I have indeed at last found a way and a workflow that works, with C4D and the Mocca module with some scripts. Marvelous Designer will never be able to deliver a quadmesh, for the simple reason that no one else have. (delivered a good enough tri to quad conversion that is). So where is the people using retopology? After all it is a quite useful thing to have in your skill set not only for Marvelous Designer but also for cleaning up sculpting models and the like.

So how do you go about it? Is there a better way? Anyone tried Polyboost plugin for Max?

Why the aversion to tri's? I grant you they do not look pretty but they work.

Phil, you will never be able to do advanced clothing with thickness, belt and borders, etc etc  without loop selections and the help you get from a nice clean quad mesh.

And why use a 3,5 MB zBrush model when a 20-30K optimized model looks just as good?

Good point. Yes if you want to do any additional editing I would agree with you.

ZBrush has a good retopology tool. I believe that you can also use it to get lower poly counts. I'd have to check to be sure, but I think it is controlable.

Phil, I have no faith in the zBrush and retopology. The workflow is extremly convoluted and the Decimation Master produces uglier mesh than I hiertho though possible. I want only the most perfect mesh possible. With all due respect,(without your site I would never got started), what I am after is persons who do retopology on a regular basis!

The best retop tool right now is Topogun, followed by 3DCoat...

Are you using any of these? (for retopology) I ask because I want only seasoned, regular users. I can also read forums and hearsay. Just for the record I have tried both Topogun and 3DCoat, (and zBrush too). But I have not tried Polyboost so if anyone has tried that I will be extremly interested.

Edit: I take it for granted that automatic conversion is not possible but a combination of tools and 'hands on'.

I use topogun, and have heard good things about 3DCoat, so I guess that bit's hearsay. I also use XSI's tools for hard surfaces where I need precision. XSI also has very good quadrangulation and decimation tools.

But if you've already tried all these out, why ask us what is good ? Use whichever one you like...

 

EDIT: Some degree of automation is possible and I believe 3DCoat actually allows you a lot of control over it's auto retop feature. I'd try a demo and see.

"But if you've already tried all these out, why ask us what is good ? Use whichever one you like..."

These are complex programs and it is only possible to make an accurate assessment of it after several hundred hours. I assume that I am not the only one who want to know the 'best' i e the fastest way to do it. Instead of each and every one of us spend days, weeks and months experimenting we can compare the time it takes to do a certain model we agree upon and arrive to some kind of conclusion.

Edit: One thing I know for sure and that is the 3DCoat's automatic retopology is utterly worthless.

It will still be down to a personal opinion.

One may find the GUI "intuitive" another may find the same GUI unworkable.

I am of the belief that the 'personal opinion' is grossly overrated. Here is one MD tri model that want to be converted to quads with  marketplace quality. Do it, show the mesh and tell us how long time it took.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10255731/V4_jacket.zip

 Edit: And keep the UV map islands as in the original. (or as near as possible)

 

 

I used Blender's retopo in version 2.49 and it worked fine. I haven't tried it with Blender 2.5 yet.

Poser 11 Pro, Windows 10

Auxiliary Apps: Blender 2.79, Vue Complete 2016, Genetica 4 Pro, Gliftex 11 Pro, CorelDraw Suite X6, Comic Life 2, Project Dogwaffle Howler 8, Stitch Witch

Hi Nanette, Blender sounds interesting. What did you used it for? (The retopology I mean)

I use 3d coat for retopology, to create usable figures with mid to low poly counts out of high-resolution Zbrush exports and voxel sculpts. I do this manually, “drawing” the new topology over the high-resolution models. It’s a comfortable process, but it takes time.  

 

It may be unconventional, but I prefer to sculpt at high resolution during the creative process and establish workable topology after the fact.

 

I’m too busy working on my own stuff to offer my assistance with benchmarking but I wish you luck in your quest for an adequate retopology toolset.

Download my free stuff here: http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php?page=2&userid=323368

Paloth, "It may be unconventional, but I prefer to sculpt at high resolution during the creative process and establish workable topology after the fact."

I don't now anything about it being unconventional or not but I am certain that you use the best way. And I agree when you say that it is a comfortable process.  Very relaxing, almost therapy! :) I understand that you are busy at the moment but could you make a educated guess over how long time it would take you to retopologize the model I posted?

I'd give it an hour.

Download my free stuff here: http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php?page=2&userid=323368

Yes that is more or less what I am used to too. I did the model in 1,5 hour but I am sure I can get it down to one hour or a little less with more practice. So I don't have to change tools then. :)

Attached Link: http://www.topogun.com

I like Topogun for retopology. I recently used it for a mesh for work that I made. The head of the mesh started out as a sculpt from a sphere and then got retopod in Topogun and later continued to be modeled in Silo and Modo. Topogun is pretty fast and version 2's beta is shaping up nicely. If you're looking for a dedicated tool for retopology, few can beat it.

 

That said, Modo, Silo, Max, etc. all have the ability these days to do retopo work. It's a simple snap and constraint action, so it really depends on how well you know your tools and if you feel like including a new app for this one thing. Topogun has some additional features like texture swapping from the sculpt to the lower res model and other map generators that may make it worth a look to you. Otherwise, you may want to see if you can find a method in your current app that works.

Teyon, So how long do you estimate it would take to do the above piece of cloth in Topogun?

 Edit: The reason I think that a plugin to some of the industry standard programs like 3ds max, Maya or C4D (for example the new Polyboost for max) would be better is because you can use all the functionallity already in the high end application! (But I might be wrong)

Not long but it depends on how many polys you want and the method you used. If you're using the new beta it would be less than 45 minutes...probably a half hour since it's primarily tube based. You could even get away with using symmetry in the new beta since it doesn't require 100% symmetry on the reference to work, which would cut the amount of time down. If you're using version 1, alot less is automated so you're probably looking at a full hour to maybe an hour and a half if you want to capture every wrinkle.

 

The beta of Topogun 2 has these nifty tube thingies...they remind me of loft curves in Rhino3D. They will conform to the mesh and will generate any number of polys you set to them. Once done, you can then build off them for the rest of the shirt. Alternatively, you could just paint the topology on top of the reference mesh and then bridge or manually combined polys to match up the various surfaces generated. All of this mentioned could be done in a few minutes. Now if you want to get more detailed in the topology generated, things will obviously slow down a tad but the surface itself is simplistic so there's little need. The only areas you'll probably want to do manually are the edges of the shirt and the collar. I really don't see it taking longer than 45 minutes and even that is longer than it probably would take.

 

Attached Link: http://vimeo.com/topogun/videos

Have a look at the attached link. It shows videos of the features in the current beta for Topogun 2.0 - every user of Topogun 1 has access to the beta of 2 and will get 2.0 free. Not to be advertising or anything. It's just a pretty sweet deal I thought I would mention.

Teyon,

The price $100 for a single license sure is right. The last time I tried was version 1 so now you have convinced me to try the new version.

To be able to quickly make your own mesh of any model is good for your self-confidence! :)

Cool! The features in the beta for version 2 is well worth the cost of version 1 - especially since you get to play with version 2 right now! :D Hope it goes well for ya.

Attached Link: http://www.ShareCG.com/v/47408/view/11/Poser/PropViewer-3.2

If you want to convert triangles to quads or quads to triangles you use PropViewer and it does more things too. http://www.ShareCG.com/v/47408/view/11/Poser/PropViewer-3.2

Stupidity also evolves!

> Quote - I am of the belief that the 'personal opinion' is grossly overrated. Here is one MD tri model that want to be converted to quads with  marketplace quality. Do it, show the mesh and tell us how long time it took. > > > >  Edit: And keep the UV map islands as in the original. (or as near as possible) > >   > >  

Download PropViewer and convert it to quads, it converted the V4_jacket pretty well.

Remove the txt extension from the file

Stupidity also evolves!

I use Propviewer (mostly to take a quick look at a obj file). But if you study the quads done by Propviewer and compare it to the manual retop you will see why no one ever will succssed with automatic quadrilation.

The mesh to the right was changed, it was decimated, simplified, some kind grid parameterization, Poisson ???, Laplace ???, (don't knw the correct names). PropViewer doesn't change the number of vertices and its position, neither UV. It only combines two triangles into a quad where is possible.

MeshLab has a lot of tools for editing and correcting meshes or scanned range data, sometimes crashes and the output is always a triangle mesh. This doesn't matter because once you have a regular grid of triangles in the way you want you can convert into quads using PropViewer

Stupidity also evolves!

As I said in the beginning of the thread, you will never be able to do advanced clothing with thickness, belt and borders, etc etc without loop selections and the help you get from a nice clean quad mesh. It is not enough to combine two triangles into a quad it must be orderly.

"The mesh to the right was changed, it was decimated, simplified"

I you are going to work further with it keep it simple (KISS). In the end you can choose any level of subdivision you want and manipulate with magnets or brush or whatever. Are you working with conforming clothing?

"PropViewer doesn't change the number of vertices and its position"

So sad, because that is what I want.

Finaliy, UV map.

It is better to work piece by piece instead of taking on the whole mesh at once. An good work flow is to make selections of all the UV islands, and then retopoligize them one by one. So the UV maps are maintained.

 

Quote - "PropViewer doesn't change the number of vertices and its position"

So sad, because that is what I want.

You have requested a tri to quad converter and this what PropViewer does, but this is not you want. You need something to do remeshing as decimation, simplification, gridification, etc and not conversion of tris to quads. If the final mesh has trinagles or quads is the less important thing. In most cases all the quads will be converted to triangles at rendering time.

Quote - It is better to work piece by piece instead of taking on the whole mesh at once.

This is correct. Any mesh processing method will fail if your mesh is not two-manifold. In your jacket there is a button that will complicate all, you must sepparate the button from the cloth. Sepparate as two groups or slit into two meshes and process each group/mesh alone.

Some remeshing methods also requires that the mesh cannot intersect itself.

 

Stupidity also evolves!

Quote - It is better to work piece by piece instead of taking on the whole mesh at once. An good work flow is to make selections of all the UV islands, and then retopoligize them one by one. So the UV maps are maintained.

UVs should always be done after retop:

http://i54.tinypic.com/2md2zdl.jpg

Attached Link: http://www.3d-coat.com/

I agree with you that Zbrush's topology is convoluted and difficult, too bad coming from such a great app. I've been using 3DCoat for the last 4 years and it's great. Very easy and quick, auto symmetry...best thing since sliced bread.

 

Comitted to excellence through art.

"You need something to do remeshing as decimation, simplification, gridification, etc and not conversion of tris to quads."

True, exactly so, to use as a BASE to build further upon. I thought that was obvious since we are in the Poser forum.

"If the final mesh has trinagles or quads is the less important thing"

NOT true, the mesh must be totally free from tris, ngons, concaves, collinears, degenerate facets of any form or shape whatsoever and be orderly (grid). Any vendor of conforming clothing free or commercial knows this.

Edit: If not these prerequists are fulfilled, it can be compared to building the house on a fondation of clay.

"UVs should always be done after retop"

True, after every adorment, belt, pockets, harness, sholderpads, etc etc + subdivison and final tweaking of magnets and brushes are done. THEN you can do the UV map but if you have done what I suggested and all the selections are intact it can be done in 5 min.

So post a pic of your retop's UVs then and we can compare...

"So post a pic of your retop's UVs then and we can compare..."

Ok, here it is. The triangle version had UV map already when I posted it so what shall we compare?

Here's a thought - since it's a shirt, why not cut along the natural seams instead of making odd ones? It would probably lend itself better to the over all appearance once textured. Just my opinion though. Are you using a pelt mapping UV app or are you using basic UV functions like planar and that sort?

Is that your final UV map?

No I mean put a basic texture on it so we can see how the retop version looks with the UVs it has. Because the mesh you posted earlier had serious problems with it's UVs, as can be seen here (click for bigger):

 

I have nightmares when I see UV maps like that. Texturing becomes an exercise is torturous futility, well anything besides a basic colour fill.   Sorry, just call em as I see em.

"Is that your final UV map?"

Laurie, I thought you had decided to be nice friday one day in the week?

This is just a scrap figure made for the discussion you may not have noticed but half the arm is gone..

 

you never stated this was a scrap figure. (I checked back on your posts - remember we are not mind readers)

Quote - "Is that your final UV map?"

Laurie, I thought you had decided to be nice friday one day in the week?

This is just a scrap figure made for the discussion you may not have noticed but half the arm is gone..

 

Nice is overrated, honest is better.

Mind, had you mentioned that it was a scrap piece, people might be a little more understanding about obvious shortcomings.

But, still, for the 'scrap model' is that the final map?

Do I really have to be nice? Damn....

Laurie

Quote - Do I really have to be nice? Damn....

Laurie

Nah. some of us love you for your periodically grumpy self.

ghonma, "No I mean put a basic texture"

Ok I do it tommorow. Next time phrase your words more exactly!

I meant this discussion to general, about the best way to retop. Not about specific cloth items. If LaurieA (or anyone else) thinks she or he can make a better UV map let us make a challenge, meanwhile let's keep to business.

 

Quote - > Quote - Do I really have to be nice? Damn....

Laurie

Nah. some of us love you for your periodically grumpy self.

Awwww....

LOL

It's fine if it's a scrap figure, i'm more interested in how you got rid of the stretch artifacts in the original mesh (you can see them in the wavy lines in the check pattern) I got rid of them by redoing the UVs on the retop mesh, but if there's an easier/faster way, it would be useful to know...

EDIT: Fine, in careful phrasing then, you stated that you could get UVs on your retop mesh in 5 minutes by following your method. I'm interested in knowing what the method is and what the UVs you get this way (by which I mean a texture mapped on those UVs as well as the UV map atlas itself) look like. And then compare it with the workflow people usually follow, which is to do the UVs, from scratch, after retops.

Is that clearer now ?

LaurieA, " had you mentioned that it was a scrap piece"

I should not have to mention that in a discussion. But if you want, I can download some of your free stuff and make a review..

 

 

Quote - LaurieA, " had you mentioned that it was a scrap piece"

I should not have to mention that in a discussion. But if you want, I can download some of your free stuff and make a review..

 

 

Er, that was not me that said that vintorix. Read again. I can understand how you thought it was me, but waddn't.

OH, and if you'd like to download my freebies and make a review feel free. I've never said my stuff was awesome or marketed it that way. But if you wanna be a jerk, go ahead.

Laurie

ok everyone, we're mind readers since Vintorix does not want to simply make things easier for us by telling us things..

LaurieA, "But if you wanna be a jerk, go ahead."

No it was not you who said it, my fault! :)

 

ghomma, "Is that clearer now ?"

Yes. And I could have been clearer myself. What I meant was not to transfer the old UV map to the new in some way but to save the material selections. It is the selections that is 90% of the work. Once you have the selections saved it is a breeze to make the UV map. So when you retop the selections one by one you keep control and can make the new selections very similar to the old - any faults.

It was not me who did the first map for the tri version, it was the map such as it came from Marvelous Designer. Usually MD's maps is first class (because you START with the patterns, not the normal other way around). But in this case there are problem because the right front of the jacket touch the left and the meshes intertwine. In the quad version this will not be a problem.

Wow, that's a bad UV. 

WARK!

Thus Spoketh Winterclaw: a blog about a Winterclaw who speaks from time to time.

 

(using Poser Pro 2014 SR3, on 64 bit Win 7, poser units are inches.)

What I used retopology for: I wanted to make a sculpture of a lion for one of DPHoadley's victorian buildings. I modelled it around the Poser 4 lion, but the topology had to be different. It still ended up with too many polys - entirely due to my limited skill, but the process in Blender was actually fun. I look forward to doing something like that again.

Poser 11 Pro, Windows 10

Auxiliary Apps: Blender 2.79, Vue Complete 2016, Genetica 4 Pro, Gliftex 11 Pro, CorelDraw Suite X6, Comic Life 2, Project Dogwaffle Howler 8, Stitch Witch

Quote - Wow, that's a bad UV. 

It is between horrific and flat out fugly.

Another beautiful day! Let's hope there are not too many jerks today. (its called a pious wish)

Here is a quick texturing, more of a concept like, using the bashed UV maps. The whole thing has taken about 3-4 hours, including the retop. It is many things to do if it were to be a real model, seam borders is the most important but never mind. (also there is no bump, displacement or normal maps in this render)

Today are many new ways to model different from the classical box modeling, ZBrush, Voxel based system as 3DCoat, Marvelous Designer, Sketchup, that are great fun to use but produces horrible meshes. Retop is a way to solve this elegantly something like the Gorodian knot actually. Each one solves this differently, I am very interested to hear about other methods for retopologizing (is that a word? :), especially with pictures before and after and not only 'this tools is good'. 'software xx is better'..and so on.

I dont currently have any screen shots to share but I do want to put my 2 cents in for Zbrush. The retopo tool is super easy to use and you can learn it in under an hour with no previous exp of ever doing a retopo before... if you are not careful you could flip a normal here or there but its easy to fix. Creating new edgeloops and adding thinkness to a one sided piece is also as easy as clicking a button and just playing with the resulting thickness... the new border and the newly extracted/extruded face are then given a different group so they are easily selectable later for finer manipulating... But, what I like is that its so easy to just spend a little bit of time getting the basic new topology down and then just dividing and obtaining all of the fine detail from the original in just a few steps.

 

Now, for me, it's not even a fair call 'cause i havent used anything else... but then with Zbrush to maya and back again, I don't feel like I need to.

 

just my $0.02

My Store   My Gallery    Contact

phionix,

Well I'm always willing to try ZBrush which is a great program. The retopology is a bit complicated but as long as it works so.. Better the program you have than the one you don't have!

I used the following process,

1)  With your tool selected and in edit mode, go into the tool palette and make a zsphere
2)  Go to Tool>Rigging>Select Mesh and select the mesh you want to retop
3)  Go to Tool>Topology>Edit Topology
4)  Add points in edit mode, move points in move mode, remove points by alt click them (press "a" to preview)
5)  When finished go to Tool>Projection>Projection adjust the Project Range until it looks good (check with "a")
6)  Go to Tool>Adaptive Skin>Density and set the density slider (higher density=higher quality)
7)  Click Make Adaptive Skin in that same subpalette. You will now have the new version in the tool palette.

It works but the thing I want to ask is, what happened to the groups? As I have explained the material selections are important. Normally when you are sculpting an organic entity in ZBrush (ie an alien creature :) you don't want seams, but with clothing seams are an important part of the design. So how do I preserve the seams in ZBrush?

 

You will have to make new groups, but it's so easy to do with your new low poly retopo-ed mesh... As for seams, you mean uv map, right?? You make a new map... But see, when you know you're going to retop a mesh, you wouldn't bother setting up the UVs on the 1st one I begin with... So it's not like it's double the work. Now I happened to like zbrushes auto uv method, and then I like to go into Maya and tweek and edit this auto setup with mayas uv tools (more control). If you mean something else by "seams" you let me know.

My Store   My Gallery    Contact

"If you mean something else by "seams" you let me know"

No I meant seams, of course you set up the maps to follow the seams anything else would be stupid. But I guess that to redo the UV is no great matter on a low-poly model.

Attached Link: Half the shirt in about 10 minutes or so.

Out of curiousity I wanted to see how fast I could do it in Topogun 2.0 Beta without using Symmetry. Result was under 15 minutes for half the shirt. I imagine you could do the whole thing - including UV's - in about 45 minutes now (assuming you have a pelt mapping UV application like UVLayout).

Very impressive, especially how you did the ! So far Topogun 2.0 is the king no doubt about it but what feature was it that was not in the 1.0 version? Anyhow I order my copy!..

 

On second thoughts, even if the 'grid' was a nifty trick it only saves a few minutes and defeats the purpose of the seams. It is important to have seams at the top and bottom on the arm. But even more important is that topogun does not keep the material zones. Redoing the UV maps is no great matter with a lowpoly mesh true, but then comes the retextureing. The texturing takes more time than all the other steps together. In C4D I can create the UV maps with a single mouse click if the zones are intact, a single click for each material that is. And then I can use the same texture maps with just some minor tweaking.. When I get more time I will make an video and show the whole process  how to distribute packages that are both  dynamic and conforming at the same time.

In zbrush you can apply your texture as polypaint... Then you can take that polypainted obj, redo or adjust UVs, then create a new texture map( or disp or bump or normal). It's come in pretty handy a few times. Of course others could have a similar approach but again, I havnt used others.

My Store   My Gallery    Contact

phionix,

We have one expert in Topogun, one expert in zBrush and one user with CD4, now we are getting somewhere! Time limits stops anyone from being well versed in all the programs, but working together gives power! Wait until I have done my video, and then I will be more than curious to read the comments. ( I have to do the texturing to to show what I mean and that takes a little time).

vintorix,

Why do you want to retopo the clothing?  Did your orginal clothing have UVs and textures yet?  Or is your plan to do all that after retopo?  Most retopology I ever do is for creating a lo-res base mesh from a detailed object that I've baked a normal map from to then apply onto the retopo mesh.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

You can transfer texture from a hi res to a low res mesh in Topogun, even a poly painted mesh from ZBrush -you do need to UVMap the low res mesh though. So after you retopo, you export out to OBJ, UVMap, then reimport to Topogun. As for topology of the mesh - you have total control of that. You can add or remove topology in Topogun however you want. So there's nothing stopping you from placing edges where you think seams will be. The demonstration idea was purely about how long it would take to do it, not so much about the topology itself.

 

Also, when doing retopology work for public consumption, I find it's easier to set up material zones AFTER I UVMap the newly made low res mesh. The way I do it, my UV islands are always exactly the same as my material zones (with the exception of eye sockets). This makes it a simple thing to select and assign material zones.

When retopologizing a textured ZBrush mesh for personal use, I don't bother with material zones, as it's usually the texture that's important to my need more than zones themselves. I may go in and assign the eyes or teeth their own zone but that's about it.

 

Quote - vintorix,

Why do you want to retopo the clothing? Did your orginal clothing have UVs and textures yet? Or is your plan to do all that after retopo? Most retopology I ever do is for creating a lo-res base mesh from a detailed object that I've baked a normal map from to then apply onto the retopo mesh.

 

Same here - unless for some reason I started out in ZBrush (as I did with a recent model for work) and I need a cleaner topology. That's what retopo work is all about - making a simpler, cleaner mesh for final production or for animation. If the starting mesh was clean already, there's little point in doing a retopo.

ShawnDriscoll, "Most retopology I ever do is for creating a lo-res base mesh from a detailed object that I've baked a normal map from to then apply onto the retopo mesh."

Yes that is the normal way to work with zBrush for example but this is different.

You can make a dress in Marvelous Designer in 10 min with first class UV maps that can be used in Poser as dynamic cloth directly. However the triangular mesh is unsuitable as a base for conforming clothing. It must be retopoligized, so the planned workflow is this,

1. Make cloth in MD
2. Do texturing in Blacksmith or Bodypaint or whatever, after where you have one piece of Dynamic Clothing

then,

3. Retop keeping all material zones intact.
4. Make new UV map (from the material zones)
5. Minor tweaking to make the texture fit the new map

Voila! You can now distribute your piece in both Dynamic and Conforming format.

 Edit: You must think outside the box! :)

Just for the record, even if the UVs and textures must be totally redone there is still a need. It is a skill that you just need to have,

1. To make meshes simpler, (from zBrush)
2. To convert to quads from tris (from Marvelous Designer)
3. To make mesh cleaner, more beautiful (from Sketchup. Yes, beautiful mesh is more valuable :)

And doubtless in many other cases too.

"3) To make mesh cleaner, more beautiful (from Sketchup. Yes, beautiful mesh is more valuable :)"

you keep saying this.. and as a Sketchup Modeler, I can produce "beautiful" mesh easily.. it's not the program at fault but the operator. any modeling app can produce crap mesh if you don't use it right. I model in Quads, I get Quads. that simple. so how about you drop the crap and get on with the subject?

Even if I live untill I'll be hundred I never understand all this belligerence in the Poser forum. I love Sketchup too, and use it for all my architectural work, in combination with C4D. I have had many a fight in the Cinema forum defending Sketchup. Kaibach has written three posts in this thread so far, all aggressive, I wonder what is his problem? Why don't you send me a fairly complicated Sketchup model, and I tell you what is wrong with it.

"Even if I live untill I'll be hundred I never understand all this belligerence in the Poser forum. "

 

read your own posts at all? I realise your primary language may not be english, but you always appear to want to fight. your posts are full of little digs, you are argumentative, etc.

sorry for reacting to YOUR way of talking to the rest of us. and no, I won't be sending you one of my models just to fuel your desire to fight - yes thats how you come across to the rest of us vintorix - I want to learn about the subject of the thread.

Quote - However the triangular mesh is unsuitable as a base for conforming clothing. It must be retopoligized

Understood.  I didn't know you were doing comformed clothing.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

Quote - > Quote - However the triangular mesh is unsuitable as a base for conforming clothing. It must be retopoligized

Understood.  I didn't know you were doing comformed clothing.

The mesh is unsuitable because the mesh itself or because is made of traingles ?

Stupidity also evolves!

To the left you see one typical example from Marketplace. They all look nice and orderly like this. But how to you expect to add the exquisite seams and details to the triangular mesh to the right?

?

But still, the triangular mesh looks more like natural cloth. So why can't you have both?

That is the whole point, you can.

Why retopology?

Why control gravitation, be invisible, fly through the air like a bird? These are things people has dreamed about since the beginning of time. Control gravitation, be invisible, fly through the air like a bird is still impossible though.

But retopology is within the reach of the average modeler.

 

Quote - But still, the triangular mesh looks more like natural cloth. So why can't you have both?

Quad mesh is easier to model and consume less memory, but triangle mesh are better for conforming and dynamic clothes and any deformable object because its normal are always correct after the deformation. A quad  after a deformation can produce a degenerate quad and so have wrong normals and can produce undesired illumination or black spots in the rendered image.

Stupidity also evolves!

"triangle mesh are better for conforming and dynamic clothes...because normals are always correct after the deformation"

ha ha,  talk about sense of proportions! Nothing is easier than to correct wrong normals except perhaps tying my shoes. Beside, the tools in C4D for retopology has never given  me a wrong normal.

Edit: But the most compelling argument is that there is not a single cloth model in the marketplace that is not made in quads, not one.

Quote - ha ha,  talk about sense of proportions! Nothing is easier than to correct wrong normals

You cannot correct the normals of a degenate or not planar quad, three normals can be good but the fourth is always bad, you only can select which one will be the bad one.

Quote - Edit: But the most compelling argument is that there is not a single cloth model in the marketplace that is not made in quads, not one.

Yes I know and almost all the clothes that I have are made by quads, but just go to the cloth room, pose a dynamic cloth and see all the abominations that happen with the quads in some parts of the cloth. Of course in most of the cases the abominations are not visible in the rendering with the camera angle you use. And when are visible you must change the camera angle, use magnets to hide or correct  them or use Photoshop. With conforming clothes happens the same at the bending zones.

Stupidity also evolves!

Dynamic cloth should be triangulated.  The triangular models right from Marvelous Designer simulate 5-6 times faster in Poser.

As for conforming clothes as everyone uses quads you would be a Don Quichotte to question it. Deforming is not the only issue overriding everything else.

 

 

Maybe I am Don Quijote, but I don't see any reason why conforming clothes cannot be made of triangles

Stupidity also evolves!

"I don't see any reason why conforming clothes cannot be made of triangles"

May I ask, have you tried? Because I have,

Hashshashin Warrior for M4
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/details.php?item_id=63535

Irish Maiden Dress for V4
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/details.php?item_id=63397

It was not an exhilarating experience. Never again please! :)

I shall see which is the problem with your Vicky dress.

A conforming cloth is nothing more than a posable figure. A figure can be made with quads or triangles and it doesn't make any difference. I even subdivided Vicky4 breast to have better breast morphs, so her breast is made with triangles now.

 

Stupidity also evolves!

After that rather disappointing experience I bided my time, waiting for MD's team to deliver a quad library. But it didn't arrived in June as promised and gradually it dawned upon me that no one had succeeded with what they were trying to do.. In other words, they won't make it. So I decided to learn retopology no matter how hard it was. Surprisingly it wasn't difficult at all.

 

I did a quick test with the bodice, that is made of triangles. The only problem that I found was with the shoulders movement. The collar present a little problem and chest and abdomen works well.

What I found with your mesh has nothing to do if is made of quads or triangles. First problem is that the mesh is not welded and so, it can sepparate the partes with some bendings. The joints for the collar need a small adjustment and the joints for the shoulders are wrong, the bending of the shoulder have no effect on the collar and maybe chest too and it must have in this cloth.

Beside this, is a nice cloth

Stupidity also evolves!

It was my first conforming for what its worth. But it was so many problems with that relatively simple mesh. If I shall make cloth, I want it to be of the most advanced kind, with all kinds of details and embellishment, seams, pockets, belt, lace, embroderies, etc, after all I am not here to play! So it has to be quads, sorry.

 

The problem is not the mesh itself, the problem is to setup the joint zones that are a headache!

Stupidity also evolves!

"The problem is not the mesh itself,"

I can not see why you say that. I had 1001 pronblems with the mesh which I wouldn't have had with quads. In the end I was too fed up with all of it to fiddle with the joint editor. I am of the opinion that modeling shall be fun.