I've seen several posts recently that ask about various weight-mapped figures for Poser.

For those interested, the following are posted in my Dropbox. All of these have been released into the public domain by their creators. NONE of them require any conversion of clothing to match the figures, so there are no hoops to jump through.

David 3 - Created by Joe Public - Requires RTE Decoder

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0lw025s6iaopbrb/DAVIDWEIGHTMAPPED.zip?dl=0

Victoria 3 - Created by Joe Public - Requires RTE Decoder

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wx3fsbs6qyp0gnd/VICTORIA-3WEIGHTMAPPED.zip?dl=0

Victoria 4 - Created by Alfaseed (This DOES NOT require that clothing be converted to use with the weight-mapped figure)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/69wc3wjfnsltgoh/v4wmas2%20%28The%20one%20that%20works%29.zip?dl=0

RTE Decoder can be found here: http://www.rtencoder.com/downloads/

While we are on the subject of weight-mapping...

I personally tend to use the WM versions only for nude renders. I don't see the advantage with clothed ones. Am I alone in this opinion? 

Once I've converted a figure to weight-mapping, I tend to use that figure all the time. However, I only have two of my V4 characters converted, and of course, none of the M4s that I use. Does it really make that much of a difference? The weight-mapped versions certainly bend more realistically, but the overall proportions of V4 are so "off" anyway, there's not that much of an advantage in most of my renders.

Thanks for the links Doug.

(I'm still working on that project too btw. Haven't forgotten or put it off, just been insanely busy. Hopefully will be finished this weekend).

The thing about weightmapping is that, if used correctly, it can replace most JCMs, magnets, etc. Or can be used in conjunction with JCMs for some great results. 

It can also be used to create realistic muscle flexing and distortions, in ways that even the V4WM doesn't have (I don't think). 

And bulbous shoulders can be eliminated on both genders. Pecks can move and function the way real pecks move and function, along with all the other muscle groups in the body. Just depends on how detailed the figure's creator wants to get with it. How the topology is designed does have an affect on it if you want to get very involved.

For the most part, a lot of it won't be very noticeable beneath clothing, unless you're using dynamics, or tight-fitted clothes, or things like shorts, sleeveless shirts, etc. Weightmaps can also be transferred to clothing, or the clothing can have their own weightmaps that accent the figure's maps. 

Lots can be done with it. There just aren't very many (if any) real examples out there that demonstrate its potential, cause most haven't bothered with it outside of their own personal work. 

I converted my main V4 characters to the weight mapped version when it became available and have modified them since.  I always use the weight mapped version although I do accept there is little benefit if the figure is clothed unless the clothing is particularly tight.  In over ten years of Poser I must average one nude render per year and with one notable exception none were pin up types.  My nude V4WM renders tend to have the character in a sick bay or some similar environment, in other words the nude in in keeping with the story / illustration rather than nude for nude sake.

Thanks for the links, its been awhile since I've seen RTEncoder, so that was nice. Now to do the wm thing...

I wish it were not the norm that the majority of Poser's features get ignored or undervalued; we have so many more tools, the P4 era should be long gone.....

 Here the back.

 And here the front.

 General view.

The advantages of Weightmap painting can best be demonstrated using a very old Poser2 figure.

See that the coller bend has been painted to correct this old figure.

Best regards, Tony

While all of this is interesting, it begs my actual question: The effectiveness of WMing in clothed vs nude renders.

As I stated above, I love weight mapped characters for nude renders. Takes away a lot of the post work and/or morph brush work.

I find weight mapping of no use whatsoever in clothed renders. This is why I like the weight mapping scheme used in the posted files as opposed to the scheme in the original V4 weight map over at RDNA. The clothes conversion that the original implementation required so totally not worth the trouble for me. These posted versions give me what I want... a WMed nude that can wear conventional clothes.

OK the conversion for V4WM using the outfitter script is an extra step but the effort is minimal.  I convert each piece of clothing as I purchase it and it takes 3 - 4 minutes, if that.  I then never use the default purchased clothing only the WM version.  As my scenes are intended as story illustrations I often use a scene setup more than once and often with different clothes.  Some of the Sci-Fi clothes are skin tight so I does not make sense, for me at least, to use a version of a figure that is non weight mapped only to decide in another scene I would need to delete the figure and load a WM version.  .

Someone starting today has the option to use what they think suits them the best from the selections offered.  I am in the position that I am so far down a road it is not worth turning back in that I have been using V4WM since it was available so when the other versions appeared these was little to gain by using them.  Any time gained in not having to convert clothing would have been lost in changing my characters to the new rigging

Maybe some examples of a clothed V4WM wearing some WM'd clothing might help.

(If I had some I'd post them, lol. I haven't bothered using V4WM so far tho, but I don't do much rendering). 

Well, I have to disagree with the argument about weight mapped clothing.

Now, granted there really hasn't been much clothing truly weight mapped properly put out there, but many of the differences I see in weight mapped clothing have to do with fit and movement.

For example, a properly weight mapped dress will "fold" when the body folds, so things like the waist bending means the clothing reacts like YOUR human clothing would.  It folds and streches like your TShirt does when you wear it.

Another example is a sit pose.  Weight mapped clothing will follow the figure even in a sit pose in a skirt.  So, all those painful twist, bend, side-side dial twists you had to do are eliminated.  I do still create sit morphs when weight mapping clothing, but only because customers expect to see it.  They really aren't necessary in a properly rigged weight mapped short dress (long dresses are another story entirely).

But, clothing like shirts and pants, there's a huge difference with weight mapped figures wearing properly weight mapped clothing.  Thunder thighs?  Gone.  Knee bubbles?  Gone.

There IS a huge difference in properly weight mapped clothing - in fit, in movement and in use by the customer.

If I hadn't recently lost my hard drive, I would post some examples, but all my renders are lost on the drive.  When I finish this render I'm doing now, I'll come back and post some weight mapped poses so you can understand a bit better what the differences really are.

In all the images below, the dress follows the posed figure.  There is no additional posing required.

V4~WM with Goth Outfit from Runtime. The weight maps on this version of V4~WM are different than the ones from the version available at Runtime but it is a helper bone setup.

Belt is now a hybrid for better draping, Skirt has more bones added to it to do the things that Glitter mentioned. I did a lot of map editing on the clothes after converting them.

I would much rather have joints that work all the time than have to brush things if the clothes don't cover problem areas. And Standard V4 has more than a few issues....

She gets upset if you suggest loading the standard version.... Which ironically doesn't get loaded much....

I wanted to expound a little bit on my comments above, by giving you an example.

I have here, Roxie and V4 in similar shaped dresses.  The Roxie dress is mine, and I have done nothing more than import it into Poser, run it through the base rigging and made no adjustments to weight maps or anything.  The dress has no handles and moves with the pose.

The dress on V4 is a standard rigged dress, no morphs and V4 has no morphs loaded other than those that come with the base figure (JCMs and such).

Both figures were literally, load, pose, render.

I will let the render speak for itself.

I don't really understand the relevance of the poser2 figures in regard to the OPs original question (I personally tend to use the WM versions only for nude renders. I don't see the advantage with clothed ones. Am I alone in this opinion? ) For merchants, the benefits are enormous, in terms of time, a few hours, versus a few days. For the end user, the benefit can be seen, in terms of ease of use, time to set up a render, and for the people learning to rig, much easier to develop clothing.

the question as with all questions is a matter of perspective.

Glit...

How did you get the weight maps into the clothing? I have no clue as to how to do it from scratch.

<quote?Glit...

How did you get the weight maps into the clothing? I have no clue as to how to do it from scratch.

Actually, it's very easy.

I happen to use the Fitting Room to do my rigging, but the exact same thing can be done in the Setup Room, and depends only on your preference.  Here are my steps:

1. Create your object normally in your modeler

2. Group the clothing object, as usual, for a dress, don't go past the hip. (A note here, I still find the Poser grouping function to be less than ideal, but it does work fairly well on skirts.  Shirts, not so much.  I use Auto Group Editor to do my grouping.)

3. Load your figure

4. Import your object normally (everything on the import screen UNCHECKED)

5. Go into the fitting/setup room and create a new figure

6. When presented with the body parts, choose the thighs as well as the hip.  In this part we WANT the thighs in the clothing.

7. Go back to the pose room and delete the imported object

8. Select your new clothing figure from the dropdown menu (skirt>Body) and conform it to your figure

9. Save your newly rigged clothing item to the library.

Now, will the weight maps you just transferred have to be refined and cleaned up?  Yes, they aren't perfect.  The biggest thing you're going to have to do is go into the thigh weight maps and remove the left weight map from the right side, and the right weight map from the left side.  But, with the weight map brush, this is fairly easy and fast.

As an example, that Roxie dress above was 10 minutes of rigging to get what you see in that render.  I just spent 4 days fighting with a V4 rig with a pair of shorts and a jacket.  The amount of time rigging for weight mapped figures is reduced extensively.

The most basic way is via the Figure menu. With the clothing selected, got to Figure > "Copy Joint Zones From..." > and select the figure. 

Or simply "Merge all zones to weightmaps"

But depending on how the clothing is rigged, you may need to do some additional weight painting. Some clothing is rigged differently than the figure's rig, depending on they type of clothing it is and what control or adjustment features it has built in. But for most tight fitting clothes, and even not-so-tight, this should work. 

x-post w/ glitter

There's one more way, easier than all so far.  However, please remember that if you plan to distribute your clothing, this would be a copyright violation.  But, for personal use, this method is perfect.

Assuming you have a properly rigged piece of weight map clothing, load both items - your clothing and that pre-rigged item.

Select your clothing item from the dropdown and Figure>Copy Joints From, choosing the previously rigged item from the list.

Delete the other clothing item and re-save your clothing to the library.

The key to success with this method is that your item and the pre-rigged items must contain the same groups and have already been saved to the library.

 The relevance of the Poser 2 figure?
If you want to demonstrate something, you take the worst possible figure out there and show what can be done by Weight-Mapping to improve that terrible rigging.

Secondly ; It is best to ONLY Weightmap the joints that need it. Mosty that will be the collars-arms and thights and shins.
The rest of the figure is not so critical and can be left on traditional rigging.

Thirdly : Do NOT use the autogroup function unless you know its limitation, and how to correct its errors, or you will get weld cracks. Examples :

rCollar and lCollar can never touch. You need a chest or neck group between them => The autogroup function does not know that.

rThigh and lThigh can never touch either.  You need a hip group between them => The autogroup function does not know that either.

So, whenever you use the autogroup function, you have to check those area's for weld cracks and correct them with internally with the group editor or externally with you mesh editor, regroup and reweld..

Weight-Mapping is an art.

For every direction, Bend, Twist, and Side-Side, you have to paint the Weightmap.
And in some area's (depending on the clothing), you also have to paint the Bulge maps for each; Bend Twist and Side-Side..

Painitng the maps is easy with the tools provided. Just go slowly, take it step by step, use large brushes initially, with low values and progress towards your end result.

Completely agree with Glitterati3D that Weight-Mapped clothing is far superior to traditionally rigged clothing and fits a LOT better if properly painted.

The most basic way is via the Figure menu. With the clothing selected, got to Figure > "Copy Joint Zones From..." > and select the figure. 

Or simply "Merge all zones to weightmaps"

But depending on how the clothing is rigged, you may need to do some additional weight painting. Some clothing is rigged differently than the figure's rig, depending on they type of clothing it is and what control or adjustment features it has built in. But for most tight fitting clothes, and even not-so-tight, this should work. 

This is how I have been doing it, and I frankly don't see much difference at pose time. I certainly am not getting the beautiful results that Glitter is getting on the renders she posted. 

For me, the morph brush is a much easier solution.

Completely agree with Glitterati3D that Weight-Mapped clothing is far superior to traditionally rigged clothing and fits a LOT better if properly painted.

...which most of us don't have the first clue as to how to do.

I don't know how to model, so if the process cannot be applied to content that I have purchased, I'm dead in the water.

The most basic way is via the Figure menu. With the clothing selected, got to Figure > "Copy Joint Zones From..." > and select the figure. 

Or simply "Merge all zones to weightmaps"

But depending on how the clothing is rigged, you may need to do some additional weight painting. Some clothing is rigged differently than the figure's rig, depending on they type of clothing it is and what control or adjustment features it has built in. But for most tight fitting clothes, and even not-so-tight, this should work. 

This is how I have been doing it, and I frankly don't see much difference at pose time. I certainly am not getting the beautiful results that Glitter is getting on the renders she posted. 

For me, the morph brush is a much easier solution.

The difference is that in typical rigging, the "thighs" were the devil incarnate (/joke).  With weight mapped clothing, the thigh bones are useful and desired for movement.  But NOT in grouping.
So, when you "Copy Joints From" or "Convert to Weight Maps" there are no thighs in the rig at all.  Without the thigh bones and their weight maps, the only movement you have transferred is the hip.  It will look and move like everything in the past, following the hip bone.

So, when you "Copy Joints From" or "Convert to Weight Maps" there are no thighs in the rig at all.  Without the thigh bones and their weight maps, the only movement you have transferred is the hip.  It will look and move like everything in the past, following the hip bone.

/quote

This makes sense! Finally! :) I see why it doesn't work.

But, as I stated above, if I can't easily apply maps to content I have purchased, on the fly, it is not useful to me. 

However... this has been a productive discussion. I don't feel quite so stupid now! Thanks to all!

Completely agree with Glitterati3D that Weight-Mapped clothing is far superior to traditionally rigged clothing and fits a LOT better if properly painted.

...which most of us don't have the first clue as to how to do.

I don't know how to model, so if the process cannot be applied to content that I have purchased, I'm dead in the water.

If you have used the morph brush, you know how to paint weight maps.  It's basically the same process. The best advice I have for any user is:

1. Small, incremental changes.  Go small and repeat.  Otherwise, you're going to overdo it.

2. Good GAWD, change the default settings on the brush - the default settings are way too big, and way too strong.  Small brush, and I never use more than a 0.1250 setting on the magnitude. during editing.  Now, if I am painting an entirely new weight map, I'll use the defaults to speed up the process, but when it comes time to refine, the settings go way down.

What about the missing bones, Glit?

vilters, I'm sorry, but I have to agree.....this thread was about CLOTHING and not original figures.  You were terribly off topic.

In addition, I truly hope most readers do NOT spend much time on your post as you make the entire process sound painful and involved.  It's not.  And it is this attitude which helps to prevent adoption by users of weight mapped figures and clothing.

Yes, you're the weight map king.  Wear the title and crown with pride, but PLEASE stop discouraging folks from adopting these figures with your involved, painful posts about the process.

What about the missing bones, Glit?

Just go into the fitting room and add them there.  Uncheck everything but the bones you need. Now, let me caution you about the shins here......they really are a half dozen of this, half dozen of that situation......they will make movement in long skirts follow the shins.  However, as witnessed at the DAZ forums, customers found the "glued to the legs" look it produces less than ideal.  In a long dress, I'm afraid we're still stuck with movement bones when we get to the shin portion of the dress.  Only because it looks better when posed.  If you are comfortable with the look and fit by adding the shins, by all means, add them in.

 Thights are not a problem at all.

But as I said above, rThigh and lThigh can NOT touch :> That is why you can only use the autogroup function if you know how to regroup and reweld afterwards.
You have to have a hip group from the hip downwards between both thigh.

This has been so forever.

Some weld it all into a big hip group (as you would when building dynamic),

Some regroup and reweld maintaining the 3 groups = rThigh => hip => lThigh.
Up till PP2014SR5 included, this has been the correct procedure.

If rThigh and lThigh touch? => Weld crack.
Just like when rCollar and lCollar touch => Weld crack.

PS, the weld will crack whatever the rigging, traditional or Weightmapped.

Glitterati - Got it.

I apologise if I upset your feels Vilters, but, in the last 2 topics I come to read about clothing and / or rigging, you are there with an irrelevant point because what? you have to prove how knowledgeable you are about weight mapping? I don't doubt that you know about weight mapping, but the question was about clothing, poser 2 figures have nothing to do with the question. Nobody asked how to weight map anything, nor did they ask (as Glitterati so eloquently pointed out) about original figures, it would be nice if you could stay on topic and impart your knowledge of the subject, so that people like myself do not have to wade through the irrelevant information just to get to the information we are looking for. this just makes coming to the post a huge waste of time and personally I find it discouraging to find an interesting post hijacked by information that does not pertain to the original question.

 Thights are not a problem at all.

But as I said above, rThigh and lThigh can NOT touch :> That is why you can only use the autogroup function if you know how to regroup and reweld afterwards.
You have to have a hip group from the hip downwards between both thigh.

This has been so forever.

Some weld it all into a big hip group (as you would when building dynamic),

Some regroup and reweld maintaining the 3 groups = rThigh => hip => lThigh.
Up till PP2014SR5 included, this has been the correct procedure.

If rThigh and lThigh touch? => Weld crack.
Just like when rCollar and lCollar touch => Weld crack.

PS, the weld will crack whatever the rigging, traditional or Weightmapped.

What you are MISSING here, vilters is that you are transferring the THIGH rigging ONLY.  Not the bones, just the rigging.  So none of the "this can't touch that" rules apply.  They can't touch.  There.  Are.  No.  Bones.  To.  Touch.

Me?
Me know "O" taken to infinity and back.

PS1, You might want to recheck your signature. It is not in sync with your post.

PS2, How many KNEW that you have to paint in all 3 directions? Bend, Twist AND Side-Side? And how many "paint" the bulge maps?
Simply pushing the "merge to Weightmaps" without repainting in all directions, is just adding more pollution to what you already have.

PS3: If you want to learn? => Read. 

Me?
Me know "O" taken to infinity and back.

PS1, You might want to recheck your signature. It is not in sync with your post.

PS2, How many KNEW that you have to paint in all 3 directions? Bend, Twist AND Side-Side? And how many "paint" the bulge maps?
Simply pushing the "merge to Weightmaps" without repainting in all directions, is just adding more pollution to what you already have.

PS3: If you want to learn? => Read. 

PLEASE.  When you transfer the rigging, all those rigs ARE TRANSFERRED!  There's no requirement to paint those in - they are THERE already!!!!!! Do they need refinement?  Probably.  For a user who just wants a better fit/movement, most likely NOT.  For a vendor, absolutely!

I think the biggest communication problem we have here is talking with vendors vs. users. Vendors need to know what you are posting - users not so much.

 @ Glitter

I know what you are transferring, but that is yet another advanced level and "non-standard procedure". The "exception" can not become the default..
Of course what you do works too, but again, one has to now exactly what one is doing.

But most here have never even painted a W-Map yet, let alone a Bulge Map, even less in all 3 directions.

What you do works, but you are in the advanced level, and this is not the default nor standard level.

Standard is to put anything below the hip in one large hip group and make it dynamic.

Or? Group conventionally in rTigh, a downwards enlarged hip, and lThigh, and rig conventionally or Weightmapped.

vilters - I did read, your pictures STILL had nothing to do with the original question - I did give you courtesy of acknowledging that your information was good information, even if it was irrelevant. - You decided that rudeness was the best course, you appear to think you are some kind of god and can talk to people however you like. (a position I do not happen to share.)

So don't bother replying, I won't be able to read your egotistical, narcissistic comments.

 @ Glitter

I know what you are transferring, but that is yet another advanced level and "non-standard procedure". The "exception" can not become the default..
Of course what you do works too, but again, one has to now exactly what one is doing.

But most here have never even painted a W-Map yet, let alone a Bulge Map, even less in all 3 directions.

What you do works, but you are in the advanced level, and this is not the default nor standard level.

Standard is to put anything below the hip in one large hip group and make it dynamic.

Or? Group conventionally in rTigh, a downwards enlarged hip, and lThigh, and rig conventionally or Weightmapped.

I won't participate in this debate in THIS thread. We have users who want to use weight mapped figures and clothing and are asking HOW TO DO SO. 

Your audience is USERS here.

Perhaps it would be advantageous to tailor your discussion to THE AUDIENCE!

 Pfffft.
Must be the season.

I find it difficult to see how anyone can be 'off topic' when the title of the thread is far from specific and does not even ask a question.  I accept that OP listed a number of weight mapped figures in a manner he felt would be helpful to others.  Along with the list there is a reference to clothes not having to be converted, again a valid and valuable information, but it hardly means that the discussion is only about clothes or that figures are off topic. 

I apologise if I upset your feels Vilters, but, in the last 2 topics I come to read about clothing and / or rigging, you are there with an irrelevant point because what? you have to prove how knowledgeable you are about weight mapping? I don't doubt that you know about weight mapping, but the question was about clothing, poser 2 figures have nothing to do with the question. Nobody asked how to weight map anything, nor did they ask (as Glitterati so eloquently pointed out) about original figures, it would be nice if you could stay on topic and impart your knowledge of the subject, so that people like myself do not have to wade through the irrelevant information just to get to the information we are looking for. this just makes coming to the post a huge waste of time and personally I find it discouraging to find an interesting post hijacked by information that does not pertain to the original question.

I gotta disagree with you there - I didn't find it irrelevant.  Vilters posted several things that I didn't know - I now have explanations for what didn't work and what I have to go back & fix.  If he bothers you that much - use the ignore button - that's what I do with Genesis vendors that show up in the Poser figure threads.....

ok - I don't want to have an argument with the vilters fan club...

"While we are on the subject of weight-mapping...

I personally tend to use the WM versions only for nude renders. I don't see the advantage with clothed ones. Am I alone in this opinion?

this is actually a question asked by the OP - immediately after his list. in what way does the information posted by vilters answer that question? - his information, while potentially useful - was irrelevant (not connected with or relevant to something:)  in THIS thread.

To get back on track here...

I have tried to follow Glitterati's instructions and make a WMed dress to see for myself.

Here is what I did:

1. I loaded a conforming dress by 9mdi. Great fashion, truly poor rigging.

2. I exported the dress as an obj.

3. I deleted the Dress.

4. I loaded V4 and added Alfaseed's WM injection to her.

5. I loaded the obj of the dress.

6. I went to the fitting room and selected the obj as the object and V4 as the target.

7. I selected "Make Figure".

8. I chose hip, abdomen, chest, both shoulders and both thighs as parts to transfer.

9. When the process was over, I went back to the pose room and deleted the obj.

10. I conformed the dress to V4.

11. As long as I only move one leg, it works fine. However, when I move both legs, it seems the bends add and become exagerated. 

What have I done wrong?

And exactly where is the weight map brush that everyone is talking about?

To get back on track here...

I have tried to follow Glitterati's instructions and make a WMed dress to see for myself.

Here is what I did:

1. I loaded a conforming dress by 9mdi. Great fashion, truly poor rigging.

2. I exported the dress as an obj.

3. I deleted the Dress.

4. I loaded V4 and added Alfaseed's WM injection to her.

5. I loaded the obj of the dress.

6. I went to the fitting room and selected the obj as the object and V4 as the target.

7. I selected "Make Figure".

8. I chose hip, abdomen, chest, both shoulders and both thighs as parts to transfer.

9. When the process was over, I went back to the pose room and deleted the obj.

10. I conformed the dress to V4.

11. As long as I only move one leg, it works fine. However, when I move both legs, it seems the beds add and become exagerated. 

What have I done wrong?

First question......how was the object file grouped, please? First response, I doubt you have done anything "wrong" but have encountered the issue I mentioned earlier with the thigh weight maps needing refinement.

Here is the original wm on the left thigh as it came out of the fitting/setup room and then the map after I revised it with the Remove brush.  I suspect this is your problem.

I did not group it. I thought the fitting room did that. How do I go about grouping it?

I did not group it. I thought the fitting room did that. How do I go about grouping it?

Since it is an existing rig it SHOULD be grouped.  You do not need to group it if it is grouped already. I just need to know how the original is grouped to advise you on the best approach.  That's all.

Also, when you were in the fitting/setup room, did you UNCHECK the Autogroup option?

I'm sorry to be so ignorant. I thank you for your patience.

How do I look at the original grouping? I just saved the existing dress as an obj. Did that transfer the grouping or delete it?

Autogroup defaults to unchecked in the fitting room. Should it be checked?

ROFL. When I check Autogroup and run it again, the dress becomes a pair of kulots! It's pants from the hips down!

I'm sorry to be so ignorant. I thank you for your patience.

How do I look at the original grouping? I just saved the existing dress as an obj. Did that transfer the grouping or delete it?

Autogroup defaults to unchecked in the fitting room. Should it be checked?

No apologies necessary.  We all had to learn this at some point, and I don't mind sharing or helping at all. The only way to look at the grouping is in the Setup Room, to mouse over each group, or open the CR2.  But that's OK, you have answered my first question.  If the autogroup option in the Fitting/Setup room is unchecked by default, the object is already grouped.  Poser is aware it does not need to group it.

So, the answer to your other question is yes, the object retained the grouping when you exported it.

Now, all I need to know is......can you please click on the left or right thigh in the garment and tell me if you see those thighs in the dress turn red?  The entire HIP should go red in this case if the thighs are not grouped into the garment.

ROFL. When I check Autogroup and run it again, the dress becomes a pair of kulots! It's pants from the hips down!

Yep.  Don't do that!  LOL!

When I click either thigh, the entire hip area gets selected.

How to edit a weight map ("where's the weight map brush")

With your figure in the scene, select the body part you wish to edit, then, Window>JointEditor to get the image below.  Then, by clicking on the painter's pallet there you will be in the edit weight map brush.  I've also marked the bulge weight maps so you know how to get to them to edit if necessary.  Be sure to select the proper movement in the Joint Editor which needs to be edited - in almost all cases it's BEND in the thighs.