dphoadley opened this issue on Aug 13, 2012 · 87 posts
dphoadley posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 8:52 AM
Attached Link: Two Nudes in a Garden by a Wall
Judy is resurrected, and back from the dead!Judy, remapped by myself for V3 skins is a whole new Judy!! Ken1 has done wonders with magnets and morphs to transform her into something truly awesome!!!!
She poses well, renders well, and has delectible naughty bits!!!! And no need to for a 3rd party add on to make her anatomically complete!
dph
For another render of her, you can also see this (WARNING: exposed naked female genitals): !!Naughty Farra Up Skirt No Panties!!
My remap is for free, so if anybody who would like my Judy remap, PM me here, and we'll work something out! However, if you do request it, I want guarantees that it will actually be used!!!
NanetteTredoux posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 9:37 AM
Nice work David - between you and Ken she has had quite a makeover. I think my problem is that I take her into the face room - the results are not good.
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
LaurieA posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 9:41 AM
Wow, she looks better than Alyson. How tragic..lol.
Laurie
Kalypso posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 9:58 AM Online Now! Site Admin
Great remapping work David, glad to see you at it again. I'd like to know if she would work with Eternal Judy? IIRC she comes with a different .obj but I think it's because he just corrected some of the original mapping for V1/2 textures. I'm thinking if pointing the EJ .cr2 to your remapped .obj would work just like for the original Judy.
Btw, any plans to remap any figure for V4 UVs? I seem to have ended up with more textures for her than V3 now :)
SamTherapy posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 12:32 PM
Crikey, that's great work, mate. I have Quarker's morph of Judy - Farah - but hardly ever used it, other than in one image, years back.
Yes, I'd love your remap and I promise it would get used but I just can't say when.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
Gremalkyn posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 1:02 PM
(Bookmark - I like Judy but use Posette a lot more.)
PrecisionXXX posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 1:16 PM
Let's not forget Eternal Judy from RMP, or An-An from Yamato either. Both amazing makeovers of a beautiful figure ruined by poor joints. She'd be a good candidate for weight mapping.
D.
The "I" in Doric is Silent.
Alisa posted Mon, 13 August 2012 at 1:46 PM
Wow - she does look great!
Cheers,
Alisa
RETIRED HiveWire 3D QAV Director
moriador posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 1:06 AM
Quote - Btw, any plans to remap any figure for V4 UVs? I seem to have ended up with more textures for her than V3 now :)
Indeed. I have a ton of very high quality V4 textures. They are likely the main reason I persist in using V4.
ETA: I always liked Judy better than most of the other Poser figures, and she's certainly better than Alyson. Her face, yeah, is hard to work with. But at least she doesn't look like a man-alien in drag.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 1:28 AM
Let me get this straight? People here actually WANY a V4 version of Judy?
Have any of you actually looked at V4's texture layout? -an arm here, a leg way over on a separate texture, an ear here, her hip someplace else all together?
Yes, I could do it, most likely, if I were a true masochist! -and if you all were to pitch in and keep me stocked up in booze!!!
dph
moriador posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 1:40 AM
Quote - Let me get this straight? People here actually WANY a V4 version of Judy?
Have any of you actually looked at V4's texture layout? -an arm here, a leg way over on a separate texture, an ear here, her hip someplace else all together?
Yes, I could do it, most likely, if I were a true masochist! -and if you all were to pitch in and keep me stocked up in booze!!!
dph
Yeah, I figured it must be a nightmare, or you would have done it already.
It's just that, for whatever reason, vendors have produced a whole lot of exceptionally good skins for V4.
I don't know about others, but I'd think a V4 version of Posette would probably be far more useful.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 1:56 AM
Trufully, remapping V4 to take V3 skins all but drove me insane!! The magnatude of the mesh was all but overwhelming, and its insane texture layout was beyound crazy!
to go back and stick my head into that bucket of worms is a bit psychologically challenging! I can think of more pleasant ways to lose my mind, like enduring root canal surgery without the benefit of anethesia!
Find 100 people who WANT such a remap, and i'LL CONSIDER It! -but NOT for just one or two!
dph
PS: Like the boy in that movie, 'Sixth Sense' who sees dead people, I still see facets and vertices whenever I close my eyes!! V4's UV's haunt my dreams!!
moriador posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 2:26 AM
That bad, eh?
(Now I'm having images of Lawrence Olivier with a dental drill...)
No, no. We definitely do not want to imagine you tortured this way.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 2:59 AM
At least Larry got to keep his diamonds in his esophagus! And Dustin Hoffman definitely did 'Fix It'!! But I don't have any diamonds at all!!
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 3:02 AM
So, let me get this straight again, you all want PosetteV3 to become Posette V4? Or are we talking about Judy? -and could I for once please my wife and make some money of this endeavor?
If so, then work up a subscription of at least 100 people, willing to put their money where their mouth is, and I'll do it!!!
moriador posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 3:31 AM
I think the person who suggested Kickstarter for Poser vendors considering consumer requests might have been on to something. I wonder how well it would work out in actual practice?
You'd find out pretty quick how serious people really were.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
monkeycloud posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 3:45 AM
Yeah, I've certainly also suggested this sort of thing in the past... for community funding something to get it done... if people can pledge and, indeed, put down their money up front via one of these project sponsorship portals, it could work pretty well... I reckon?
Anyway, great looking work on fitting the V3 skins dph 
I'm not even sure if I have Judy? Does she still come with Poser 9/2012??? (I only just started out with these versions!) I will have to check her out later if I do have the figure...
I think I ascertained from a previous thread that I should have Posette bundled still??
Cheers 
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 3:56 AM
She probably doesn't come with the out of the box version of Poser 9, but you should be able to download her for free a part of the Poser Legacy Package. At least that's what I did with Poser Pro 2010, when I lost all my Poser 5 files when my old HD died of old age!
dph
monkeycloud posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 4:00 AM
Thanks... I will have to investigate further this evening then...
EnglishBob posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 5:13 AM
I have Farrah, Eternal Judy, and An-An, and still use Judy in those forms: I also have plenty of excellent V3 textures, and Texture Converter can make more for me if I wish. Expect a PM. ;)
3anson posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 5:17 AM
is there a remap anywhere that takes V3/V4 skins over to V2? or a remap that takes V4 skins to V3?
WandW posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 8:54 AM
Mazel tov; it's David! :biggrin:
I was plugging your V4 to V3 remap the other day...
Lovely render, but Judy's left index finger looks painful; I didn't notice at first because I was distractered by her other...attrubutes.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Wisdom of bagginsbill:
"Oh - the manual says that? I have never read the manual - this must be why."
EnglishBob posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 9:27 AM
Quote - is there a remap anywhere that takes V3/V4 skins over to V2?
There is a V2 remap to take V3 maps. Watch this space. ;)
pitklad posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 9:28 AM
Teeth correction morph comes as a separate dial
This should work on this V3 skinned Judy too, David you are welcome to add it on your judy if you like :biggrin:
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 10:26 AM
Judy V3 has been morphed to my Aoshrat character, whereas VickyV2V3 is out of the box! So, any real comparison will have to come from yourselves, once I give you the mesh.
LaurieA posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 10:55 AM
You have a couple pontoons there...perhaps a gravity morph? They're floating on an invisible surface? LOL
Laurie
JohnDoe641 posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 12:07 PM
Quote - She probably doesn't come with the out of the box version of Poser 9, but you should be able to download her for free a part of the Poser Legacy Package. At least that's what I did with Poser Pro 2010, when I lost all my Poser 5 files when my old HD died of old age!
dph
I'm probably missing the obvious here, but I'm not sure where to find the legacy content. I thought it was on CP but I couldn't find it.
ssgbryan posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 12:11 PM
Quote - > Quote - She probably doesn't come with the out of the box version of Poser 9, but you should be able to download her for free a part of the Poser Legacy Package. At least that's what I did with Poser Pro 2010, when I lost all my Poser 5 files when my old HD died of old age!
dph
I'm probably missing the obvious here, but I'm not sure where to find the legacy content. I thought it was on CP but I couldn't find it.
http://poser.smithmicro.com/content_update.html
WandW posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 12:11 PM
Quote - I'm probably missing the obvious here, but I'm not sure where to find the legacy content. I thought it was on CP but I couldn't find it.
http://poser.smithmicro.com/content_update.html
EDIT :Ya beat me to it...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Wisdom of bagginsbill:
"Oh - the manual says that? I have never read the manual - this must be why."
JohnDoe641 posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 1:06 PM
My PP2012 serial number doesn't seem to work with the content downloads even though it worked just fine for SR3. I have to go searching the house for my old Poser 7 box now. :(
SamTherapy posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 2:15 PM
Thank you, David! I'll take the young lady for a test drive in a little while.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
Gremalkyn posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 2:42 PM
Quote - So, let me get this straight again, you all want PosetteV3 to become Posette V4? Or are we talking about Judy? -and could I for once please my wife and make some money of this endeavor? If so, then work up a subscription of at least 100 people, willing to put their money where their mouth is, and I'll do it!!!
I think this would work better if you determined and posted a production cost first rather than getting 100 people at a buck each (unless you want / settle for $100.00). If this were done as a pre-sale IPO where everyone investing would put in $10 and get it "free" when it was done, then you put it in the market at $15 for everyone else, you would probably get more than $100 start up and who knows what from the market over time.
I use the out-of-the-box P4 Hi Rez Nude Female more than anything, so continued options for her are always welcome. I would invest $10 for a non-genital ungrade and a little more if the naughty bits were included.
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 2:50 PM
Considering the complexity of the V4 UV format, $1000.- would be the least that I could consider to sit down and do it! The job, would take between 3-4 months of 12 to 18 hour days.
Anything less than that wouldn't begin to compensate me for the Blood, Sweat, Toil, & Tears incolved in the endeavor.
dph
moriador posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 3:06 PM
Quote - Considering the complexity of the V4 UV format, $1000.- would be the least that I could consider to sit down and do it! The job, would take between 3-4 months of 12 to 18 hour days.
Anything less than that wouldn't begin to compensate me for the Blood, Sweat, Toil, & Tears incolved in the endeavor.
dph
If you could do it in a couple of weeks and were yourself happily excited about the project because you know you'd enjoy doing it, I'd think $1000 would be acceptable minimum compensation.
For 3-4 months of 12-18 hour days of blood, sweat, toil and tears -- I think $10,000 should be the minimum. ETA: The absolute minimum.
I think we would be better off accepting the result of using texture converter to convert our v4 skins into v3 ones and then thanking you profusely for mapping Posette for V3.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
Gremalkyn posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 3:13 PM
99 People at $10 each is only $990. Oops - missed the mark. :p
If people were to invest a minimum of $10 (to get the "100 people") and could invest more as a sort of community development project with no expectation of additional products (no hair or props, just the skin and feeling good about helping out the community), I would still think it likely you would get the $1,000 eventually - no idea how soon, though.
That is to say, everyone who met the minimum investment of $10 would still get a "free" copy later and anyone investing more only gets the "free" copy and good karma. Do not post who invested what, since that might lead to "look at me / him / her" threads, just post the "invested / still needed totals," preferably with a Poser thermometer or a status bar.
$300 = [x] [x] [x] [] [] [] [] [] [] [_]
I am currently out of work, but I could invest more than $10 to help you and, since I have nothing good enough to sell / give away for free, the only way I can help the community at large is to support ideas and help look for things when someone posts "looking for . . . " threads. :)
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 3:32 PM
Talk it out among yourselves, and decide what you want, and how you want it! If your counter proposal is reasonable, I will consider it! Remapping Posette to V3 was fairly easy compared to remapping V4 to V3! The mesh was unrasonably dense, and its distribution was unrasonably complex!
Remapping Posette to V4 will not be nearly as easy as it was to remap her to V3. However, being Posette, she will certainly be much more easy than remapping V4 to V3 was!
Raise me a reasonable initial sum, and I will look happily upon the project! And, I will say this: the beauty of a remapped figure over that of a texture converter is that you only need one figure to that texture format in order to reuse your textures, whereas, with a converter, you need to 1st convert each and every texture you wish to use, thus creating endless duplication on your HD!
Think about your own time and effort, and then think about mine!
dph
SamTherapy posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 5:05 PM
Hey David, just tried out the new remap of Judy and it's superb. I used GND's skin, which looked first class.
Please tell me how I can get the morphs you used in the pics you posted.
Thanks in anticipation.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
dphoadley posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 5:31 PM
Quote - Hey David, just tried out the new remap of Judy and it's superb. I used GND's skin, which looked first class.
Please tell me how I can get the morphs you used in the pics you posted.
Thanks in anticipation.
1st of all, post us a render of GND Judy!
I've just sent you all of the Ken1 Judy Cr2's, redirected with My JudyV3 object, instead of standard Judy! Ken1 used magnates to create his morphs, from which he also generated morph targets. All of his figures can be downloaded for free from here: POSER GIRLS
My sending you the Cr2's simply saved you the trouble of having to edit them by hand!
dph
SamTherapy posted Tue, 14 August 2012 at 7:12 PM
Hi David, will post you a render tomorrow. :)
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
Kalypso posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 3:06 AM Online Now! Site Admin
David, I saved out the .uvs from your remapped .obj and applied that .uvs to the Eternal Judy .obj and edited the EJ.cr2 to point to that new one. It worked! For some reason though the mat files do not apply the BodySkin material so I just did that manually, it's only one material but I will see what else needs editing and let you know in case anyone else wants to use EJ. And if anyone does have EJ and plans to use her I've got some face presets in freestuff - there are tons of morphs in her face and it can get really tiresome to keep scrolling.
Next I'm going to try with Ken's characters. :)
Thanks again for all your hard work and generosity!
dphoadley posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 3:38 AM
The point is, Judy Lives, and lives well! As far as I'm concerned, you may give your EJ uvs file to anyone who wants it.
I myself prefer Judy over EJ, because EJ was neutered for some reason, and I like to occassionally render erotica. Other than that, EJ's a very beautiful figure!
dph
EnglishBob posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 3:52 AM
Looks good to me!
Quote - And if anyone does have EJ and plans to use her I've got some face presets in freestuff - there are tons of morphs in her face and it can get really tiresome to keep scrolling.
Thanks for those, just downloaded them. I must have missed them when they came out.
Gremalkyn posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 2:02 PM
Quote - I myself prefer Judy over EJ, because EJ was neutered for some reason, and I like to occassionally render erotica. Other than that, EJ's a very beautiful figure! dph
Yes, but, no. Maybe. The following is from site mail I exchanged with EJ's creator, 3Dream:
Me: 2) Since you reworked Judy's map, did you also rework her genital map, or will she only look good with genitals switched off?
3Dream: 2 - You must work with the genital on. Eternal judy has a morph that soft vagina as if it was with the genital off.
I purchased EJ, but the files need some sort of special unzip program that I do not have yet, so I have not tested this answer.
EnglishBob posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 4:39 PM
Quote - I purchased EJ, but the files need some sort of special unzip program that I do not have yet, so I have not tested this answer.
It's not an unzip program, but an encoder designed to avoid copyright problems. Basically, you can only decode EJ if you have Judy.
I have the remap working on Judy, EJ, and Farrah - but when I tried the new OBJ with AnAn R4, many of her morphs stopped working, which implies a changed vertex count. Yet the other figures are fine. I've probably done something wrong and will go over the steps again, it wasn't hard.
Does anyone else have a remapped AnAn yet?
dphoadley posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 5:17 PM
I find something etherally beautiful about her!!
Saphire Fox hait completes the figure!
dph
LaurieA posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 5:25 PM
Her gens look...really wrong.
Laurie
SamTherapy posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 7:15 PM
Yup, that's one weird looking minge.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
LaurieA posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 7:33 PM
Don't ya mean schmoo? LOL I heard Russell Howard say that and damn near fell outta my chair...lmao. I live a sheltered life ;)
Laurie
monkeycloud posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 7:46 PM
ROFLMAO :lol:
Oh man... that hurts...
...the new schmoo... LOL!!!
moriador posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 7:50 PM
So when we go to business meetings in order to do some schmoozing?
Man, I've been doing it WRONG! my whole life.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
LaurieA posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 7:57 PM
Quote - ROFLMAO :lol:
Oh man... that hurts...
...the new schmoo... LOL!!!
Well, the worst thing was when Howard referred to it, a bird flew out of it!! LMAO Makes one wanna take a trip to Thailand, doesn't it? LOL.
dphoadley posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 9:30 PM
Actuallly, that Schmoo looks exactly like my wife's! Maybe that explains how we ended up having 5 children, and now 8 grandchildren!
LaurieA posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 9:31 PM
I think that's what happens after you have 5 children.
Laurie
dphoadley posted Wed, 15 August 2012 at 9:43 PM
Quote - I think that's what happens after you have 5 children.
Laurie
Could be! Over the years it has changed a bit, but after 40 years of marriage, she still manages to RING MY BELL!!!!
SamTherapy posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 12:39 PM
@ Laurie - if you want to learn some more Brit slang, there's always "Chuff". As in,
The miracle of childbirth... 16 hours of labour and a chuff like a wizard's sleeve.
:)
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
jjroland posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 1:57 PM
I got 3 kids. I must have stopped prior to THAT occurring. Thank the gods! We could probably eliminate all of the '16 and pregnant' if we simply put this out as a warning image.
Anyhow I am forcing myself to believe that it is just a misinterpretation of how DPs wife appears. I've never seen anything like that, in all of my 'referencing'.
Back to the point of this thread. I was actually pleasantly suprized by the image in the first post DP. They do look really nice, and actually useable. I'd pay my $10 too.
I am: aka Velocity3d
dphoadley posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 3:03 PM
Actually, my wife doesn't look like that at all, I just said that to deflect the critisizm in the other thread about Cynthia. I don't know why Ken1 made her framis to look so distended, but I do love Liliana's face and physique so, and she is my favorate of all the Judies I've encountered so far, that I'm more than willing to live with it!
As for girls getting pregnant at 16, I most certainly don't believe that they have no idea about where babies come from! And I'm sure that they must have heard about condoms! So, if they are having babies at that young an age, there must be a serious psychological reason for it! Maybe they feel that motherhood somehow empowers them.
dph
moriador posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 3:16 PM
Quote - Actually, my wife doesn't look like that at all, I just said that to deflect the critisizm in the other thread about Cynthia. I don't know why Ken1 made her framis to look so distended, but I do love Liliana's face and physique so, and she is my favorate of all the Judies I've encountered so far, that I'm more than willing to live with it!
As for girls getting pregnant at 16, I most certainly don't believe that they have no idea about where babies come from! And I'm sure that they must have heard about condoms! So, if they are having babies at that young an age, there must be a serious psychological reason for it! Maybe they feel that motherhood somehow empowers them.
dph
I doubt there's any intentionality among most pregnant teenagers. Most probably believe "it won't happen to them" or any other number of myths, such as "you can't get pregnant while menstruating" or "you can't get pregnant the first time." Some get pregnant when they're drunk or high and their judgment is severely impaired. And many get pregnant because birth control is not infallible. The failure rate for condom use among teenagers is quite high. After all, it requires the cooperation and experience of the young male as well.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
Gremalkyn posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 3:22 PM
From the movie "Grease:"
[Rizzo and Kenickie are making out in Kenickie's car, crawling into the backseat together]
Kenickie: Oooh, Riz... Riz...
Rizzo: Would you call me by my first name?
Kenickie: Ooohh, uhhh... ooohh... uhh...
Rizzo: Betty.
Kenickie: Betty, Betty... [says her name several times, in increasing passion]
Rizzo: Hey... ya got something?
Kenickie: Are you kidding? [Sits up and gets a condom out of his wallet]
Kenickie: My 25-cent insurance policy.
Rizzo: Big spender! [Kenickie opens the condom packet, is shocked as he finds it broken]
Rizzo: What?
Kenickie: It broke!
Rizzo: How could it break?
Kenickie: I bought it when I was in the seventh grade. [the two spend a long nervous moment considering the situation, but look to each other with growing lust]
Rizzo: What the Hell... [Rizzo grabs Kenickie, and they resume making out]
Kenickie: [muffled] Oh Betty...
bagoas posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 5:01 PM
Here's number 1: JudyV3, with Sally texture for V3, EZSkin sub-surface shading. No further morphs. Rest later.
jjroland posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 6:17 PM
I meant that if they thought it would look like that afterwards it would be a further deterrant.
I am: aka Velocity3d
dphoadley posted Thu, 16 August 2012 at 8:54 PM
Quote - I meant that if they thought it would look like that afterwards it would be a further deterrant.
What, stretch marks on their bellies isn't deterrant enough?! Obviously there is something more at stake here! I understand that a lot of them simply want to hold in their arms a 'Living Doll'!
Perhaps also there is an unconscious biological imperitive here: Historically, girls became women and were married by age 13! Look at Julliet in the Shakespeare play, she was 14 and considered very marriagable.
moriador posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 12:07 AM
Quote - > Quote - I meant that if they thought it would look like that afterwards it would be a further deterrant.
What, stretch marks on their bellies isn't deterrant enough?! Obviously there is something more at stake here! I understand that a lot of them simply want to hold in their arms a 'Living Doll'!
Perhaps also there is an unconscious biological imperitive here: Historically, girls became women and were married by age 13! Look at Julliet in the Shakespeare play, she was 14 and considered very marriagable.
I don't think biology had much to do with it. The biology of girls has changed since then. If you look at the diaries of 17th century Puritan girls, you find that the average age of the onset of menses was around 17. Compare that to today...
The young girls getting married were mostly of among the aristocracy for whom marriage was largely a political consideration. At much of the time that 13 year old girls were commonly married, men of this class often did not marry until after age 30. Again, I doubt this was due to biology. Among the lower classes, marriage occurred quite a bit later, keeping in mind also that, given the later menses, teens could happily engage in all sorts of hanky panky without babies appearing until a bit later than they would today.
ETA: The possibility of a future death from smoking does not deter many teens (and many adults). The possibility of death from from drunk driving does not deter some of them (and many adults either). If death is not a deterrent, stretch marks and mutilated genitals surely won't be. Besides, as I said earlier, you have to really believe that sex leads to babies. Despite the fact that we've known this for quite some time, it seems to require actual personal experience to convince some people.
ETA2: It's my understanding that menses among Roman girls was more like it has been in the 20th century (though I'm very weak on classical history). Nutritional status has varied widely from one time period to another, and that no doubt has an effect. I think Roman youths may have married quite young. To me, in many ways late Roman culture seems closer to our own than the Renaissance culture of Shakespeare.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
dphoadley posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 1:49 AM
Quote - Ok, Let me keep me to my promise and show some pictures.
Here's number 1: JudyV3, with Sally texture for V3, EZSkin sub-surface shading. No further morphs. Rest later.
@bagoas, that is one really beautiful render you made! I love the figure, the pose, the texture! She looks like one very delectible MILF, or Cougar!
DO GIVE US MORE!!!!
Strange, the older I get, the more sexy older women look!!!!!! Some even more so than the younger ones!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NanetteTredoux posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 2:56 AM
I second that - a lovely render Bagoas! But I don't think she looks more than 40 - to me that is young!
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
AmbientShade posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 3:41 AM
Quote - > Quote - > Quote - I meant that if they thought it would look like that afterwards it would be a further deterrant.
What, stretch marks on their bellies isn't deterrant enough?! Obviously there is something more at stake here! I understand that a lot of them simply want to hold in their arms a 'Living Doll'!
Perhaps also there is an unconscious biological imperitive here: Historically, girls became women and were married by age 13! Look at Julliet in the Shakespeare play, she was 14 and considered very marriagable.
I don't think biology had much to do with it. The biology of girls has changed since then. If you look at the diaries of 17th century Puritan girls, you find that the average age of the onset of menses was around 17. Compare that to today...
The young girls getting married were mostly of among the aristocracy for whom marriage was largely a political consideration. At much of the time that 13 year old girls were commonly married, men of this class often did not marry until after age 30. Again, I doubt this was due to biology. Among the lower classes, marriage occurred quite a bit later, keeping in mind also that, given the later menses, teens could happily engage in all sorts of hanky panky without babies appearing until a bit later than they would today.
ETA: The possibility of a future death from smoking does not deter many teens (and many adults). The possibility of death from from drunk driving does not deter some of them (and many adults either). If death is not a deterrent, stretch marks and mutilated genitals surely won't be. Besides, as I said earlier, you have to really believe that sex leads to babies. Despite the fact that we've known this for quite some time, it seems to require actual personal experience to convince some people.
ETA2: It's my understanding that menses among Roman girls was more like it has been in the 20th century (though I'm very weak on classical history). Nutritional status has varied widely from one time period to another, and that no doubt has an effect. I think Roman youths may have married quite young. To me, in many ways late Roman culture seems closer to our own than the Renaissance culture of Shakespeare.
I think it's a combination of biology and society. Today teens are just little kids for the most part - not all but the majority - have little to no comprehension of responsibility or consequence, they live for the now. Centuries ago teens were much more mature, and seen as young adults. They had a lot more responsibility on them at very young ages. The further back in history you go the more young teens there were running farms and plantations/estates, or entire armies and kingdoms/empires. Think about it, Alexander the great was only in his 20s when he conquered pretty much all of the eastern world. Joan of Arc was 16 or 17 when she defeated the brits.
Plus people lived much shorter lives - the average life expectancy was late 30s to mid 40s. Today it's pushing 80. So if we're living longer, and "letting kids be kids" longer, maybe the psychological impact of that has an effect on biology. Even in the US, in the early to mid 1900s girls were getting married and having kids in their early teens and it wasn't a big deal. My great grandfather's first wife died when she was 15 from being kicked by a horse, and she was 6 months pregnant with twins.
It's only pretty recent that we, as a society, insist on treating teenagers like children for absolutely no logical reason.
~Shane
moriador posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 4:27 AM
I agree, Shane. We do infantalize our youth. What does it take to be a relatively successful self-sufficient adult these days? 20 years of education plus the time it takes to pay off student loans?
Add to that the helicopter parent (which isn't all that of a new phenomena: I remember babysitting an 8 year old who claimed that he didn't know where the glasses were in the kitchen, so he couldn't get his own drink of water, and I think he was likely telling the truth) -- it's hardly their fault. But given that many (though certainly not all) have grown up under these influences, how do you go about restoring both responsibility and empowerment? Well, may be a subject that risks becoming political.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
AmbientShade posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 4:52 AM
Quote - I agree, Shane. We do infantalize our youth. What does it take to be a relatively successful self-sufficient adult these days? 20 years of education plus the time it takes to pay off student loans?
Add to that the helicopter parent (which isn't all that of a new phenomena: I remember babysitting an 8 year old who claimed that he didn't know where the glasses were in the kitchen, so he couldn't get his own drink of water, and I think he was likely telling the truth) -- it's hardly their fault. But given that many (though certainly not all) have grown up under these influences, how do you go about restoring both responsibility and empowerment? Well, may be a subject that risks becoming political.
Exactly, it's not their fault. It is how they are raised. Children are a reflection of society. That's why there's really nothing that can be done about it. It took centuries to get to this point and it will likely take just as long to go back. Kind of like a tree, the roots can be just as deep, if not deeper, as the tree is tall. The only way it can be restored is when they're forced to deal with things most young people today have no comprehension of ever having to deal with. But yeah, it all ties back ultimately to politics.
~Shane
dphoadley posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 9:28 AM
bagoas posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 1:38 PM
Here you are:
Trouble in the Runtime. Sydney for reasons women may understand better having words with Judy. But: We all know Judy can be a bitch when the Master of the Runtime has cast her to dwarf-form.
*Judy: Sally! skin for V3; EZSkin SSS shader and Koz's short bob. Sydney with native skin, EZSkin Judy's dwarf shape from some dusty box in my Runtime. *
JohnDoe641 posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 3:12 PM
lol
Sydney looks rather angry and intense but Judy just doesn't care.
Jules53757 posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 3:17 PM
Ulli
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience!"
bagoas posted Fri, 17 August 2012 at 5:51 PM
In my copy I have moved the 'iris' polygons to the left and right respective materials in the eyes (load the .obj in poser and re-assign the polys), then save the .obj (different name), throw away the .mtl.)
Then to fix the .cr2 open it in a CR2 editor (PhilC has one) or in a text edtor, remove all material definitions and fix the reference to the new .obj. Save the .cr2 with a new name and load it in Poser. If you then load it in Poser your figure will just have (a subset of) the V3 materials.
Loading an existing V3 MAT file will let you end up with all V3's body zones (SkinLeg, SkinFeet, and so on) in your figure. There is little you can do about that. In JudyV3 these are not assigned to polygons. All 'skin' is SkinTorso, or BodySkin for the alternate hip. The Genital material is specific for JudyV3. A template is attached.
Judy always had an error in her original materials. Judy featured both a ToeNails material actually assigned to Polygons and a Toenails material, an orphan in the .cr2. Case is important, in naming, so these are 2 different materials. This doublure of course disappears if you cut the materials from the .cr2.
For an EZSkin defintion for your new figure you can of course copy the V3 definition and select a shader for the genital material. In this elect forum I need not expand on the potential the special effects (wet, soapy) of EZSkin2 provide in this respect.
dphoadley posted Tue, 21 August 2012 at 2:54 AM
I've been requested to remap MyMichelle to V4. As a prelude for this project, I'll 1st be remapping Posette to PosetteV4 as practice. Therefore, no subscriptions will be necessary for whomever wishes a V4 version of Posette.
dph
monkeycloud posted Tue, 21 August 2012 at 3:20 AM
Quote - I've been requested to remap MyMichelle to V4. As a prelude for this project, I'll 1st be remapping Posette to PosetteV4 as practice. Therefore, no subscriptions will be necessary for whomever wishes a V4 version of Posette.
dph
That's great news on both fronts
moriador posted Tue, 21 August 2012 at 3:23 AM
Wow. That would increase MyMichelle's usability dramatically. It's great news, indeed.
PoserPro 2014, PS CS5.5 Ext, Nikon D300. Win 8, i7-4770 @ 3.4 GHz, AMD Radeon 8570, 12 GB RAM.
-Timberwolf- posted Tue, 21 August 2012 at 10:09 AM
What kept me away from using Judy, was that all her expression morphs are so buttugly and her mesh issues. Actually her buttcheeks are stitched together. :-D If it just were the base shape or her joint issues, this could be fixed quite easily in PP2012.
dphoadley posted Tue, 21 August 2012 at 11:43 AM
The proper word is buttocks, and after my remap, they are no longer just stitched together! As for joint issues, I've never discovered any in all my years of using her!
bagoas posted Tue, 21 August 2012 at 12:05 PM
Quote - Actually her buttcheeks are stitched together. :-D
Where? Buttocks are welded to hip and to nothing else.
I wish you were right. It would be a breaktrough if Poser could handle body parts welded to more than one parent.
EnglishBob posted Tue, 21 August 2012 at 4:18 PM
Quote - It would be a breaktrough if Poser could handle body parts welded to more than one parent.
It can. I've had success with Bloodsong's method 2 on this page, for what it's worth. I used the technique in my ancient Della Skirt, where the hip and both thighs are welded through a CR2 hack.
-Timberwolf- posted Wed, 22 August 2012 at 8:00 AM
dphoadley posted Wed, 22 August 2012 at 9:17 AM
dphoadley posted Wed, 22 August 2012 at 9:24 AM
-Timberwolf- posted Wed, 22 August 2012 at 9:28 AM
Oh you've fixed it , great :-) . But all those prebuilt morphs that came with stock judy won't work.
dphoadley posted Wed, 22 August 2012 at 9:56 AM
Actually, they do! -or at least the ones on my FarraV3 do! The problem that you point out was probably with the uvs, and NOT with the mesh itself.
dph
-Timberwolf- posted Wed, 22 August 2012 at 10:10 AM
It is not the UVs. It is the mesh itself. If the default Judy-morphs still work, you won't have changed the verticies itself. That means that this little "meshbug" is still there in P5JudyV3.
dphoadley posted Wed, 22 August 2012 at 10:44 AM
