Is a geograft always a derivative mesh?

Silent Winter

Been looking into making geografts and the tutorials I've seen involve selecting and duplicating a ring of polys from (e.g.) G8M, then extruding and making the new geograft mesh from there.

This makes sense and would probably be required to get them to work.

My question is this: Isn't this then a derivative mesh? Is this allowed under the EULA?
(Or have I just found the wrong tuts and there's another way?)

 

Tried searching but didn't find a thread on it (even though there probably is one)

Cheers,

SW :)

Midnight_stories

That's a tricky one if you are a Daz vendor and are only selling here there shouldn't be a problem. But if you are selling at another place then you may need to get an official statement from DAZ before you do it. I would put in a ticket to get it sorted out !

Richard Haseltine

it is allowed, though Daz reserves the right to ask you to take the item down - I'm not aware of that having happened, however.

Silent Winter

^Thanks for the info :) (and to Midnight_Stories for the suggestion - I would be trying to sell it at Daz but so far they don't seem to like any of my stuff).

I guess Daz reserve the right to ask you to take it down in case anyone takes it too far and duplicates large portions of the mesh (not sure why you'd need to do that for  a geograft but hey).

I just need a ring of polys to attach something to G8M's abdomen, giving him a new lower body.

Thanks again :)

Richard Haseltine

Actually, you need a ring of vertices (joined by edges) not a ring of polygons as such - but that may be what you meant.

Silent Winter

Richard Haseltine said:

Actually, you need a ring of vertices (joined by edges) not a ring of polygons as such - but that may be what you meant.

That was my initial thought, but a tut I looked at said we need to grab a surrounding ring of polys first (that overlap with the original model but don't get used in the final graft or something) - maybe I misunderstood (certainly the verts would be the bit that gets connected anyway).

I'm still experimenting with 'proof of concept' ideas but it seems to be working :)

Richard Haseltine

I can't recall if it initially needed a ring of polygons (though I don't think so) but certainly now you want only a ring of vertices, although some tutorials do say otherwise.

TheKD

It's just a lot easier to bring the whole polygon ring in at first, so you know the polygons you are creating aren't at extreme angles to the existing ones that can create some funky issues sometimes. A ring of vertices only doesn't have as much information as a ring of polygons.

Richard Haseltine

Yes, although I'd probably keep the base mesh on a separate layer (or as a separate object) for the same reason. But the output, the final geoGraft, needs to match only a ring of vertices joined by edges (or more than one ring of vertices - a graft is not limited to a single attachment point, though the bone hierarchy musts till be an open tree and cannot have two chains of bones meeting at a shared child bone).

Silent Winter

Groovy, thanks again :)

wiz

Richard Haseltine said:

it is allowed, though Daz reserves the right to ask you to take the item down - I'm not aware of that having happened, however.

With the geografts that have been sold for years on a certain site (which shall remain nameless) I can't imagine what it would take to make DAZ ask someone to take one down.