True. They all have pros and cons.

It was also said that the body parts fall apart when taken into hexagon. If making morphs in this program is so hard then I think about adding a warning/limitation that warns hexagon is no fun, even with the program.

Wish I could provide it already, dang >_<.
;)
Making process with the manual, hopefully I can put it on my homepage tomorrow as a sneak preview.

Is maybe someone here that uses Hexagon for making morphs? One of the testers cannot get the morphloader to work, appearently. Hexagon seems to either be losing vertex order and/or polygon group information, does someone know why? ;)

Small Update: Its looking good currently. Friday I will put the manual online.
Then search for a few count of people for a point of no return test.

Yes, it cannot do that, there is no API that would allow it.
For Poser8 I do not know, I just recently bought it, hoping for the hierarchy editor to allow set up of the ERC.
To give an update, we had a problem with shading errors on body part seams, this is now hopefully fixed and about to be re-tested. If its finally ok, then I will do a final review/regression test, write a better manual and submit it to rendo and pray ;).

hi spanki,
so sorry, the test are done in two waves. at the moment its mainly retesting of the parts that proved not working good enough in the initial release. and there we things reported still; I have yet to decide if I should enable them or not. guess I will though.
you will receive the edition that has the wave1 issues fixed.
best regars,
cc

hi, mike, I am waiting for tester feedback, but seems everybody was gone during the weekend :).  i hope its basically stable now, joe had a situation where the precision was strangely low (but appearently still made a fine morph).  you can try the tool if you like. drop me mail [at] colorcurvature.com.

That makes sense. I wonder if there is a good ERC tutorial around that one can read? I was also unsure about ERC and limits. It appeared to me that poser takes local value + erc value and clips this with the limits. The local value must also comply to the limits.

Maybe there is also freeware tool that can display/dump the ERC setup of a figure? I still wonder about the ERC setup of the DAZ4 figures. I noticed that if you do a menu->create_fullbody_morph in the poser gui while a morphform is dialed, the morphform is "partly" added into the fbm.  One is set up to be morph target, one is just an ERC dial, but they are slaved 1:1 as far as I could see. The dial on the BODY actor and the dial in the BODYMORPHS actor get different values then, because only the morph dial is added to the FBM. Poser appears to be unable to properly safe such a pose to the library then. It stores different values for something that tries to be the same through ERC. Interestingly, the wrong value of the BODYMORPHS morph is copied back to the master dial in the BODY actor. Why this is I could not figure out.
Can slaving be bi-directional?

yes, i want P8 too :-)
I have contacted the testers now, the release candidate is ready for test.
Joe reported its working in P8 and 2010, so I have hope it is now stable :).

Then all thats left is some talk with rendo admins regarding the EULA. They basically said that the EULA is also protecting the vendor, not only rendo itself. So this sounds good.

Good to hear ;)
And there will not be any warranty =).
There are far too many variables in the game to bet one's life on it.
Figure setup can be very complex, and Poser does not always do the right thing. I noticed it cannot make FBM's for M4/V4/F4 properly if you are using the morphforms when you create a FBM. Because that is a morph dial, Poser tries to add the dial to the morph. But then the link?param to the BODY actor gets de-synched. In consequence you cannot save the pose any more. One does not need a script to reproduce this phenomenon.

While I think its ok that it tries to add the morphform, it is not ok that the dial sync gets broken when that FBM is in use.

So I added a big warning on the banner screen, that the user is always in charge to  check that what he got is what he wanted. Posers system is too complex and too intransparent to be sure unless one checks :)

I think :)

Yes, if  'r' is not passed to open(abc), it should still open for read, I hope ;) I saw most people use open(abc,'r'), but from the docs I think open(abc) is just the same, and I would prefer that notation.

I think I am finally done.
If IK chains are active, the results are completely broken.
No idea whats up, but WorldVertex seems to go berserk if IK chains are active.

But if they are turned off, it seems to work just as planned!

I posed, scaled, bent, twisted the characters and even tortured them with a wave deformer. And still the morphs load at an almost exact precision!! The limit to precision were just the rounding errors of my deformer. Just hope P8 and 2010 behave the same.

Now only have left to review the code for harmlessness and package it to get it into beta.
But as I only have one I/O  "open(filename) "  and python documentation says default access is read-only, there should not be much to be afraid of :). Cage, do you agree =) ?

Maybe someone can help me where to get an "as-is" no-warranty disclaimer that I could use?

I think it is more than just the magnets.

I have written a new toolset just to debug the effect on morphs in the world coordinate space. I found that actually the layout of the whole virtual space is changed in a non linear fashion. Both the dialing itself as well as the axes of the (hyper)space appear to be unstable (from a linear point of view).  This is a fundamental issue and might be not the fault of poor v4. I hunted the issues down to m4 as well.

Poser seems to calculate in a way that I am not able to find out. It might be sums of rounding errors or be the cause of the core of their algorithms.

However I have a small hope. By repeatedly applying my algorithm and tracking the movement of the vertices in poser I seem to be able to reduce the error from about 10^-2 down to about 10^-6.  At least for the worst example it worked.

I morphed M4 posed with AdamTwaithes Pose 72 into a V4 with Adam's Pose 84 and the error was estimated at only 10^-7.

If this would work in general than it would get as close to mathematical perfection as possible :).
However I have to redesign the script from scratch now, and noone can say if it works good on any other poser than mine. @Testers: You will have mail soon ;)

morphing a zero-posed into adams posekit#82  does not have the issue that morphing from posekit#72 to posekit#82.

that i think, it must be the influence of the attached deformers. i just wonder why my magnet worked.
is there an (easy) way to make these V4 magnets visible in the UI?
or need to hack the .cr2?

but then again - v4 refuses to work properly. she creates really wrong targets. mmmmh

_<
dgahdfsgh