Look here: These are made from a kind of plasticine that hardens in the oven. You cut them in slices for nail-art and other decoration purposes. You can as well look up "Fimo Fruits" in the google image source. If you can do the shapes I would do the textures (as far as images work here as textures as the system with the shapes is still a miracle to me).

I am attaching a render, done with a rather extreme pose (one of my Assorted Poses, "Art 11"). Tweaking the earrings to fit the pose was a question of a minute (after I learnt what the dials do).

SF, that pose close-up looks good.

Would some please download the edited version of Kaylene if I send you a link (not from the free-site) to test and see if I got it fixed?

I'd hate to re-upload to APG's Free-site again just to have to do it again...sigh.

It was still calling for missing files so I hat to open in cr2 editor and find where the files were being called from. I hope it's fixed now.

SF, that pose close-up looks good.

Would some please download the edited version of Kaylene if I send you a link (not from the free-site) to test and see if I got it fixed?

I'd hate to re-upload to APG's Free-site again just to have to do it again...sigh.

It was still calling for missing files so I hat to open in cr2 editor and find where the files were being called from. I hope it's fixed now.

Looking Great no problems with Daz either,many thanks.

Whew, I just finished using cr2 editor and checked each file material and shader nodes one by one.

Corrected all calls for the Danika files so it should work now. BE4Kaylen is re-uploaded and I am tired...ugh.

Now to do some mre texturing on another set. :)

Quote - If you can do the shapes I would do the textures

Ah, there in lies a problem. My modelling skills are virtually none existent. The cherries and pear are just spheres produced in UV Mapper, and deformed by magnets in Poser. The leaf and stalk were pruned from a flower, that was in turn created by a wonderful little application that automatically produces flower objects. The chains came from figures generated by Cage's "chain_maker4b.py". So no real modelling apps were harmed (or even used) in the production of the geometry for the Cherry Rings.

I would be very interested in collaborating with you on some more earrings (or what ever), as I have a great respect for your abilities with materials and textures, but I feel that we would probably need a third conspirator, someone who could model and UV map the pendant geometry.

I do have one more earrings figure on the back burner (see above), but it uses very simple geometry like disks and squares, and deformed spheres and cubes. It would be nice to have a some slightly more complex geometry. I probably could make a banana, but I'm sure it would take me at least ten times longer with Poser magnets than it would for someone with a few modelling skills.

@SaintFox,

Hum, I jumped in rather fast with my past post, before I had actually looked at the Fimo Fruits stuff. Most of it looks like it could be done with deformed disk props, and that is something that may be within my very limited capabilities. I'll have a go and see what I can come up with.

LOL Yep, melone slices could be done by cutting a sphere into pieces, the most other things are either disks or disks with a little bump here and there (the apple for instance). If one really wants more details with so tiny things you can do it by creating a displacement map. But it will hardly be recognizable.

I will be away from the computer for some days, but on Monday we can think about some nice things...

Attached Link: http://www.sharecg.com/v/29080/3D-Model/Symbols

He says they're unrestricted use, but if you'd prefer to ask him he's approachable and I'm sure would give permission.

Quote - I'm currently / specifically looking for V3 at the moment (so I can use Morris' excellent texture), but I'll consider doing a V4 remap afterwards.

...ok, I ran into a bit of a snag...

My plan was to remap the lo-res version (fewer uv-polys to deal with) and then sub-divide the mesh to (re)create the hi-res version of the mesh (which would also carry over the new uv-mapping, but sub-divided nicely).

I did the remap of the lo-res mesh and it looks great.  The problem I'm running into is when sub-dividing the mesh to generate the hi-res mesh...

• vertices get re-ordered.
• polygons get re-ordered (and thus, the uv-polygons)
• 'slight' differences in the final positions of some vertices - likely due to the 3D software I'm using to do the sub-divide, but possibly also due to some 'options' (vertex weighting) of that process.

...I have tools (plugins I've written) to help me with the first two issues, but they kinda rely on...

• same number of vertices/polys - no problem here.
• the uv-mapping being identical - which is obviously not the case here, since the point is to generate new mapping, or...
• the polygon-ordering being identical - which is not the case here... and/or...
• at least having the vertex positions all identical (within some small tolerance) - which is also not the case here...

...so... the biggest areas of the mesh where the vertices are different is:

• finger-tips (including fingernails)
• toes (including toenails)
• a few vertices around the nipples
• every vertex where teeth-meet-gums

...so... I have now gone back and clipped out portions of the original mesh (for example, finger-tips w/nails, toes w/nails) and merged them back onto my new hi-res mesh.  I had to re-uv-map those bits (extremely tedious), but at least the vertex positions are now correct.  Here's a sample image using one of Morris' V3 textures...

...and just for yuks, here's a head-shot...

...so... the last remaining issue/area are the teeth/gums mapping.  In order to copy/paste this portion of the mesh over (and getting it remapped) will be very tedious - so I'm considering just pasting it in with the Antonia mapping.  In other words, the following Materials would use Anotnia textures instead of V3 textures...

• Teeth
• InnerMouth / Gums
• Tongue

...speaking of which, Antonia's eye-mapping is close enough to V3's that I also left that alone (you can use either Antonia's or V3's textures).  I also followed dph's V4 mapping of the eyebrows (the closest in mesh-shape to Antonia's).

Anyone have any comments for/against leaving Antonia mapping on the inner mouth parts?

Thanks.

BTW, I've also managed to remove a lot / most of this texture-stretching/distortion...

...here's my remapping...

...note that you might not even notice much of that distortion when using some textures, but there are (were) some detail areas where it's fairly evident.

Quote - I did the remap of the lo-res mesh and it looks great.  The problem I'm running into is when sub-dividing the mesh to generate the hi-res mesh...

I think odf has stated that he's been using a program he's written himself, to port changes from low-res to high-res versions.  IIRC, it largely applies Catmull-Clark subdivision, but some parts of the mesh are handled differently.  I think he considered developing it for everyone to use, at one point, but the idea sort of got lost.

If odf would share his tool with you, or be willing to run your modified low-res mesh through it, that might simplify your process.  :unsure:

Ahh - that might explain it - thanks... I'm using Cinema 4D and when I sub-divide the mesh (using Catmull-Clark), I have an 'option' to add weighting to any vertices/edges to help keep them 'sharp' (for example)... it looks like he may be doing something similar in some areas, but there may also be some slight differences in how the Catmull-Clark routine is implemented.

The majority of the mesh is 100% identical, but the afore-mentioned areas (finger-tips, toes, etc) are coming out 'off' a bit.

How "off" are they?  Are they close enough that a script could compare the vertices and reassign the UVs of the original mesh to the new positions?  Or locate the matched vertices to work a vertex re-ordering and then just plug the re-ordered new UVs into the orignal .obj?

My plugins attempt to (basically) do what you suggest, but the problem is...

The areas that are 'off' are in places where lots of tiny polygons (ie. very close vertices) are bunched together, so trying to find matches between the two meshes is problematic - the 'closest' vertex in the original mesh may not be the 'matching' vertex.

My plugin loops through comparing all the vertices of one mesh with the other mesh (within some 'tolerance' distance), marking off vertices as it finds matches, then loops again with greater and greater tolerances, looking for the closest match for each vertex (out of the remaining un-matched vertices).  The problem is those false-hits (we've seen these before, eh? :) ).

Once I manage to get identical vertex-location-equivalence, I can re-order them to match the original mesh and use a look-up table to remap the polys using those vertices (and the matching uv-polys), based on the newly re-ordered vertices.

Anyway, I'm mostly done now (I think)... it's mostly now down to the question of whether I want to spend the time re-mapping the inner mouth parts to match V3 (again) or just leave them with Antonia 1.2 mapping.

...the more general problem is - that 'nothing' matches, so I don't have any frame of reference.  In other words, if the poly orders were the same, I could use that as a frame of reference to find (or at least test) the vertices.  If the uvs matched, I could use those as a reference to find the polys/verts.  If the verts all matched, I could use those to find the polys/uvs, etc. :).

At this point, I think I finally have all the vertices matching, so I can get everything re-ordered.

Hey Spanki,

Like Cage said, I wrote some tools for this kind of thing, back in the day. They match mesh topology, not positions or orderings, so they should be pretty robust. Basically, you can take two meshes with the same topology and transfer any kind of information - vertex positions, UV positions, grouping - back and forth between them. I used this a lot while working on Antonia, particularly for propagating UV maps from the low-res to the high-res version and such.

I've never really bothered to give these tools a decent API or at least prettify the command line interface. But if you want them, and I can still get them to compile, you can have them. If you prefer source code, you can find that here: https://github.com/odf/scala-meshes

The code is pretty ugly, because it was my first exercise of programming in Scala (which I since have abandoned as a language). Otherwise, I'd have suggested that you could just study what I did and replicate it. :-)

Cheers,

O.

Quote - The problem I'm running into is when sub-dividing the mesh to generate the hi-res mesh...

    * vertices get re-ordered.

    * polygons get re-ordered (and thus, the uv-polygons)

    * 'slight' differences in the final positions of some vertices - likely due to the 3D software I'm using to do the sub-divide, but possibly also due to some 'options' (vertex weighting) of that process.

I think odf made some custom tools specifically for subdividing from the lo to hi Antonia. I seem to remember that MJ had problems converting his UVs from lo to hi, and that odf fixed it. You might try sending a site mail to odf for more info on this.

Quote - Anyone have any comments for/against leaving Antonia mapping on the inner mouth parts?

I see no problems with that. Sounds like the best way to resolve the issue. Does your process leave the hi version morph compatible with the standard Antonia hi res?

Quote - BTW, I've also managed to remove a lot / most of this texture-stretching/distortion...

**Great work. I'm very impressed! **:thumbupboth:

Kinda OT, but I love when you lot of know somethings, talk shop. I learn so much, I may never use it but the understanding of how things work just makes everything else make more sense.

@EnglishBob

Quote - Les, Spacebones' Timesavers series should give you more raw material than you can ever handle.

Good idea Bob, thanks. Spacebones seems to have a lot of very useful stuff. Not just primitives. Doors, windows, SF props, all sorts of things. Great to know about this!

I have posted the "Cherry_Rings_AP" conforming earrings to the jewelry section of Antonia's Free Site.

If you try them and like them please let me know. If you try them and don't like them, also let me know, and tell me why.

I plan to do more earrings for Antonia along the same lines, but with different pendants. I also plan to do a V4 version. Donations on low poly obj files suitable for use as earring pendants welcome, and if used, you will get credit in the readme file, not to mention a warm inner glow.

:biggrin:

Do you think that the same technique can be used for necklaces? I use to fiddle around forever when using them in renders as long as I do not use the classic "Stand still, don't move - FREEZE!"-poses. So I tend to used the few dynamic necklaces available when using some more dynamic poses. A necklace with gravity would be a little revolution!

Quote - Do you think that the same technique can be used for necklaces?

I'm not sure, but probably not for the gravity stuff, though the geometry swapping part would work OK. There are a lot more difficulties to overcome with a necklace, and and using Point At for gravity. With earrings, they generally have a lot of clear space to swing around in before they hit anything, where as a necklace lays against the chest and neck. The chain of the earrings is just a rigid object (with a couple of morphs that can be applied manually to give it a slight bend). A necklace needs a chain made of parts, so that the individual links can move. But I think it would be very hard, if not impossible, to use Point at to control such a chain in a useful way. And there is a problem with Point At, it does not respect forced limits, if it did it might be much more useful.

I think dynamic is probably a much better way to go with necklaces. There again, there may be other ways. Cage can do some very amazing things with Python script and chains. And whilst this seems like an insurmountable problem, if an insurmountable problem can be surmounted, Cage is the man to do it!

Some type of EasyPose like system might might be an option for making necklaces more user friendly and manageable. IK chains for necklaces might be another option that is worth investigating. Though it would not be automatic, and would require a lot of user tweaking to pose the necklace. But I still thing that of the currently available options dynamic is probably the easiest and best way to go.

Quote - Hey Spanki,

Like Cage said, I wrote some tools for this kind of thing, back in the day. They match mesh topology, not positions or orderings, so they should be pretty robust. Basically, you can take two meshes with the same topology and transfer any kind of information - vertex positions, UV positions, grouping - back and forth between them. I used this a lot while working on Antonia, particularly for propagating UV maps from the low-res to the high-res version and such.

I've never really bothered to give these tools a decent API or at least prettify the command line interface. But if you want them, and I can still get them to compile, you can have them. If you prefer source code, you can find that here: https://github.com/odf/scala-meshes

The code is pretty ugly, because it was my first exercise of programming in Scala (which I since have abandoned as a language). Otherwise, I'd have suggested that you could just study what I did and replicate it. :-)

Cheers,

O.

Ahh - thanks for the info.  I am a little confused about your explaination though -  maybe it's a matter of semantics / terminology, but...

Quote - ...They match mesh topology, not positions or orderings...

From my understanding, 'mesh topology' is basically defined by the layout of the polygons, which in turn are defined by the 'positions' of the vertices that make up those polygons.  I don't know how you could be comparing mesh topologies without (ultimately) comparing vertex positions (?).

I don't know Scala, but I'll take a look at that code - thanks.

BTW, I know that it's mentioned ('somewhere') in this long thread, but who did the newer (non-A version) uv-mapping of Antonia 1.2 ?  Or perhaps more importantly, do you know what tools they used for it?

Quote - Does your process leave the hi version morph compatible with the standard Antonia hi res?

Thanks for the comments and... yes, that's what I'm (was) trying to do with all the vertex re-ordering.

I now have it all re-ordered and remapped.  I'm just going through it making sure that I have all the grouping and material zones fixed up.

Attached Link: Page 134

AFAIK this is MikeJ with UVLayout but this is without warranty, i have found a reference to UVLayout in page 134 of this thread

It would be really nice if someone could make a jeweled cap specifically for Antonia like the one Swam has in freestuff, Elfdance.

I fit it to Antonia but when I rendered there was errors. Some parts of the cap render white. If it is loaded into UV mapper you can see a few of th efaces or vertices are out of place and won't accept textures...sigh.

hm!

I have that just forgot about it. time to bring it backinto the fold. couldn't you contact the artist and tell of the problem...maybe they can fix it?

Quote - It would be really nice if someone could make a jeweled cap specifically for Antonia like the one Swam has in freestuff, Elfdance.

I fit it to Antonia but when I rendered there was errors. Some parts of the cap render white. If it is loaded into UV mapper you can see a few of th efaces or vertices are out of place and won't accept textures...sigh.

BTW: here's a render of the newest set I started with SSS applied.

I did go in Photoshop and post-work the cap a bit.

Don't know what SSS is. Is that Antonia? Nice lips!

Quote - She probably would but it would be nice to have one made specially for our gal. :)

BTW: here's a render of the newest set I started with SSS applied.

I did go in Photoshop and post-work the cap a bit.

Yes, that's Antonia.

SSs is SubSurfaceScattering. in Poser 9 and PoserPro 2012 you can use a preset dial or add a scatter node and edit the nodes for yourself.

BB was kind enough to let us use a set he made if we alter it.

@BluEcho,

Quote - It would be really nice if someone could make a jeweled cap specifically for Antonia like the one Swam has in freestuff, Elfdance.

It might be possible to convert it for Antonia, in the same way as hair conversions are done. If one knew where to find it that is (eg a link).

Attached Link: Elfdance Cap

But it has a couple of faces or verts out of place. I have no idea how to fix it and haven't contacted Swam about it yet.

Thanks for the link BluEcho. Whilst your initial link does work to take me to the Rosity download page, clicking the "Download Item" button on that page returns:

Quote - Not Found

The requested URL /Freestuff/ElfDance_Charm_Free.zip was not found on this server.

This might just be due to my BT connection, BT are not only the worst service provider in Britain, they must be the worst service provider in the entire galaxy. Sending the packets by carrier pidgin would be a lot faster. But I digress. I can't access the file, and for once, this might not actually be TB's fault, it's quite possibly due to a dead link (can anyone else access this?).

No, it's dead, Jim. To be fair, this freebie is nearly five years old. ;-)

Hmmm, yes it has been a while since I downloaded it.

Guess we can't do much with it then...sigh.

@EnglishBob,

Quote - No, it's dead, Jim.

Who's "Jim"?!?

I think that this is another version of "It's life, Jim, but not as we know it." - some Treckie-quotation I think (sorry, I am so very not into SciFi - with very few exceptions).

Quote - Ahh - thanks for the info.  I am a little confused about your explaination though -  maybe it's a matter of semantics / terminology, but...

Quote - ...They match mesh topology, not positions or orderings...

From my understanding, 'mesh topology' is basically defined by the layout of the polygons, which in turn are defined by the 'positions' of the vertices that make up those polygons.  I don't know how you could be comparing mesh topologies without (ultimately) comparing vertex positions (?).

When I say topology, I mean what you get when you look at a basic OBJ file without texture coordinates or normals and ignore everything but the 'f' lines. Basically, that tells you that have a certain number of vertices, numbered from 1 to, say, 14512, and that certain cyclic sequences of these form polygons. If you change all the numbers consistently - say, you add 1000 to each - you still get the same topology.

So, imagine you had the 'f' lines for two meshes which you suspect to be the same, but mesh B so radically morphed away from the shape that mesh A had that comparing vertex positions wouldn't help, and also the vertex numbering completely screwed up by the program you did the morphing in. Then, if you also had a lot - and I mean a lot - of computing time, you could still figure out which vertices in A correspond to which vertices in B by simply going through all the possible ways of renumbering the vertices in B and testing for each if the result coincides with A.

Of course, it would be pretty silly to go through all possible numberings of the vertices. If your meshes are connected, and you have found a small patch - a single polygon would be sufficient - of mesh A that corresponds to a similar patch in mesh B, all the rest will be completely determined and you just need to verify that your partial match indeed extends to a complete match. Furthermore, poles in one mesh should corresponds to poles in the other one, so you can save a lot more work by picking a pole in mesh A and matching it to poles in mesh B.

I hope that clarifies some things. :-)

[/nerd]

Oh, I see , it's like:

"Jim, we have to reduce warp speed now. The dilithium [Li2] crystals are overheating, they can't take any more. They'll blow any sccond!"

"Scotty, we have to increase power, the Vegans [or is it "Vogons"?] are about to recite poetry at us. It's poetry or death Scotty! Maximum Warp pluss 75% Mr Sulu!"

Quote - So, imagine you had the 'f' lines for two meshes which you suspect to be the same...

WOW! I'm stunned. That's brilliant! I don't know much about meshes, or topology, but I think I understand enough to know that what you have done is very, very, clever!

Thanks Les! Well, I used to twist my brain about this kind of problem for a living - and soon will again - so I'd better be clever about it. :-)

ETA: Ha, that nerdy babbling about matching meshes was my 3333rd post. Kind of fitting! :-)

@Odf,

It's good to "see" you again! I have kind of missed your presence here. You were the mainstay, and central focus of this thread for a long time. But now you only visit (or at least contribute) very occasionally. I understand that, I know you have moved on to other things, and left the care and maintenance of Antonia to our fumbling hands.

However, what I'm really wondering about is your own life in the real world. I know you moved to Australia, to the A.C.T. but know nothing since then. I'm not wanting to pry into the minutia of your personal life, but I think all of us in this forum would appreciate a few broad brush strokes as to the direction life has taken you in the last few months, what you are doing, and where your current interests lay.

Cheers,
Les.

Quote - I hope that clarifies some things. :-)

[/nerd]

Daaw... aba.. mwaaah?  :b_stunned::b_stunned::b_stunned:

I think Les may have understood it more than I did.  :lol:  But you've taught me the defintion of "gawp".  "laugh:

That's danged nifty.  Man.

HI!

@Les: Your wish is my command. Get ready for a long off-topic post then. :-)

I guess I should start 4 1/2 years back, when I first came to Australia. I'd been on temporary, academic positions since finishing my PhD in 1994, with no chance of ever becoming permanent faculty, and was a bit fed up with getting the boot and having to find a new job every couple of years or so for various reasons. What's worse, during my time in the US, my visa was actually tied to my position, adding extra spice to the general aroma of uncertainty. So, when I moved to the ACT, I was quite happy to take up non-academic work with the chance of continued employment and, eventually, permanent residency, while still working at a university and thus in close contact with the exciting world of science.

So, I got that permanent residency in January 2010, which is really nice, but my work situation didn't quite move into the direction I was hoping and expecting. I started doing some web programming, hoping to move towards more interesting - which to me means scientific, and particularly mathematical - things later on. Pretty much the opposite happened, and nowadays I tend to find myself somewhere in the no programmer's land between application development and system administration most of the time. As a grumpy old dude who tends to be quite oppinionated about things and generally way too educated for employers to be comfortable with - or at least that's what I'm suspecting - I decided that the best path for me would be to take the plunge and go freelance. So I'll be quitting my current job as of mid-January and try to earn my daily kangaroo (sorry, vegetarians!) with whatever jobs I can find that fit my talents and pay reasonably well.

I also decided that Canberra was too boring a place for me, and that Melbourne would not only be more pleasant to live in, but also provide more work opportunities. So I'll be moving here five weeks from now, and am in fact writing this from my future home. I have to confess that both decisions - quitting my job and moving - were made much easier by the fact that my new partner also lives here in Melbourne.

To close the loop and get slightly more on-topic: back when I spent a lot of my time fine-tuning Antonia and writing tools to make the job easier, such as the mesh tools mentioned a few posts back, I've been speculating whether either of these things - modelling and figure development or writing tools for modellers and figure developers - could be made a source of supplementary income. I don't think I'll make it the exclusive or even main source any time soon, but I might find myself inclined to spend more time on these things again some time in the future and maybe try to sell a few things here and there. So if any of you good folk have ideas on what you think might sell well - models, morphs, figure accessories, mesh-fiddling tools or general Poser-related hair-pulling-out-avoidance software - please don't be shy and let me know. :-)

Quote - Just thought I'd bring her here to say hi.

 

HI!

That's a lovely render.

Quote - So if any of you good folk have ideas on what you think might sell well - models, morphs, figure accessories, mesh-fiddling tools or general Poser-related hair-pulling-out-avoidance software - please don't be shy and let me know. :-)

A program to design and edit Poser dynamic hair files.  It would need to be able to handle line geometries, perhaps work with splines.  If the formatting is handled properly and the base vertices for the hairs aren't moved, an external tool should be able to handle Poser hair.  Making dynamic hair accessible would be a big boost for Poser.  :laugh:

@odf: Thank you! And "mesh-fiddling tools or general Poser-related hair-pulling-out-avoidance software" is very very relevant to my interests LOL

@Cage: is that EVEN POSSIBLE? OMG WANT!