I also seem to have a problem with some of the newer items I purchased from Christophe3D. Everything I purchased after Sept 2013 is "missing".

Pawn Shop

Thanks!

freyfaxi62 posted at 2:53AM Sat, 13 January 2018 - #4322087

I love PE..still figuring out stuff like fitting V4 stuff to her..but I'll get there eventually with the help of posts like the above. :) I have one (only one ??) question ..as PE evolves..will the upgrades to her functionality ( eg..her morph dials and rigs) be free updates or will we have to pay more for her ? I'm not referring to custom morphs and texures from 3rd parties..just the base model.

I think fixes will be free... I've already received an update of the Clothing Mannequins package... not sure about new "versions" which add functionality that does is not currently in the PE model. I'm pretty sure Ero isn't going to go "hog wild" on adding stuff when Poser 11 is barely keeping up with what he has accomplished [This is after all mesh-Four-dot-something-or-other because P11 couldn't do Mesh 5]. When Poser catches up, I'm sure he'll start work on a new version in his spare time... [which is to say he isn't working on comics or having a real life]

digitell posted at 8:57PM Mon, 08 January 2018 - #4321908

Glad you got it figured out! Very cool!

Also, dont forget to check those boxes under Properties>When Conforming. This helps a lot!

I saw that and yes I did check them off... I have been using the scaling / morph feature for years-- none of my ol' Daz v4 characters are ever scaled at 100%...

Thanks again for the help!

I then added the morphs:

and when I was done all was good:

All of the movement morphs work and there are no tears in the mesh of the skirt...

I'm not sure if this is the "right way" but at least in this instance it seems to work [No I did not have a PE model in the scene I just used the dress Mannequin]

Thanks for the help!

Okay based on both what Ero and you [Digitell] showed me I started over...

I tried to "follow instructions"

But obviously it didnt work. The arms were not in a position to be fitted... so I injected the V4 PE morph into the dress... then used the "V4 Rough fit PE" pose in an attempt to get the dress to move the arms of the dress over the arms of the mannequin.

I returned to the fitting room and made slightly different settings to set up: I did not zero the dress

The results of doing that were immediate to see:

So I ran the fitting:

As you can see the dress fits the way it should so I created a figure and gave it a name

[To Be Continued]

digitell posted at 10:21PM Sun, 07 January 2018 - #4321824

I have that dress Sensibility. I have my big computer shut down now and am in "watching TV mode" but in the morning I will give Sensibility a try and see if I get the same issues you do.

Yep..giving Ero a real work out! He has the flu so hopefully he will just rest up and get well before diving in to help us with our problems!

I took a second try at it by exporting it as an obj file then importing it in again. I took it to the cloth room did a simulation to drape it then took it to the fitting room and made it into a conforming dress and re-added the morphs from V4 [with the PE morph]. I did not re-run the fitting against V4... but the fit from the cloth room did give it a bit of a dumpy look. I then ran a fit of the dress against the Dress mannequin but that didn't work either... I ended up with flat arms on top of the mannequin [rather than through the sleeves] and a split in the front of the skirt skirt [not suitable for a proper am English miss to wear in the colonial Raj of south asia!

I'll give it another go later today...

digitell posted at 6:48PM Sun, 07 January 2018 - #4321814

Hi Gishzida!

Yea it is not all that easy for peeps not all that familiar with the fitting room. I posted about my problem to CGBytes and Erogenesis responded with instructions on how to get it to work. Let me post the procedure that Erogenesis told me to follow:

1. load V4, inject the PE shape
2. load the jeans, conform to V4
3. bring the Jeans to the shape of PE by passing on the PE morph injected into V4( I just did the "copy morphs from V4 method"
4. you can leave those jeans conformed to V4
5. load the skintight mannequin, just leave it, don't conform it to anything
6. in fitting room: jeans are the object (do not zero), mannequin is the goal (do zero)
7. create figure: transfer morphs, autogroup, zero
8. once done, back in the pose room, 'transfer Joint zones' from mannequin
9. then load PE
10. conform new jeans to PE (remove old jeans, V4 and mannequin if you want)

This was for a pair of jeans I was trying to fit to her but I am sure you can try any other clothing using these instructions. I hope this helps you!!

Saw your post there and Ero's response [We are running him ragged! Thanks for all your hard work Ero!]

I tried it. It didn't work. The long sleeves of the dress are too far out of alignment to the PE morph. The sleeves end up fitting over nothing.

It's too bad there isn't a upper body morph for v4 clothing to fix that.... hmmmm.... wonder if I could do that with a morph...

digitell posted at 4:13PM Sun, 07 January 2018 - #4321745

I love the way she bends and moves and stuff! She is a wonderful figure!!

Unfortunately I have not had a bit of luck fitting V4's cloths to her..spent all day yesterday trying, using the instructions with the mannequins and such..no luck I do hope some of the awesome vendors make some great stuff for her!!

You are not alone...

It's fairly easy to convert "street clothes" [i.e. pants / jeans and top] See the last post in my gallery... I converted BDUs, a Tac Vest, and boots from clothing sets by Billy-T but I've had similar trouble using the fitting room to convert full length dresses such as "Sensibility". Also sandals seem to be an issue. I've converted most of Renapd's "Semiramis" set with the exception of the sandals.

It might be my inexperience with the fitting room though... So I guess I'll have to learn more about the fitting room before "When in trouble or in doubt / Run in circles and scream and shout" will apply.

TheBryster posted at 11:33PM Wed, 15 November 2017 - #4317409

Just playing devil's advocate here, but.....are not these things often referred to as, 'acts of God'?

Yes we know that God is a Bstrd [what was Its father's name?] but what makes It the one responsible for these events?

One might ask "Who created God?" or "who is this Devil guy really?" Or one might ask "How do you know that 'God' was responsible? Did 'God' tell the insurance companies that? (Imagine a story where an insurance company actuary has a conversation with God) or is this just the Human way of saying 'I don't know why these things happen but somebody must be blamed'? One might as well ask why does a Human choose to blow up a Federal building, fly a plane into a building, drive a car over peaceful protesters, kill four college students on the lawn of an Ohio university while wearing full combat gear, enslave people and then put up monuments commemorating their war to keep people enslaved, become a suicide bomber in Bagdad or Kabul or London with the intent to kill innocent people, commit suicide by intentionally flying their plane into Monterrey Bay while drunk as a skunk... let's not even talk about politics! Humanity is irrational enough with out trying to create theological bogeymen to change the subject...

We create explanations and rationalizations for things which are not rational acts. I'll see your advocate and raise him up! -- Are those explanations also 'acts of god'? Remember in Monotheism there can be no devil.. There is also a tendency to declare "God is only good!" Well if the only cause is God and if everything God does is good then Evil is not Evil -- it is good. It is God thinking its own thoughts and going Its own ways [Isaiah explained that but nobody really understood that God really cannot think like humans and Humans cannot really understand Its thoughts].

So now you've got a get out of jail free card--- For example: God made me write this post.

You will have to for give me for taking a slight detour before actually telling you what the source of evil is.

Let us consider for a moment what it would mean if "Evil" was capable of being "objectified" whether it appears as a yellow watermelon or as the mythographic "Lucifer" or "Satan"... If one were to accept that way of thinking then they are accepting that there is more than one thing with "god-like" powers. Dualism [as it is called] assumes that there is a thing of "ultimate good" and a thing of "ultimate evil"-- but that is not monotheism which allegedly is the foundation of most of the "Abrahamic" religions.

"Satan" is a Christian abbreviation of a Hebrew "title" given to one of the Hebrew God's angels, "Ha Satan" which litterally means "The Accuser". It is his "job" to accuse "sinners" before the "Throne of Glory" that the sinners can not get away "unpunished". You might think of this Malach [Hebrew for 'messenger' or "angel"] as the Special Prosecutor of Human Evil. As time went along and Christianity re-interpreted the Hebrew texts, "Satan" took on a godlike sheen all its own as adapted from the Manichean and the Zoroastrian theologies.. But that is not what Monotheism means. Monotheism has only one power that being the "Creator-God"... there is no room for another "power".

So by now I'm sure you're asking 'Where did 'evil' come from then? The answer to that is simple: humanity created 'evil' in all its forms [See that paragraph in Genesis about God gave man dominion over the world]. Think about it for a moment: who created that yellow hearted GMO spawn of the garden? Humans. Who picked it and smiled at the idea of the money to be made selling it? Humans. Who did you buy it from? A human. No objectified entity other than a human was responsible for a watermelon of a different color.

Finally we return to a 'human duality" taken from the Hebrew. Humans have the power / intention to create goodness -- "Yetzer Ha Tov" and the power / intention to create Evil -- "Yetzer Ha Ra". You might think back to those old cartoons where an "angel" sits on the right shoulder and a "demon" sits upon the left... Most of those cartoons were created by Jewish Artist / Animators. That is as near as Jewish thought gets in regards to evil. Neither objects nor demigods create evil. Evil is created by people... After all who created "Soylent Green"?

[an aside: The four seasons of California (and everywhere else), that is, Rain, Mud, Fire, and Earthquake are not 'evil' -- they are just random events which happen. There is no punishment or retribution implied by these events they are just a part of the way the world must work for it to function properly-- with the exception of you got it - human induced Climate Change.]

3D Universe has something over at DAZ along this line called Pose Repair... It kills the morph dials but it still won't do all of what you want. The only problem with both that app and what you propose is that it does not have an option to zero the Hip X-Y-Z nor delete the body x-y-z from a pose. You'd still get thrown back to zero using the pose after it was "repaired"

Many pose sets designed for a specific "scene" use the hip trans coordinates to move the figure relative to the scene zero [for example some pose sets were designed for use with specific sets or props]. Generally sets like this "force" the body trans to 0 and set the location via the hip. This means using the pose for something else means spending the time to zero the hip trans settings and adding the correct body coordinates.

I've actually gone as far as manually deleting the body trans manually via an editor.

Most "good" pose sets use the hip trans as the offset from "location" zero [i.e. if the pose is in relation to another item or character"] and delete the body x-y-z trans from the pose file. This allows you to set the "global" position of a character via the body trans and the character's relative location to that location via the hip trans.

Quote - Greetings,

Quote - > Quote - Please add:

white-space: nowrap

to the dates in the item list.  Below a window-width of 1470 pixels, they wrap unpleasantly in my display.  An example image is below.  This is not a major problem, but it IS a bug, and it is one that is easily fixed.

--  Morgan

This should be corrected now.  Please take a look and let me know if it is better for you.

Thanks

Much better, thank you very much!  The updated dates are wrong, but you know that already, and I'll just presume anything updated on those dates...wasn't. :) In other news, I have stopped browsing 'rosity on my smartphone, and browsing it on my iPad is uncomfortable, but those are matters of taste, not outright bugs.

Change is in the wind everywhere these days, and it's never comfortable.  I don't think these changes have been for the better, all told, but I'm fairly confident that you'll know from your own statistics whether it drives more sales or not, which is in the end all that matters.

I wish you the best of luck with the site upgrade!

--  Morgan

Morgan,

What are you showing as updates? I'm showing many [not all] of Mihrelle, Studio Art Vartanian, and Godin and a couple of others as updated on 6-24, 6-25, and 6-29.

It is possible that these are valid updates or not... but SexAppeal Blouse and Skirt dated 6-29-2014 is definintely an update

regards

Gz

Quote - > Quote -  

Tina,

I gotta ask why do you consider this a "suggestion item"? It was working before your "update" now it does not work-- Breaking functionality is generally considered a bug.... or was breaking this intentional?

I have purchased over 1900 items here. The changes have made it impossible to easily check for updates... which makes this a "bug".

As noted the sort function does not work for vendor, date, order number or updated.

 

win 7 pro x64  firefox 30

I do apologize I think I misunderstood the question and I have the Programmer looking in to that at this moment.

Still broken...