connect • Drag and drop conforming • Conforming with scaling • Morphing tool enhancements • Load full body morphs • Dependent Parameters Editor • Improved rigging • Capsule falloff zones • Multiple falloff zones • Joint strength indicator • Indirect Lighting • Light falloff and attenuation • Tone mapping and exposure • Render PSD layers • Updated PoserFusion plugins • Improved OpenGL preview • New searchable library • Metadata support

Poser 11/PP2016 (Sep 2015)

• High resolution display support • Custom parameter Palettes • Actor Selection history • Customizable keyboard shortcuts • Text props • Measurement props • Revamped Direct manipulation tool • Auto Save • Synchronized morph dials • Custom partial scene saving • Cycles/SuperFly integration • Area lights • Caustics • Cartoon OpenGL Render improvements • Antialiased display • Subdivision level morph targets • Improved handling of subdivision surfaces • Vertex weights constrain to material • Figure symmetry improvements • Control props • Pre- and Post- transform morph • Animated joint centers • Animated orientations • Smooth translation bending • Value Op Editor • Layered materials • 3D Texture Node improvements • HTML library • Improved library search • Absolute scaling for 3D format import and export • Alembic export • Exposed hidden options in parameter palettes • Simple selection tool

Poser 11.1 (Dec 2017)

• Animation palette categories • 3D Paths Palette

Poser 11.1.1 (Jan 2019)

• Maintenance release

Deecey posted at 9:14PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355369

shvrdavid posted at 1:44PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355320

And it isn't because the service packs for P8 that we call P11 are "state of the art"

Not certain what you are saying here. Are you implying that there haven't been any improvements or features added since Poser 8?

Sometimes looking in a mirror does wonders. I understand his reaction. Hair room, Poser5 technology, hundreds of enhancement proposals and bug reports. Face room, Poser5 technology, same thing. Cloth room, Poser5 technology, same thing.

Basically; All rooms are still Poser 5 technology with little to no improvements/fixes, so Scott is pretty right in his assessment. And the Fitting room comes from my idea after long talks and proposals to Steve Cooper on the ambassadors RDNA forum.

Alyson, Roxie, Pauline and their male counterparts. Hundreds of enhancement requests and bug reports. Everybody running to the DAZ figures because nothing gets repaired, fixed or enhanced.

Sometimes one has to be humble and re-think how did it all get so far.

Most beta -testers did their job. They filed the reports.

caisson posted at 3:22PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355385

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poser#Program_history

P11 is P8 + Superfly is just rubbish. Sorry, but FFS.

Pretty amazing, isn't it? So, weight mapping was just an SR according to these people.

:eyeroll:

As I wrote above, usually I am too soft.

I test, and testing and reporting is what I do.

Almost all "figure" reports are mine. How many got fixed? Alyson and Miki4 have 42 magnet errors (just an example). Fix? Roxy has unused morphs and bones. Fix? Pauline, no, I am gonna shut up about Pauline and Paul.

And what was the result?

Don't let Tony have a look at your figures because he finds bugs, and then, we won't fix them anyway.

And Tony got a bad name as "bashing" the figures while at the same time all end users are fleeing to the DAZ figures "en mass". And nobody asks why?

It's the figures and errors in them that chase everybody out. And a lot of never upgraded Poser5 technology while everybody was asking, no SHOUTING, for "room" improvements.

No, we got a measuring tool. Tja, OK.

I tested it's function and never used it afterwards. And I am in Poser each and every day as most here.

Oh, and want to hear the best news?

Don't use beta testers.

Get your "friends" to do the testing, they won't reports as many bugs because a) they do not have the the tech, and b) they don't want to report because they want to stay "friends".

Glitter, you are talking about weightmapping.

Aha, a great find. I love you deerly with all my heart and the rest of my humble body.

I have a little word :

In the good old days we had conventional rigging. It worked but had its limitations, so we enhanced it with JCM's.

Then came weight and both bulge map rigging. Whaw, finally we could rig properly. (and some of us do)

So why on planet earth are there 146 JCM's in PE, and 120 JCM's in LaFemme?

Let me tell you why.

The riggers don't know how to rig, and the beta- testers don't open their mouths.

Yes, I know who rigged La Femme, and I am shocked (and that is an understatement) And GOD only knows what Thigh JCM's are doing in the abdomen anyway. Damm, want to release a figure, learn how to rig properly.

2 evenings, 2 Evenings is all what it took to cut open the LaFemme obj file to transform funnels into legs and re-rig her completely without a single JCM.

I did not cut open PE, because the rig is the least of her issues.

Of course they build and load less JCM's.

What most forget is the deep impact 31615 actually has.

Each JCM you load becomes an "individual" in each and every vertex group concerned.

That is where 146 and 120 come from.

tonyvilters posted at 4:13PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355395

In the good old days we had conventional rigging. It worked but had its limitations, so we enhanced it with JCM's.

And magnets. Which the more recent characters no longer use.

Then came weight and both bulge map rigging. Whaw, finally we could rig properly. (and some of us do)

Which negates the claim that Poser 11 is basically Poser 8 with SuperFly.

Funny. I keep hearing from a very small number of people that JCMs are only needed for 'people who don't know how to rig'. But I never see them display any evidence of it in a figure that is remotely appealing or marketable. It's fine to critique, but when you are constantly bashing the skill level of others, but aren't demonstrating anything better it's hard to really view it with much credibility

I posted screengrabs of my corrected figures multiple times on the ex-official forum, even accepting challenges from other figure creators up to the point they asked me to stop showing "what can be done" with proper weight- and both bulge- maps painted riggings.

Deecey posted at 11:15PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355398

tonyvilters posted at 4:13PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355395

In the good old days we had conventional rigging. It worked but had its limitations, so we enhanced it with JCM's.

And magnets. Which the more recent characters no longer use.

Then came weight and both bulge map rigging. Whaw, finally we could rig properly. (and some of us do)

Which negates the claim that Poser 11 is basically Poser 8 with SuperFly.

Tja Deecey, with older and conventionally rigged figures we got magnets and JCM's and with the newly released weightmapped figures we still get JCM's to fight.

So for the end user? Nothing changed.

I still hear Nerd3D say "content is king" , and then we get Paul and Pauline, and then he releases P11 without a fix for 31615 (and the about 20 or so related and well documented problem reports), then he has to rig himself, and falls in the JCM trap while saying at the same time ; , "Use the new tools". Well, what's he waiting for? All you need to do is take the time to do it. (And agreed, it takes longer then to create and load a JCM).

tonyvilters posted at 5:22PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355407

Deecey posted at 11:15PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355398

tonyvilters posted at 4:13PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355395

In the good old days we had conventional rigging. It worked but had its limitations, so we enhanced it with JCM's.

And magnets. Which the more recent characters no longer use.

Then came weight and both bulge map rigging. Whaw, finally we could rig properly. (and some of us do)

Which negates the claim that Poser 11 is basically Poser 8 with SuperFly.

Tja Deecey, with older and conventionally rigged figures we got magnets and JCM's and with the newly released weightmapped figures we still get JCM's to fight.

So for the end user? Nothing changed.

So now you've moved the goalposts from your original point that Poser 11 is basically "Poser 8 with SuperFly."

That Poser figures still use JCMs is a non-issue. DAZ figures still use them as well. That hasn't stopped anyone from using and developing for Genesis figures, which also use weight mapping.

Just saying.

Seems to me that Poser has a lot of tools and advances that people rarely, if ever. take advantage of. I remember that I had a contest earlier this year where one of the critieria was that you had to use at least one of Poser's tools like the wind force or bullet physics. No one used Bullet physics, but everyone complains they don't understand it.

Well you learn things on these forums everyday. I believed, and it seemed to be the case with other software I've used, that service releases and patches fixed bugs, while new versions of software added features, but it's clearly the opposite in poser land, how else would we have that great throwaway line about poser11 just being a service release of poser 8, to poor scorn on poser. Secondly obviously the best way to help with the development of poser is to convince people it's not worth upgrading to poser 11 pro as it has no benefits and poser content is rubbish so they won't buy that. A great way to help renderosity's sales so they get the income needed to make poser a commercially successful product and be worth developing. Gosh, I've misunderstood this so long!

Nails60 posted at 6:07PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355415

Well you learn things on these forums everyday. I believed, and it seemed to be the case with other software I've used, that service releases and patches fixed bugs, while new versions of software added features, but it's clearly the opposite in poser land, how else would we have that great throwaway line about poser11 just being a service release of poser 8, to poor scorn on poser. Secondly obviously the best way to help with the development of poser is to convince people it's not worth upgrading to poser 11 pro as it has no benefits and poser content is rubbish so they won't buy that. A great way to help renderosity's sales so they get the income needed to make poser a commercially successful product and be worth developing. Gosh, I've misunderstood this so long!

Nails, shhhhhh. Tony climbed out on that tree limb and started sawing. Don't stop him now!

:-)

tonyvilters posted at 6:37PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355406

I posted screengrabs of my corrected figures multiple times on the ex-official forum, even accepting challenges from other figure creators up to the point they asked me to stop showing "what can be done" with proper weight- and both bulge- maps painted riggings.

I'd be interested in seeing how JCM-less La Femme bends. Start a new thread and show us!

randym77 posted at 8:06PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355422

tonyvilters posted at 6:37PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355406

I posted screengrabs of my corrected figures multiple times on the ex-official forum, even accepting challenges from other figure creators up to the point they asked me to stop showing "what can be done" with proper weight- and both bulge- maps painted riggings.

I'd be interested in seeing how JCM-less La Femme bends. Start a new thread and show us!

The only figure I ever remember him posting was his own figure.

I never said that there were not improvements to Poser. What I meant was that there have been basically no changes to the UI, the general core, etc in Poser. Going from 32 to bit to 64 bit, that's a setting in the assembler and a few tweaks to most programs. No it isn't always that easy, but it isn't that hard either. I have been tinkering around with some of the things I have to update them from 32 bit winapi to 64 bit, and there are some quarks here and there. Odd errors pop up, etc. But that is what the assembler is for in the first place. To find the majority of those errors for you. No, it wont find all of them, so don't get them impression it will. It would be nice if it could thou,nlol. I have made simple mistakes like forgetting to double the stack size, and that causes all sort of issues going from 32 to 64 bit right off the bat. Yes, it requires some work to do it, needs tested, etc. Enough on that thou....

Macs reporting that Poser 11 isn't fully 64 bit? Well... I'm betting there is good reason for Macs to report that Poser 11 will not function in the next version because it isn't fully 64 bit. But feel free to argue that all you want, I am sure that Apple is probably wrong about the 32 bit calls it makes that flagged that in the first place. There is a way to do 32 bit calls from a 64 bit program in most opp systems, including Windows and OsX.

Yes there were things added to Poser, I am not debating that. Many of them, as Deecey mentioned. But the fact remains it is still built around the same UI in Xcode. Directx is at version 12 and Poser still uses a Mac based and developed UI. I had many discussions with people at SM about that, and it still uses it. There are advantages to Xcode, and there are some really bad drawbacks as well. One of them is speed. Using it in Windows, well, do the math on that versus directx, directdraw, directshow, etc. There is no comparison and the difference is hundreds of frames a second on most systems out there. Animation software that can't do preview playback at the intended fps (or close to it), is beyond odd if you ask me.

As far as weight mapping goes. Does anyone really understand what that actually is? Well, oddly all it really is, is a weighted sphere joint. Go figure. Instead of using a sphere or a capsule to do the math on each vertex and assign a weight to it, you just assign an array to it versus doing all the math on it in the first place. It's neat how it works, because it actually cuts down on the math needed to bend the joint. Less math, better bends. Awesome isn't it.....

I hope that Rendo can make an awesome version of Poser. I really do. So don't think that I don't. But at the same time don't assume that my opinion isn't valid either. I have been using Poser for a long time. Active with its development for a long time as well. And I hope to continue doing the same.

But in the end, I don't want P12 to be a service pack either. Poser needs to shine in the next version. Or it's content wont make it past the Pawns to be the "Content is King".

shvrdavid posted at 9:26PM Sat, 29 June 2019 - #4355425

I never said that there were not improvements to Poser. What I meant was that there have been basically no changes to the UI, the general core, etc in Poser.

(rest cut for brevity)

Thank you for clarifying, Scott. Much appreciated. And a far more realistic description than that Tony offered. LOL

Wow, you can't possibly expect me to read all this... I couldn't think of a better home for Poser. Welcome Home!

I'll be back with some cat pics... just kiddin... or am I?

I would like to add something else to a general misconception about weight mapping a figure.

2D weight mapping, like in Poser, can not replace JCM's. That isn't possible. Let me explain a bit.

Like I mentioned in my previous post, the only difference between sphere joint rigging and weight mapped joint rigging, is exposing the vertex weights to the UI. That's it....

With sphere mapping, you assign an inner and outer region, and the weights are calculated from that. So it is basically just a falloff curve based on distance, nothing more.

With the map exposed to the UI, then it is weight map-able. Which means it no longer has to follow a falloff curve like a sphere joint. The weights can be anything you want them to be, on any vertex that is mapped.

Since it is still using the same way of bending the joint as a sphere joint, (in 2d) all you can do is assign a weight, that is basically just a percentage of how far it moves when the joint moves.

To give a good example, if a joint is bent 90 degrees and the weight is 50% on all the vertices, they only go 45 degrees around the joint center now. Literally, that is it.... It bent 45 degrees when you dialed in 90...

The bulge maps work the same way, and can only move the vertex out, or in, from the joint center. Following the same percentage thing, with a max distance setting.

Notice that you can't move anything on the 3rd dimension. Simply because it is the same program handling as a sphere joint. If you need to move a vertex on that 3rd dimension you only have a few options.

One is scrapping scaling and pulling your hair out to do it that way. Another is to use a ghost bone. A Magnet works. Or a jcm.

Magnets and jcm's can move on all three axis's, unlike joints.

If you want a figure to bend like we do, things have to move in 3 dimensions when the joint bends. Just like things on us move when joints bend. There is no way around the 2d rigging limitation to get 3D joints unless you use something for the 3rd axis.

That something, is usually jcm's.

Good explanation Scott. Thanks.

Anyone who thinks rigging can replace JCMs doesn't know about rigging. Anyone who doesn't know why a Thigh JCM appears on more than the thigh doesn't understand JCMs.

I agree poser needs some work. Could they have tested their figures out more? Of course. Honestly I do not think SM EVER used Poser to make a figure themselves from start to finish because of all the bugs that could be found in the versions and updates released... But I also think that the reason, the main reason, poser users go to daz is Poser fails to make a "flagship figure". Make 1 male, 1 female, and update that one figure so all items/clothing/skin can be used in the future. Having a new set of figures every release, never updating them, never fixing them, never supporting them themselves, has led down a dark path of "no good figures". There really is nothing wrong with the existing poser figures as a "1.0" release version. They almost never take it to a 2.0, and 99% of the time never to a 3.0. Miki is the only thing I can think of that went that far and I don't see massive improvements. What's worse is they relied 100% on end consumers to generate content. I don't mind this, being a content developer myself, but spending an extra $1000 on a professionally made HD skin for one of their figures could have gone a Long LONG way to show what those figures could really be.

On a side note I hate that there is not superfly update to work with my new RTX card... but I use Octane plugin anyway.

DarksealStudios posted at 7:21AM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355459

Anyone who thinks rigging can replace JCMs doesn't know about rigging. Anyone who doesn't know why a Thigh JCM appears on more than the thigh doesn't understand JCMs.

I agree poser needs some work. Could they have tested their figures out more? Of course. Honestly I do not think SM EVER used Poser to make a figure themselves from start to finish because of all the bugs that could be found in the versions and updates released... But I also think that the reason, the main reason, poser users go to daz is Poser fails to make a "flagship figure". Make 1 male, 1 female, and update that one figure so all items/clothing/skin can be used in the future. Having a new set of figures every release, never updating them, never fixing them, never supporting them themselves, has led down a dark path of "no good figures". There really is nothing wrong with the existing poser figures as a "1.0" release version. They almost never take it to a 2.0, and 99% of the time never to a 3.0. Miki is the only thing I can think of that went that far and I don't see massive improvements. What's worse is they relied 100% on end consumers to generate content. I don't mind this, being a content developer myself, but spending an extra $1000 on a professionally made HD skin for one of their figures could have gone a Long LONG way to show what those figures could really be.

Actually, unless, I'm mis-remembering things, Teyon did indeed do Roxie and Pauline from scratch. But from everything I ever recall reading about the figures online he didn't have enough time to finish them properly. That seems to be an ongoing issue with SM's Poser. There was never enough time to finish development before release.

EClark1894 posted at 7:56AM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355478

DarksealStudios posted at 7:21AM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355459

Anyone who thinks rigging can replace JCMs doesn't know about rigging. Anyone who doesn't know why a Thigh JCM appears on more than the thigh doesn't understand JCMs.

I agree poser needs some work. Could they have tested their figures out more? Of course. Honestly I do not think SM EVER used Poser to make a figure themselves from start to finish because of all the bugs that could be found in the versions and updates released... But I also think that the reason, the main reason, poser users go to daz is Poser fails to make a "flagship figure". Make 1 male, 1 female, and update that one figure so all items/clothing/skin can be used in the future. Having a new set of figures every release, never updating them, never fixing them, never supporting them themselves, has led down a dark path of "no good figures". There really is nothing wrong with the existing poser figures as a "1.0" release version. They almost never take it to a 2.0, and 99% of the time never to a 3.0. Miki is the only thing I can think of that went that far and I don't see massive improvements. What's worse is they relied 100% on end consumers to generate content. I don't mind this, being a content developer myself, but spending an extra $1000 on a professionally made HD skin for one of their figures could have gone a Long LONG way to show what those figures could really be.

Actually, unless, I'm mis-remembering things, Teyon did indeed do Roxie and Pauline from scratch. But from everything I ever recall reading about the figures online he didn't have enough time to finish them properly. That seems to be an ongoing issue with SM's Poser. There was never enough time to finish development before release.

A company that is determined to make a figure a success doesn't give the modeler less than 2 months to create a figure from scratch. Then, they should give a rigger more than double that time. And, finally, a texture artist should be the 3rd component of a good figure.

Asking ONE person to do the job of 3 in 2 months time, using software that is being changed daily and not ready for release is asking for a figure to fail and be scorned from the first day of release.

The SM figures, here we go.

Every release, SM tried to get figures in the app that where using the latest technology. => Deecey feel free to add info if required.

Long time ago, Teyon build the initial obj files, and then transferred the figure to a second person (I must be getting very old because I do not remember his name) to do the retopology and the rigging. During that period a third person made the textures.

Unfortunately for all of them that had to be done WHILE the Poser team was still coding the new version, and all that time they had to work with the new tech AT THE SAME TIME that a) the app was not ready yet, and b) there where still many- many bug fixes to fix.

In the end , the figures would be more or less ready at the same time as the app. Beta-testers time we had to test the "new" figures could be measured in weeks, sometimes only days. We always got the figures W A Y too late and W A Y too late in the process.

To give just a small example of Roxie.

The builders of Roxie had a great idea for geometry lashes. And Roxie was released with her geometry lashes.

During the beta testing we where focussing on obj file and rigging, texturing, and that turned out fine.

I do not remember the exact time; Was it a day before, the day off, or the day AFTER release, that I, (yes, again, me, myself and I) discovered that the Roxie head with those geometry lashes where NOT faceroom compatible.

That gives you an idea of the time frame the figure content creators had to work in.

For Paul and Pauline, our good old Teyon was doing EVERYTHING himself, the others where already fired.

Deecey had the same issue. She did a GREAT Job on the manuals, but was facing the same issue. The time to get the latest apps fixes in the manual on time.

Darrel Glidden was the retopology and rigger guy. Oef, grey cells returning to activity. Sorry Darrel, that one is on me. I must be getting very old very fast. (Have the grey hairs to prove it too.) LOL.

The testing process itself is an issue for many figures. (Speaking in GENERALnow)

Somebody makes an obj file. That goes to a rigger and a texture creator. (Sometimes the same person, sometimes the a team of friends)

Then "usually" : The builder of the obj file starts making the morphs.

When all is ready, they send it off to testers.

Now, "a" tester finds an issue with the obj file. WTF? ? ? ? The rig banana's, the texture banana's, most of the morphs => Banana's. => All that time, all that work "lost".

The obj file, the "core" of each figure should go in beta testing WEEKS if not MONTHS before starting the rigging, texturing or morphs to prevent this mishap.

Most errors can ( or the start of most if not ALL problems further down the line) can be traced back to the obj file.

Example : You can have the best rigger in the world. But rigging tubes is completely different from rigging legs.

For a tube you put the joint center in the middle of the tube. Bend, bend and done. You have a tube.

To build a knee, you ALWAYS put more geometry in the area's that go in stretch and less geometry in area's that go in shrink, and you put the Joint center where the actual knee joint is. => Completely different outcomes. => Where is the error? => Who created the issue? => Do you have to add JCM's or change the rigging? => NO, you have to cut the obj file open and add and remove geometry where required, and only then re-rig.

And the most important, and most ignored part is. . . What rigging to use? ? ? No,

The most important part of the rigging is where you put the Joint centers.

I remember that I had a contest earlier this year where one of the critieria was that you had to use at least one of Poser's tools like the wind force or bullet physics. No one used Bullet physics, but everyone complains they don't understand it.

Eclarke, those features you mentioned typically required some animation key frames to implement the effects.. yes??

I have played with bullet physics and soft bodies in poser pro 2014 and frankly they are pretty decent IMHO.

The python based Poser physics plugin By "faceoff"( Paul Kinnane), was a critical part of my Character animation work for years until I was able to use My Endorphin software on windows after I had Migrated from Mac to Windows, as primary OS, and on to the DS aniMate and then Iclone pro Pipeline

How many self identified poser Character animators remain here.. beyond John Donahue(Operaguy)?

I have no opinion on JCM/Weightmapping rigging debate I leave that to the people who know that arena.

But as a professional Animator, the primary reason I Dumped poser was the Abysmal animation tools and when the sitting Product manager, at that time,(Nerd), publicly Stated ,in these forums, that the state of the Character animation tools in poser 11: "Makes me sad" .

No one can seriously claim that they have been effectively "updated" since... Poser 7?.. added the largely useless "animation layers".

Audio based Lipsinc options??..."Talk designer", only useful by default with Smith micro figures that I (and many others ) never used.

Human IK solver??.. Still broken beyond the point of being useful, as it was in Posers-4,5,6,7,8,9,10.

Spline Graph Editor ??..unchanged from poser 4 technology.

Dope sheet (animation pallet)??..unchanged from poser 4 technology.

Hair dynamics..??unchanged from poser 5 technology

Cloth Dynamics..??unchanged from poser 5 technology

Ironicly the best Dynamic Cloth product ,I ever bought from the RMP,is the "Dyncreator"script by Lola69

It cracked the closed Daz optitex Format, enabling me to use My custom Dynamic clothing meshes in Daz studio as I never upgraded beyond DS 4.8 and thus do not use the slow "Dforce" system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg4NLVxQCuo

DarksealStudios posted at 1:26PM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355459

Anyone who thinks rigging can replace JCMs doesn't know about rigging. Anyone who doesn't know why a Thigh JCM appears on more than the thigh doesn't understand JCMs.

I agree poser needs some work. Could they have tested their figures out more? Of course. Honestly I do not think SM EVER used Poser to make a figure themselves from start to finish because of all the bugs that could be found in the versions and updates released... But I also think that the reason, the main reason, poser users go to daz is Poser fails to make a "flagship figure". Make 1 male, 1 female, and update that one figure so all items/clothing/skin can be used in the future. Having a new set of figures every release, never updating them, never fixing them, never supporting them themselves, has led down a dark path of "no good figures". There really is nothing wrong with the existing poser figures as a "1.0" release version. They almost never take it to a 2.0, and 99% of the time never to a 3.0. Miki is the only thing I can think of that went that far and I don't see massive improvements. What's worse is they relied 100% on end consumers to generate content. I don't mind this, being a content developer myself, but spending an extra $1000 on a professionally made HD skin for one of their figures could have gone a Long LONG way to show what those figures could really be.

On a side note I hate that there is not superfly update to work with my new RTX card... but I use Octane plugin anyway.

SMS did update Paul and Pauline to 2.0. We got ethnic versions, and Pauline’s variants got makeup options. They fiddled a bit with Pauline’s geometry. I use them, though I would never claim that they are customer-drawing figures.

RobZhena posted at 1:56PM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355527

DarksealStudios posted at 1:26PM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355459

Anyone who thinks rigging can replace JCMs doesn't know about rigging. Anyone who doesn't know why a Thigh JCM appears on more than the thigh doesn't understand JCMs.

I agree poser needs some work. Could they have tested their figures out more? Of course. Honestly I do not think SM EVER used Poser to make a figure themselves from start to finish because of all the bugs that could be found in the versions and updates released... But I also think that the reason, the main reason, poser users go to daz is Poser fails to make a "flagship figure". Make 1 male, 1 female, and update that one figure so all items/clothing/skin can be used in the future. Having a new set of figures every release, never updating them, never fixing them, never supporting them themselves, has led down a dark path of "no good figures". There really is nothing wrong with the existing poser figures as a "1.0" release version. They almost never take it to a 2.0, and 99% of the time never to a 3.0. Miki is the only thing I can think of that went that far and I don't see massive improvements. What's worse is they relied 100% on end consumers to generate content. I don't mind this, being a content developer myself, but spending an extra $1000 on a professionally made HD skin for one of their figures could have gone a Long LONG way to show what those figures could really be.

On a side note I hate that there is not superfly update to work with my new RTX card... but I use Octane plugin anyway.

SMS did update Paul and Pauline to 2.0. We got ethnic versions, and Pauline’s variants got makeup options. They fiddled a bit with Pauline’s geometry. I use them, though I would never claim that they are customer-drawing figures.

The problem is, they weren't supposed to be. As Tony pointed out, the figures that shipped with Poser were only supposed to be test figures. They worked with the program, which really, is all they were supposed to do. Every now and then, SM released a clothing pack for the figures, but real support was rare and fleeting. Plus, you could only get the figures if you bought the program. So SM and for that matter, Fractal Designs, MetaCreations, Curious Labs, E-Frontier, left market support up to third parties.

Well, this thread is to celebrate forward movement for Poser by Renderosity.

Re-hashing ancient history serves no purpose.

I say we get back on topic.

Obviously, Renderosity learned from SM mistakes and La Femme proves it. They assembled a competent team to create, rig and texture her before they even purchased Poser - while negotiations were ongoing. In addition to lining up a stable of vendors prepared to support the figure from day one.

Well, I really hope they turn Poser into something great and continue iterating on LaFemme until she is a powerhouse. I'd also wish to see a "Le Lui".

I understand what you were all saying about previous figures. They were rushed and only supposed to be test figures. I only hope the trend stops with 'Osity. If people plop down cash for the program they need at least a guy and a gal that are not rushed test subjects, rather finished polished figures ready to be used with all the tools in the box.

Updating the tools and UI, bringing them from versions 4 and 5 into 2020 (or whenever) would be awesomesauce too.

A FBX exported that actually works would also be on my wish list... cause standards do exist between other programs. That would be a program to buy. I Can Has Plez?

Glitter, if La femme proved ANYTHING, it is certainly how NOT to do it.

There is NOTHING acceptable, from the obj file over the textures provided up to and including the worst possible rigging ever.

The tubes as legs, the tubes as arms, the BLACK on WHITE specular map (rarely used and when used overwitten by proceduals just to get rid of it), the light grey over even lighter grey bump map.

LaFemme survives because of an AUTSTANDING Diffuse map, over a GREAT sculpt.

Nobody, nobody took the time to look inside.

Hey, come on, the knee Joint center is 3inches below the knee, and then trying to recover the tubes as legs?

And of course 120 JCM's

He, you can wear Santa clothes on a funeral, and give Easter eggs at Christmas.

In the first case you will be dressed, and in the second, at least you have a gift.

It is figures of this kind that is killing Poser, and it really hurts my heart.

PE that is WAY too complicated for general use, and the LaFemme's technical disaster brings some short term pocket money for some vendors, but they are NO long term solution and certainly NO long term investment, and certainly NOT the way to get Poser back track on a long term recovery to success.

It is everybody thinking, NOW and TOMORROW, but most of us want to see Poser back on track for many years to come. And there is NO place for NOW and TOMORROW fast and easy money at whatever the long term quality cost.

By all means, Tony, release your figure, since you are the rigging and material expert.

I think what would go a long way would be an official statement from rendo on the current state of things, direction and future plans, even if there are not a lot of definites to report at this point

This thread needs to get back to the initial intent. We have purchased the software. We do have plans for development that will be announced soon.

If all of us here want the same thing, and it seems we do, then let's just say we'll work together to make Poser and the content for it as good as we possibly can. All I personally have ever wanted is to see Poser thrive as well as the users and the vendors who support it. Attacking each other does no one any good. I thought maybe we were past the days where every conversation that was about Poser ended up at this end. Let's all STOP.. OR maybe just a "this is great" or how you feel about the acquisition as this was what this thread was about. We'll ask for feedback and your input and wishlists at another time and in another thread.

It's been less than 2 weeks....let's give it some time shall we? We will be posting areas to post your wishes and reports of what needs fixed. This thread isn't the place for that as right now who would dig through all of this? lol Let's not go down this road any further. Let's all get along and realize we all want the same thing.

...but I want it meow

YAY , Jenn! Less bashing and more celebrating! Oh and Tony LaFemme in YOUR opinion may be a bad figure but in MY opinion she is head and shulder above other POSER only figure. That my opinion and you do know what they say about opinion right? so why not give it a rest and work in your own figure.

jennblake posted at 5:34PM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355558

This thread needs to get back to the initial intent. We have purchased the software. We do have plans for development that will be announced soon.

If all of us here want the same thing, and it seems we do, then let's just say we'll work together to make Poser and the content for it as good as we possibly can. All I personally have ever wanted is to see Poser thrive as well as the users and the vendors who support it. Attacking each other does no one any good. I thought maybe we were past the days where every conversation that was about Poser ended up at this end. Let's all STOP.. OR maybe just a "this is great" or how you feel about the acquisition as this was what this thread was about. We'll ask for feedback and your input and wishlists at another time and in another thread.

It's been less than 2 weeks....let's give it some time shall we? We will be posting areas to post your wishes and reports of what needs fixed. This thread isn't the place for that as right now who would dig through all of this? lol Let's not go down this road any further. Let's all get along and realize we all want the same thing.

Well said Jenn! I couldn't have said it better.

After quite the hiatus from purchasing new Poser items, I've very recently (past few days) been picking up things that I've had in my Wishlist for some time. Why? Because of this announcement that Poser has a new home. I'm hoping that Poser will have maintenance releases and new versions coming in the future. It's that new hope that led me to begin buying wonderful content for Poser again. Congratulations to all who made the Poser acquisition happen and all of those who will make it a success going forward. I've enjoyed using Poser since version 1. Thank you all again! Lee

LeeMoon posted at 10:14PM Sun, 30 June 2019 - #4355580

After quite the hiatus from purchasing new Poser items, I've very recently (past few days) been picking up things that I've had in my Wishlist for some time. Why? Because of this announcement that Poser has a new home. I'm hoping that Poser will have maintenance releases and new versions coming in the future. It's that new hope that led me to begin buying wonderful content for Poser again. Congratulations to all who made the Poser acquisition happen and all of those who will make it a success going forward. I've enjoyed using Poser since version 1. Thank you all again! Lee

It's really been cool to see old familiar faces coming back! YAY!