many of you quibbling about the price simply dont understand how things work outside of the poser community.

if you need a rigged med-poly female model for something - complete with displacement/normal/texture maps and shaders - there are three routes you can go:

• if you have in-house guys that can make it, then you pay their wages for x months while they develop it.
• you commission an individual/studio to make it for you. price for something like this would start at 5 figures.
• you go online and purchase something like this for $999. then you can either use it as is, give it to your in-house guys to tweak, or commission someone to tweak it. either way it will be a lot cheaper than developing everything from scratch.

and yeah, as Teyon said, the Poser community doesnt know how good they have it. products for $1-25, no inflation for 12+ years despite a massively devalued US dollar, about half the product dev time is spent on 'poserization'/poser-specific features and conforming, and customer support on top of everything.

as for the model itself being better than vicky - not even close. here is pretty much what i posted in the other thread:

50% of its functionality would be lost in Poser.  a lot of what you are looking at is Max rigging, meshsmooth and Mental Ray. it would look and function nothing like that in Poser.

even if you could get it to, your very first customer comment would be: 'she looks nice but i really hope you can morph away that definition'. since its a normal/disp map you cant: its baked into that exact body type you see unless you strip off the normal/disp maps - in which case its nothing special. just another vicky-esque figure with equally poor bending.

a 7500 poly model would have inferior versatility and morphing potential, and i dont really see the point when weve been happily rendering figures with 10x that vert count for a decade.

i can tell you from a morphers perspective that a simple 'quad grid' mesh like that is a real PITA to morph compared to one with topology that flows with the anatomy. not to mention noone would bother trying to morph a 7500 poly mesh: you need to sub-D it once and make it 30k polys before you tried, and youd still be hampered by the mesh topology.

ps: its somehow sickly reassuring that even a $1000 figure in a $4000 application looks like ass with its arm raised.

Blackhearted :I like your morphs ,PS, Silo, UVMapper no zBrush ?
No way would I work with a 60,000 polycount mesh in any app other then Z.

I tryed in Basic C4D 9 once ,insanity.

Yes, the upperarm-shoulder-underarm shape and bending is the acid test. That is where trouble seems most difficult to drive out, regardless of the program.

::::: Opera :::::

"50% of its functionality would be lost in Poser.  a lot of what you are looking at is Max rigging, meshsmooth and Mental Ray. it would look and function nothing like that in Poser."

Thank you for pointing this out in fact your 50% percent loss functionality estimate is probably too optimistic IMHO.

This model looks "better" than vicky4 because it is by Design leveraging the internal technology
of a Figure platform that is BETTER than Poser
$$Autodesk MAX$$ and those promo shots are rendered in a much better render engine than firefly ( mental ray)

Pull her out of that support system and you get just another
hacked out polygonal 3D mesh dumped into poser leaving most or ALL of its "special features "behind.

 We saw this clearly with the genesis "CR2 exporter"Debacle.

Poser users are better served at working on internal poser native solutions or poser specific implementations of known solutions like SubD and the new weight mapping.

Cheers

Every word that BlackHearted said !

And while I wouldn't mind having (full) SubD functionality in Poser, I really don't understand why so many people insist that it's the only way to model ?

SubD is wasteful because it indiscriminately subdivides everything, even parts of the mesh that actually need no subdivision at all.

Using a natively high res (Or "frozen" SubD) mesh also allows you to create more detailed morphs as in a subdivided mesh you can only morph the low les cage.

All the figures above use the same 3rd gen DAZ hi res mesh, and several of them were morphed in Wings and using Poser magnets.

Never had a problem with the polycount.

People seem to (or would like to ?) forget that Poser IS different from professional CGI animation.

So why do they keep on insisting that we have to do things exactly the same way the professionals do ?

BTW, the model in question has fantastic expressions but could be recreated just as easily in Poser using V3, V4 or Genesis provided one has  similar sculpting skills.

What these figures have as a "PLUS" above all current Poser figures is exellent poly distribution.

Something Poser figure makers can learn a lot from? And I hope they do.

Quote - What these figures have as a "PLUS" above all current Poser figures is exellent poly distribution.

Something Poser figure makers can learn a lot from? And I hope they do.

have you looked at the topology of this figure?

its basically a subdivided cube with arms and legs extruded out of it.

Some programs allow for partial subdivision.  Just pointing that out in response to an earlier statement.

The character seems to be modeled with animation in mind, not a plethora of body morphs/muscle morphs. So it makes sense the topology would be simpler. If we'd do that for a Poser figure - as much as I'd love it - the majority of users/content creators would not be happy campers. 

note: in case anyone wants to play around while waiting for Snarly's script....

http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/

feature laden and free.

i have perfomed both decimation and subdivision with it, and I am a rank amateur in such software.

:: og ::

"Some programs allow for partial subdivision."

I didn't know this, but so far all uses of SubD I've seen in Studio and Poser were an "All or nothing" approach.

And the problem I still see is the inability to morph the subdivided mesh, so a SubD 1 mesh will be smoother than it's cage, but can not be more detailed.

Quote - note: in case anyone wants to play around while waiting for Snarly's script....

I'm not sure what you're waiting for? I thought the version I posted in the stickied thread was what people had asked for?

Quote - > Quote - note: in case anyone wants to play around while waiting for Snarly's script....

I'm not sure what you're waiting for? I thought the version I posted in the stickied thread was what people had asked for?

psst whispers: i dont think most people really know what they're asking for, they're just following the herd. kind'a like politics. 

True SubD (control cage-style subD that is) won't give any better results than what animated joint centers and single axis scaling, combined with weight mapping, will give. Unless you're using really old figures, you don't need SubD in poser. At least I can't see any reason why it would be necessary for the vast majority of poser users. SR3 has all the equivalent features to acheive the results that subD will (theoretically) give. There just isn't a figure that takes advantage of them. Yet.

~Shane

1 You have Meshes.
2 You have Meshes that's SubD.
3 You have Meshes that's SubD with Displacement Maps.
4 You have Meshes that's SubD with Vector Displacement Maps.

The higher you go the better they look.

Topolagy can defer from 1,2,( 3 ,4 ).

sorry snarly, i am beind events. my apologies

"1 You have Meshes.
2 You have Meshes that's SubD.
3 You have Meshes that's SubD with Displacement Maps.
4 You have Meshes that's SubD with Vector Displacement Maps.

The higher you go the better they look."

Yes.

But only if you know how to create a displacement map that is good enough to compensate for the lack of mesh detail of a SubD mesh.

And so far, I perhaps have seen only two or three displacement maps being made for Poser meshes that I would call "professional quality".

If you have hobbyists morphing a single mesh over a wide range of bodytypes, "built in" mesh detail is just more practical than "painted on" detail.

The "built in" will work with every texture map, every shape and also won't interfer that much with vastly different rigs.

Again, those "Pro" meshes are one-offs and everything is tailor made for just that mesh.

A Poser mesh has to withstand a lot more "abuse" by users who not always know exactly what they are doing.

A muscularity morph can go from 0% to 100% with a simple dial spin and any problems can be easily fixed with a swipe of the morphbrush.

A professional grade displacement map needs a lot more know how to be customized.

The problem is not finding the most efficient or elegant or most "pro" way to do things, but finding the solution that delivers the most useability to the average dial spinning Poser user.

Quote - sorry snarly, i am beind events. my apologies

No worries :-)

I'm so addled these days I thought I'd forgotten something ... again!

And just so you know, it's been updated to v1.3.0 now :-D

with regard to the troublesome area on any human model in any platform, the elbowbend-upperarm-shoulder-underarm area...

http://jrdonohue.com/v4arm.mp4

... my opinion is that V4 need not apologize for a thing.

::::: Opera :::::

Never not once in 10+ years have I ever made a SubD Characters topolagy that I like.
It's a insane unsolvable puzzle to model a character 100% quads.
Your puting a Quad pig in a Tri hole ,Sure that's going to work well.
To make the rule model with only quads is the galactic joke of all times in CGI.

If you want to stay with generation 3 unimesh & bumps.
Thats kool as long as you having fun and making art ,that's what it's all about.

Don't think you can chain me down to your views.

Does Poser companys deserve the leaps and bonds award for advancements in CGI.
What orginal tools has Poser companys givin us ?
What tools have Poser companys not incorperated in to Poser ?

Who makes Poser companys or users ?

Who gave us INJ
Who gave us REM
Who gave us unimesh.
Who gave us Vicky
My bad ,My bad I forgot we are hating DAZ cause ... ah
... wait ... Frack it since when does Hate need a bloody reason.
Who gave us Morphs
Who gave us SubD
Who gave us Displacement Maps

"To make the rule model with only quads is the galactic joke of all times in CGI."

I never said otherwise ?!

On the contrary, I completely agree.

BTW, the 3rd Gen DAZ mesh does have lots of tris as it was created before all quads and SubD became the latest craze.

And it still works perfectly well in Poser.

:-)

My bad
"the rule model with only quads" is a general rule acrose all the app's Max ,Maya ,LW ,C4D ,Blender ect ect all the app's follow the quad rule cause there SubD will convert Tri's to quads.

The 3rd Gen DAZ mesh was modeled in LW.
Around LW 6,7 time ,I think.
The 3rd Gen DAZ mesh was relesead around Poser 3,4 ,I think.
It's a fine mesh made for Poser.

Around Poser 4 days Max had a plug called Charater studio.
It was Poser Charters in Charater studio.

Even back then Max had the model 100% quad rule.cause Max had SubD.

V4 was modeled in Modo.She is 100% quads.So she follows the quad rule.
V4 is a fine mesh made mostly for Poser and also kinda for the poser pro app's.
except her polycount was high.

V5 was modeled in Modo initially for all the app's.

oh forgot to say in the Poser 4 days don't remember turbo being around.

there was another well known site ,don't remember the sites name ,it had a black background.

Anyways there where few characters on the site none any where close as good as Vicky or even Possetta.

Since then we have developed a topolagy flow for humans.

Lol, you just called Posette "Possetta", that's spanish for flush toilet... hahaha

It's a insane unsolvable puzzle to model a character 100% quads.

For V4, they could have created the SudD base in Modo using nGons and tris if they wanted. When you freeze the SubD it automatically becomes quads.

Quote - It's a insane unsolvable puzzle to model a character 100% quads.

For V4, they could have created the SudD base in Modo using nGons and tris if they wanted. When you freeze the SubD it automatically becomes quads.

Yes that's how we model it's the only way I know to get a 100% quad human.
But your still puting a quad pig in a tri hole.
when you see a vertice with only 3 lines to it.it's a quad tri.
when you see a vertice with 5 lines to it.it's a quad ngone.

Yes that's how we model it's the only way I know to get a 100% quad human.

*You might explore the retopology options as well.

I do not use NGons and avoid tris polys 98% of the time. I don't know how other people model but I seem to model differently.

I never use Ngons and avoid tris as well. This  is standard workflow.

Poser4 Lo Res figures using Snarly's script at 1X.
Same object files, just different textures.

Click to enlarge

I try to model 100% quads
Poly count 3964 , 218 nGones n Tri's
18 % nGones n Tri's.
I'm not very good at it.

Quote - I try to model 100% quads
Poly count 3964 , 218 nGones n Tri's
18 % nGones n Tri's.
I'm not very good at it.

You'll get better if you keep at it, like anything else. 

All quads is always possible, it just takes planning. If you're block modeling the traditional way, just stick to very basic forms and only add edge loops when you absolutely need them. Use diamonds and 5-point stars to redirect edgeflow. 

At very low res - say, under 2K - you can "cheat" in some areas by using  tris, as they will become quads when subdivided. 

The model I've been working on is 33,890K right now, 100% quads. It is possible.

If you want to create a new thread and post screen shots of your model, I'll look at your topology and might be able to show you where you can make changes to reduce the ngons and tris.

~Shane

Quote - > Quote - I try to model 100% quads

Poly count 3964 , 218 nGones n Tri's
18 % nGones n Tri's.
I'm not very good at it.

 

You'll get better if you keep at it, like anything else. 

All quads is always possible, it just takes planning. If you're block modeling the traditional way, just stick to very basic forms and only add edge loops when you absolutely need them. Use diamonds and 5-point stars to redirect edgeflow. 

At very low res - say, under 2K - you can "cheat" in some areas by using  tris, as they will become quads when subdivided. 

The model I've been working on is 33,890K right now, 100% quads. It is possible.

If you want to create a new thread and post screen shots of your model, I'll look at your topology and might be able to show you where you can make changes to reduce the ngons and tris.

 

~Shane

Thanks for the offer ,most kind.
I know your school only accepts 99.99% perfection.
If I get 70% I'm good, if I get 80% I'm ecstatic.

Can you imagin rigging these characters

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?170535-The-Character-Art-of-Darksiders-II-%28new-images-pg-5-6-7%29

Or Mapping these

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?170332-Meats-Meier-Sketchbook

I've been out of school for a while now.

And they weren't that bad. They graded on a 96% A-curve. 

The first thread you linked are game characters. They're low poly tri meshes. Most of what you're seeing is converted to displacement. If you worked in a game studio you'd be rigging things like that on a regular basis. Well, if you're a rigger that is.

Meats Meier is an amazing artist, and very respected in the pro world. He's worked on  films in the past, but I think he mostly does sculpture. 

~Shane

Quote - I've been out of school for a while now.

And they weren't that bad. They graded on a 96% A-curve. 

The first thread you linked are game characters. They're low poly tri meshes. Most of what you're seeing is converted to displacement. If you worked in a game studio you'd be rigging things like that on a regular basis. Well, if you're a rigger that is.

Meats Meier is an amazing artist, and very respected in the pro world. He's worked on  films in the past, but I think he mostly does sculpture. 

 

~Shane

No doubt there killer Artist.

If we could get that in Poser ,D/S .It be wicked kool.