I am very excited to see your results, partial simulation and auto closing meshes was a stroke of genius. Regarding interest in a Spanish translation, I am afraid I don't have enough information to make an educated guess, but going by the global number of Spanish speakers, I am guessing it would be useful to quite a few users.

I would love to support you on Patreon, but I fear my contributions would be quite modest for quite a while. Your incentives for subscribers are very tempting, though, and you've accumulated enough good karma that I can justify the budget allocation. If you'd prefer some kind of help with editing English texts or translating to Spanish, though, that I'll also gladly offer.

The new developments in the program are very exciting (really, a soft body solution is one of those long-term hopes that I had more or less given up on, but with your seal of quality I can dream again), so just keep at it while we cheer you on and let's hope we can turn that into something more substantial.

Of course! I meant it when I said I am not rushing you: everything you are working on is something relevant to me, so I am not about to play favorites and, lest of all, asking you to drop GPU coding. Thank you for your efforts.

That's just it, Gérald: the speed of a Dforce Gpu simulation running on a GTX 1080 was comparable to VWD running on a core i7 4790. Of course, my system is bloated and not running at a 100%, but I would say that would go double for the CPU over the GPU. At first blush, I wasn't that impressed with Dforce and the only thing that really peaked my interest was the way the simulated object retained its rigging and morphing capabilities, but I think VWD had made its own advances in that direction with the intersection function? I am still waiting for that tutorial (not rushing you, just highlighting that, once again, you've captured my attention).

Pure coincidence, I am sure. Sorry, I am trying to keep my face straight while saying that, it's harder than it may seem.

I played around with it in the beta and it wasn't much faster than VWD (maybe in the setup of the scene, but certainly not in the simulation of the few simple drapes I managed). It didn't seem nearly as complete nor versatile as VWD: hair was right out, some outfits just wouldn't work at all and others required some work that I do faster on VWD (obviously, I mean, I have had more experience with it). The advantages are that it is integrated and allows morphing and tweaking of the clothing objects after the simulation, introduces a wind emitter similar to a spotlight that allows more than one source of wind in a scene and it lets you simulate more than one object at a time with different weights in different surfaces (so that you can have, for instance, a veil with metal beads on a fringe). Even so, VWD is a more complete solution, with dynamic adjustments on the fly, some functions to simulate volumes, far better support, a greater range of simulable objects and, well, even if it is more complex that just translates into more options and freedom for the end-user. As usual, plug-and-play solutions lack in versatility. Though d-force is supposed to introduce a greater range of dynamic effects in the future and it would be awesome to see it handle soft-body collisions and the like, at the moment VWD is by far the superior tool.

Semi-publicity rant ended. I am honestly satisfied with my purchase, though I will try and see if mixing both tools can give me more interesting results.

These are fantastic news! Thanks again for your hard work, it really comes through in the final product.

Merry Christmas, happy New Year and, at the rate you are going, optimal Singularity day! This is Great News (TM)!

Sometimes the fabric stretches and it is just a matter of making it more rigid (lowering the numerical "Softness" value on wichever method you used to rigidify the clothing). More often than not, however, it is a matter of the piece being modeled with some spaces (folds, distance from the model, etc) that the simulation eliminates (because it wouldn't be a good simulation if it allowed clothes to float over the figure); in these cases, as far as I know, you have the following options:

• If you want to preserve certain shapes in the clothing that would be flattened out with gravity, you can lower the gravity setting and/or rigidify those specific sections (either via surface selection or with the vertex selection tool).

• If you don't especially want to preserve the folds or whatever other elements are adding "extra fabric" (which you usually won't, because VWD generated wrinkles are far more realistic for a given, arbitrary pose) you can just shrink the simulated object, either via the scale transformation tool before simulating (just scaling on the y axis should suffice) or by using VWD's option to scale selected vertices in the "Vertices groups".

• A third option would be to simulate some upwards wind to give your skirts a measure of volume, though I am not having much luck with the wind. Time to refresh the manual.

Sorry about not answering sooner, I finally got back home. From what I've been reading in the forums, the new version of VWD looks to be a huge improvement regarding new functionality and ease of use (_really _looking forward to the fabric presets and standardizable behavior--and to anything regarding volumes, obviously). Thanks for everything you are doing for your customer base, this kind of interaction and response to our concerns is much appreciated and I hope it reflects on your sales.

Wow, the speed with which you edited the pillow in this video is nothing short of impressing. Also, 64 threads?! What kind of monster have you managed to enslave inside your computer?

About the Optitex plugin, while I don't have the complete version (I started relatively recently with Daz and by that time it was quite apparent the whole thing was going nowhere fast) I know one of the "premium" parameters it's internal pressure. I don't quite know the nuts and bolts of it, but it's used in the tutorials for their, quite appropiately, pillow set:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y6CZ577tK4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0POm6CV97KU

I believe it's also used in their promo video for their backpack:

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

Also, thanks for your explanation, for some reason, imagining a mesh filled with tetrahedrons appealed to the gamer in me (those 4 sided dices can be deadly... when walking barefoot). One thing I don't quite understand, though: if using the second method and applying a vector along the normal of a node, couldn't this be applied to a partially open mesh, or even only to a part of it? Let's say, in keeping with the thread's theme, could we make something like this:

My experiments with clothifying human figures tell me there would be lots of "cloth-like" wrinkles, so, not really (also, rigging would be lost, so animation would be out, unless there was a way to fit a rigged figure as a collider inside of the simulated figure that moved it like an skeleton without deforming it too much... maybe even using a literal skeleton, now that I think of it, as the old one has Victoria 4's rig and should be animatable without any hassle, or even fit inside the original figure and copying its movements from the timeline). But if there was any method to get some internal pressure on the human's body... well, that would also work for simulating punches, having tight clothes on (the infamous "muffin top", for instance) or even a "femenine bounce" with energetig movements. Darn, it's far too late for me to keep on rambling, so I will try and stop here. Hope that wasn't too overwhelming, but this tool really makes me want to push things in unexpected directions. Thanks once again for providing it for us, and for your attention to your clients. Really, it is very much appreciated.

That's... that's really, REALLY cool. I can imagine a lot of cases where volumetric simulations may be useful: from someone getting up from a sofa with the cushions recovering their shape to various cases of squeezing (choking someone, squeezing a tube paste, throwing a water balloon--sans explosion). The functionality certainly appeals to me, and I am sure that users more skilled than I would make stunning images and animations with it.

Also, it is one of the few things the Optitex plugin has that VWD doesn't, so it may be nice to put the final nail in the coffin

Hello, thank you for the video. Right now, I am away from my rendering machine, but seeing this tutorial, I find your resourcefulness awe-inspiring (I guess that's a programmer's job, though). The way you used two planes to make a pillow really surprised me, and opened quite a few possibilities for pseudo-modelliing with VWD, and the final image certainly met my criteria, so, again, thank you for that.

Now, seeing how the process was dependent on turning off gravity and inertia (I had kinda figured that, through trial and error) I am left with a doubt: following the pillow theme, how would you make and animation with an actor hitting another one with a pillow? Gravity would not be needed, but inertia certainly would and I imagine the pillow would lose its volume fast; would you reccomend stiffening, then--maybe with similar parameters to the ones you used in the string tutorial video?

Hi, thanks for the enthusiasm The problematic element, for me, is the pillow, as I have yet to make a volume that doesn't collapse or behave really weirdly just by having gravity turned on. I think a written explanation (with maybe some screenshots) would be great, but a video would be awesome. Also, let me take this chance to thank for all you are doing to make your users comfortable with the software. I assure you, it is much appreciated.

I stand corrected, thank you for this gesture.