Look out, Honey, 'cause I'm using TECH-NO-LO-GY....

:-P

One of my major gripes about Genesis always was it's low resolution mesh.

Low resolution mesh = no detail, unless you use displacement maps.

Which create all sorts of problems if you use them for more than subtle detail.

Not to mention that they don't show up in the OpenGL preview.

Well, just when you thought Poser caught up a bit in the technology race with it's own SubD algorithm, Studio again leaves us poor Poser users in the dust.

At least, this time we can play, too.

The picture shows OpenGL screenshots, NOT RENDERS, of Genesis II with the new High Resolution "HD" creature creation morphs applied.

The DSON SubD level was cranked up to "3" except for the last pic, where I used Poser's native SubD set also to "3", instead.

OpenGL turned to be a bit sluggish with DSON SubD set to 3 on my 4GB i5 laptop, but still worked.

The HD morphs still worked pretty well at SubD "1", where Genesis II has about the same resolution as regular V4 or M4. (And OpenGL runs a lot faster)

So, if you don't need super-duper ultra fine details, Genesis II can now deliver the exact same mesh detail without displacement maps as only higher res meshes like V3 or V4 could deliver.

BTW, the last pic proves that, in theory, this new HD technology is compatible with Poser's native SubD, too.

Yes, the results are very different, but the morphs still manage to alter the subdivided mesh in the OpenGL preview !

If I could pick one feature for the next Poser, this would be it : Set the SubD level and then simply create your own high res morphs directly in Poser.

Good riddance displacement maps, good riddance ZBrush !

As for DAZ, currently there is no publicly available HD-sculpting software.

Hope they do not make the same mistake as they did with their dynamic cloth plugin as of course without the ability to create my own sculpts this technology will be completely useless to me !

Still, an amazing step forward towards more realism.

Isn't technology wonderful ? Gee, what will they think of next ?

:-)

RENDER of Genesis II set at SubD "1".

At SubD "1", Genesis II has 83.358 polygons, a little over V4.

No performance reduction in OpenGL or during render compared to V4.

The HD-morph was set to "2" to compensate for the lower resolution.

Not as detailed as the SubD "3" morphs, but still lots of detail.

These are all Dawn btw.

This is something I’m also very interested in - in my experience (I use Zbrush and Poser), mesh detail beats map detail. I think I’m right in saying that as of SR2.2 it’s possible to export a subD mesh from Poser as this was exposed in Python. What is not currently possible is the ability to either use the morph tool on a subD mesh directly in Poser, or to import a subD mesh as a morph target. I intend to raise a question about this with the devs as this would be an absolutely killer feature.

I would speculate that that could be what HD is - an exported and sculpted subD mesh imported as a morph target.

AFAIK, both Poser and DS use Pixar’s OpenSubDiv too (see http://graphics.pixar.com/opensubdiv/overview.html), so morphs created on a subD mesh should - at least in theory - work in both as the mesh generated by applying OSD levels would be identical.

Sometimes I love technology ;)

Interesting! BTW: Caisson is my Guru for all things Displacement Map. In my less able hands- dmaps are good for fine detail-but have limits with the V4/M4 mapping-if pushed there tend to be discontinuities at the texture map borders-makes the figure look like it is breaking at the seams. For whatever reason-this effect is less apparent with the Dawn figure.

Quote - This is something I’m also very interested in - in my experience (I use Zbrush and Poser), mesh detail beats map detail. I think I’m right in saying that as of SR2.2 it’s possible to export a subD mesh from Poser as this was exposed in Python. What is not currently possible is the ability to either use the morph tool on a subD mesh directly in Poser, or to import a subD mesh as a morph target. I intend to raise a question about this with the devs as this would be an absolutely killer feature.

I would speculate that that could be what HD is - an exported and sculpted subD mesh imported as a morph target.

AFAIK, both Poser and DS use Pixar’s OpenSubDiv too (see http://graphics.pixar.com/opensubdiv/overview.html), so morphs created on a subD mesh should - at least in theory - work in both as the mesh generated by applying OSD levels would be identical.

 

Sometimes I love technology ;)

I'm attempting to learn how to make DAZ n Poser meshes.

I get Poser don't like displacment maps.

Why don't Poser meshes use normal maps ?

Quote - I'm attempting to learn how to make DAZ n Poser meshes.

I get Poser don't like displacment maps.

Why don't Poser meshes use normal maps ?

Huh?  Poser does displacement faster than most other software, so why bother with normal maps when you have a software that can do displacement so well?  Normal maps aren't as good as displacement visually, and they're a pain to deal with.

No matter what it is, displacement maps, normal maps, or whatever... they always lose detail of the original geometry to some degree.  The ability to use high definition geometry is a much better solution.

Quote - Why don't Poser meshes use normal maps ?

Poser and Normal maps get along quite nicely, I use them in my products all the time, mostly for clothes wrinkles and such...they work great. Zbrush and Normal maps are the bomb.

The one drawback is it's there all the time, regardless if the figure needs/wants it. For instance one of my ideas that the dev team has never taken hold of is to have different normal maps that are driven by body part rotations...much like morphs are. But normal maps can resemble much greater deatil than morphs, though they don't actually displace the mesh...they just trick the eye. So when the pant leg is straight no wrinkles behind the knee, when the shin rotates along x axis a normal map is inserted onto the shin map node. A rough example of my rough idea.

Quote -  

Look out, Honey, 'cause I'm using TECH-NO-LO-GY....

:-P

 

One of my major gripes about Genesis always was it's low resolution mesh.

Low resolution mesh = no detail, unless you use displacement maps.

Which create all sorts of problems if you use them for more than subtle detail.

Not to mention that they don't show up in the OpenGL preview.

 

Well, just when you thought Poser caught up a bit in the technology race with it's own SubD algorithm, Studio again leaves us poor Poser users in the dust.

At least, this time we can play, too.

 

The picture shows OpenGL screenshots, NOT RENDERS, of Genesis II with the new High Resolution "HD" creature creation morphs applied.

The DSON SubD level was cranked up to "3" except for the last pic, where I used Poser's native SubD set also to "3", instead.

OpenGL turned to be a bit sluggish with DSON SubD set to 3 on my 4GB i5 laptop, but still worked.

The HD morphs still worked pretty well at SubD "1", where Genesis II has about the same resolution as regular V4 or M4. (And OpenGL runs a lot faster)

So, if you don't need super-duper ultra fine details, Genesis II can now deliver the exact same mesh detail without displacement maps as only higher res meshes like V3 or V4 could deliver.

 

 

BTW, the last pic proves that, in theory, this new HD technology is compatible with Poser's native SubD, too.

Yes, the results are very different, but the morphs still manage to alter the subdivided mesh in the OpenGL preview !

If I could pick one feature for the next Poser, this would be it : Set the SubD level and then simply create your own high res morphs directly in Poser.

Good riddance displacement maps, good riddance ZBrush !

 

As for DAZ, currently there is no publicly available HD-sculpting software.

Hope they do not make the same mistake as they did with their dynamic cloth plugin as of course without the ability to create my own sculpts this technology will be completely useless to me !

Still, an amazing step forward towards more realism.

 

Isn't technology wonderful ? Gee, what will they think of next ?

:-)

Yes the HD tech is pretty damn amazing. With the HD tech you can sub-D up to level9, though most rigs can't even handle that level of detail now. So Kudos to them, they have really thought this out. I have no idea what Poser is going to bring to the table to counter this feature, but HD is the future, that is a certainty. Combine that with the Genesis figures and you have the foundations for a long and profitable business. Finally you can sculpt all those details you never could before:) or even add fine details via JCM's. Endless possibilities....Also I am pretty sure it will works on all Triax models (clothing, props), So exciting times if you are a Daz user, or Poser user Via Dson.

Quote - > Quote - Why don't Poser meshes use normal maps ?

Poser and Normal maps get along quite nicely, I use them in my products all the time, mostly for clothes wrinkles and such...they work great. Zbrush and Normal maps are the bomb.

The one drawback is it's there all the time, regardless if the figure needs/wants it. For instance one of my ideas that the dev team has never taken hold of is to have different normal maps that are driven by body part rotations...much like morphs are. But normal maps can resemble much greater deatil than morphs, though they don't actually displace the mesh...they just trick the eye. So when the pant leg is straight no wrinkles behind the knee, when the shin rotates along x axis a normal map is inserted onto the shin map node. A rough example of my rough idea.

pretty sure you can do this already,since textures can be animated you just need to do the proper linking,it's similar to a JCM,but instead its a joint controlled texture so you can bend an arm and have the veins or muscles from a displacement(or normal) map increase/decrease in strength etc

any good links to DAZ HD ? whats H.D. stand for ?

SubD a mesh 9 times ? I can't SubD V5 9 times in zBrush.
I have a quad processors PC .8 GB RAM .it's not a peace of trash PC.

HD sounds just like a displacment or vector map.

is HD as good as a vector map ?

if Displacment maps don't do well with rigs .why does HD ?

Quote - > Quote - I'm attempting to learn how to make DAZ n Poser meshes.

I get Poser don't like displacment maps.

Why don't Poser meshes use normal maps ?

Huh?  Poser does displacement faster than most other software, so why bother with normal maps when you have a software that can do displacement so well?  Normal maps aren't as good as displacement visually, and they're a pain to deal with.

No matter what it is, displacement maps, normal maps, or whatever... they always lose detail of the original geometry to some degree.  The ability to use high definition geometry is a much better solution.

say ya take a regular dude and make him look like Conan.
I hear that Displacement map get distorted with rigs ?

Quote - pretty sure you can do this already,since textures can be animated you just need to do the proper linking,it's similar to a JCM,but instead its a joint controlled texture so you can bend an arm and have the veins or muscles from a displacement(or normal) map increase/decrease in strength etc

hmmmm, I'll have to check that out stoney...it sure seems like it would be a cool deal.

Isn't this a Render Order problem?

You need the control cage subdivided to generate a mesh before any morphs or maps can be applied to that generated mesh. (Like the way Genesis loads as an already subdivided figure in DS or the minor miracle that DSON is having to perform)

Its still early days for subD in Poser but while you wait for Poser's own DS3 to DS4 moment (the full integration of subD into the program) is there a way to access Poser's Render Order?

Max and Maya obviously have more direct access to the Render Tree but I like Cinema's cheap and cheerful method of gouping things in nulls and nesting nulls in the order you need.

HD wont get rid of displacment maps......we just wont be restricted to making things look HD by using displacment maps.

Now displacment maps can be used more properly to how they were designed. To add extra displaced detail to textures.

With HD morphs we no longer need to use displacment to do gross shaping to the mesh, We dont need it to add muscle detail, to soften mesh into a more organic look, to bump out areas for growths like horns. We can do all that with morphs now, like things should be done.

But we can still use displacment to augment texture details that are not so morph specific. So that adds a new level of versitility to both content creators and content shoppers alike.

It is all very cool!

Two quick points.

Displacement maps displace along the normals, Morphs are not limited to that.

Displacement maps and normal maps are dependent on the UV set used, and with Tri-Ax Figures you are not limited to one UV set per geometry. 

The HD morphs do look interesting.

But as far as them replacing displacement maps, that isn't going to happen any time soon.

There are render engines that can use displacement on rigging without issues. Just not in the Poser or Daz world.

With all the advancements in GPU's, many render engines are going to be obsolete soon.

Ironically the one that will probably come out on top comes with Windows.

DirectX11 on a decent CUDA or STREAM card can tesellate, texture, displace the mesh, render it in real time (biased engine), at higher frame rates than any of us can see.

Contrary to popular belief DirectX is the most used render engine in the world, but at the same time is the least used in 3D applications like Poser, Studio, etc.

No idea why either, it is faster than any cpu render engine out there with even moderate hardware.

Kind of off topic, but relates to my last post.

To see how fast your system is rendering Directx11 in real time, download this and try it.

http://www.rigidgems.sakura.ne.jp/files/RigidGems2_0.zip

This has raytracing, caustics, physics, etc.

Obviously, your system will need Directx11 and a video card that supports it.

Run the program, then right click anywhare on it to get it into manual mode.

@shvrdavid:

The DirectX rendering technology you speak of has been in use now for about 4 years in 3dsmax, as a real time viewport rendering system, called Nitrous viewport rendering.  It ships standard with 3dsmax, and can produce incredibly good results in real time, yes.  However, it requires it's own shader language, and it's shaders and lighting capabilities have their limits when compared to a full blown engine like Vray, or Octane, but it's very good for instant results.  Some effects, like HDRI, looks a little artificial still though, compared to rendering with a full blown engine, like Octane or Vray, probably becuase of the shader limitations, I don't know.

Yes your right, it does require its own language, and it does seem to have some limitations.

That we can agree on. But it also has the potential to replace a lot of what we use now as well. There are major changes in what Direct Compute 5 can do. I would imagine the 3dsmax is wrttien on version 4 due to the length of time it has been out, and things that are not in it.

I have been playing around with some of the code in version 5 and there are differences that make it possible to do far more calculations and get the same frame rates as version 4.

This page lists the major differences between version 4 and 5. And there are some major differences in may things. One of them is a huge difference, and that is the threading dimensions. It doesn't do much good if you have thousands of pipelines and most of them are idle. Directx11 allows for better GPU core saturation than 10 ever dreamed of.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ff476331%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

The biggest downfall to Directx11 on present GPU's, is the GPU itself. Microsoft can't fix that. It doesn't matter how many cores your GPU has if all of final information has to be pushed thru a single thread at the end.

AMD and Nvida are fixing it, both companies are working GPU designs that don't have the limitations that current chips have. And you can bet if they are removing the present limitations, they are going to be far faster than what is out now. GPU's design does not always follow Moores Law...

Quote - The HD morphs do look interesting.

But as far as them replacing displacement maps, that isn't going to happen any time soon.

There are render engines that can use displacement on rigging without issues. Just not in the Poser or Daz world.

With all the advancements in GPU's, many render engines are going to be obsolete soon.

Yet, Displacement maps are part of the shader, which is render engine specific. Morphs are not. Further Maps take up significantly more Graphics card memory than morphs, which when dealing with real time rendering or GPU rendering, like Octane or DirectX, very quickly becomes a limiting factor.

Quote - ...Displacement maps are part of the shader, which is render engine specific. Morphs are not. Further Maps take up significantly more Graphics card memory than morphs, which when dealing with real time rendering or GPU rendering, like Octane or DirectX, very quickly becomes a limiting factor.

DirectX11.2 is not limited by Video Card memory, it can use tiled resources which will allow your main system RAM to be used without the massive slowdown seen in older versions. Tiled resources are a hardware requirement.

The code to check if your video card supports it is in the programming guide.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/bg182880.aspx  <<< DX11.2 Guide

AMD/ATI 7000 up cards support it with a bios update. None of my Nvidia cards support it yet, (Some Nvidia ones do right out of the box) but I am sure that they will at some point. (Jury still out if older ones by a bios update or new card)

DirectX versions usually don't get a lot of use for the first couple of years because of the hardware requirements. IE: You need a new card.....

People say that DirectX will never get much use every time a new version is released. Then support appears on every brand of GPU.......

This time AMD/ATI cards have the ability to support it without replacing the hardware. Hopefully current Nvidia hardware will as well.

Quote - > Quote - ...Displacement maps are part of the shader, which is render engine specific. Morphs are not. Further Maps take up significantly more Graphics card memory than morphs, which when dealing with real time rendering or GPU rendering, like Octane or DirectX, very quickly becomes a limiting factor.

DirectX11.2 is not limited by Video Card memory, it can use tiled resources which will allow your main system RAM to be used without the massive slowdown seen in older versions. Tiled resources are a hardware requirement.

The code to check if your video card supports it is in the programming guide.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/bg182880.aspx  <<< DX11.2 Guide

AMD/ATI 7000 up cards support it with a bios update. None of my Nvidia cards support it yet, (Some Nvidia ones do right out of the box) but I am sure that they will at some point. (Jury still out if older ones by a bios update or new card)

DirectX versions usually don't get a lot of use for the first couple of years because of the hardware requirements. IE: You need a new card.....

People say that DirectX will never get much use every time a new version is released. Then support appears on every brand of GPU.......

This time AMD/ATI cards have the ability to support it without replacing the hardware. Hopefully current Nvidia hardware will as well.

Still leaves Maps taking up significant Graphics card memory, or slowing you down for Texture spooling, and losing the "real time rendering" advantage.  There is a reason games, and things that rely on real time rendering, use as few maps as possible, and this is precisely that reason. 

You are not going to be using 11 maps at, effectively, 4096x4096, and 4 maps at 2048x2048 and get what you are looking for. Note that is the V4 High Res set, no clothes, no hair and presumes the render engine loads each texture map only once. 

Considering that newer texture sets, or newer characters use significantly more maps, to include Displacement, Normal, SSS and Transluency maps.

Morphs are significantly better at this.

The entire Poser paradigm will have to be changed to properly support Real Time Rendering. 

Im glad you think so...

There is a version of Halo with 6 gigabytes of texture info in memory that gets better frame rates than most games out now. (in real time)

No Poser character ever made, has 6 gigabytes of anything.

Quote - Im glad you think so...

There is a version of Halo with 6 gigabytes of texture info in memory that gets better frame rates than most games out now. (in real time)

No Poser character ever made, has 6 gigabytes of anything.

V4 High Res has 11gb of texture surface all by herself.

Quote -  

Good riddance displacement maps, good riddance ZBrush !

Whats your problem with ZB? 

~Shane

"Whats your problem with ZB? "

Well....

...I'm still using ZB-3 because I hate the newer interface and that version has a big problem importing objects from Poser. After a few sessions import rounding errors noticeably have shifted bodyparts around randomly and your mesh is hopelessly asymetric.

But that's my personal problem.

But I also have to admit that after a few years I've grown tired seeing all those fantasy creatures and warlords and orks with über-busy sculpting everybody and his brother puts into their portfolios.

It's like the person who can put the most detail into a square-inch of skin automatically gets the job. Lol.

The SF-designers have the same obsession with greebles. Lol.

So, yeah, ZBrush is a great tool, but it also has promoted a certain style that has led to a certain sameness in CGI.

And thirdly, ZBrush is expensive, so I'm rather glad the MorphBrush was fixed and enhanced to a point there it made zBrush completely obsolete for Poser mesh morphing.

(Or at least once/if we get fully functional HD technology in Poser).

Subdivide Genesis once or twice (Or any other mesh with comparable topology), and you can sculpt it into anything you want right inside Poser. No need for actually owning ZBrush anymore.

Of course ZBrush will still be needed for professional work that has to be done from scratch, but now even the poor hobbyist will be able to create quality morphs right inside Poser. It's only the lack of talent holding him back, not a lackof funds to buy the necessary tools.

So, I'm not against ZBrush, but I always saw it as some necessary evil I had to use because Poser tech wasn't simply good enough.

And finally, I got a bit tired of everybody arguing with me that those newfangled low res meshes (Genesis + Roxy) could easily be as detailed as the good ol' high res meshes with just a quick displacement map made in ZBrush.

It's nice to see that I was again right and that there's only one thing better than a high resolution mesh:

An even higher resolution mesh.

:-P

Ah, I get you.

Well, hyper realism is that style you're referring to, and is what studios want because it's what sells games and movies today. As an artist trying to get into the industry, if you don't have z-brush or mudbox, and know how to use one or the other fluidly and can demonstrate it in your portfolio, you aren't getting a job, 9 times out of 10 anyway. Pretty much as simple as that. Traditional poly modeling is a thing of the past. Its okay for architecture still, up to a certain point, tho zb's hard surface modeling techniques are making that obsolete too. And you're still expected to create your high-res details in a real sculpting package, and blender doesn't cut it for most studios. You're likely to just get laughed at there, though probably not to your face, least not directly.   

Personally I hate Poser's morph brush. It's still extremely clunky, even with a pen tablet, and never does what I want it to do, pen or mouse, so I use it for minimal touch-ups for poke-thru when I absolutely HAVE to. I can't imagine having to actually sculpt morphs with it. That would make me want to eat my own face off. Or throw the PC out the window. I don't see how it can possibly be very friendly to new users. 

If you're still using a version of ZB that's, what, 5 years out-dated now? I can understand your frustrations with it then. You should give 4r6 another chance tho. The interface is completely customizable. If you're using a mouse then I can see where it could get frustrating, but zb isn't meant to be used with a mouse, it's designed for pens and thats what most people use with it. 

I'm left-handed, and use a right-handed mouse. So in ZB I'm ambidextrous pretty much. I have the mouse in my right hand and the pen in my left and can fly through a model just like working with real clay most times. 

I don't see where it's any more expensive than Poser. For long-term Poser users perhaps, but if you can't upgrade, Poser will run you $400+ and another $200+ with every upgrade. ZB is only $700 and all its upgrades are always free, always have been. I paid less for ZB than I did for PP2014 alone, and that was an upgrade from PP2012, another $250, which was an upgrade from P7. I think I paid $150 or so for that. Been too long tho, cant remember. (At the time I bought ZB, it was around $200). Even mudbox doesn't do that. It's nearly $800 and they want to charge you for every patch and bug fix, just like adobe, which is why I don't use mudbox. I'm loyal to pixo cause they treat their customers good without trying to gouge them for every penny every chance they get. Their only downside IMO is their crappy user manuals. They cover the basics, but if you want to actually learn the software you have to experiment or go hunting for 3rd party tutorials with varying results. Or buy a book on it. Even their online videos don't really tell you a whole lot. I've been using it for a good 8 years now and even still I find stuff that makes me think 'wow, i never knew I could do that".

But if the poser morph brush works for you then that's cool too. Whatever works best for the individual.

~Shane