Victoria 6 has been released.

11416181920

Comments

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,912
    edited June 2013

    wowie, when you dialed Heavy morph on Genesis and Gen4, did you dial native Heavy morphs (one from Genesis Evolution packs and one from Gen4 morphs++) or you transferred morphs between them to compare same shape? Because native morphs are different in shape as they always are in different generations. If we compare V4 native Heavy to G2F native Heavy for example: both morphs made for female base figures but they look different from each other too. Does it mean that one of them is suddenly not feminine just because it is different?
    I attached Genesis and V4 with same heavy (V4 version) on both. Look pretty same to me. If there was an alternative morphpack for Genesis with those morphs done for unisex Genesis base, in conjunction with V4 Iconic shape you'd get pretty same picture as native V4 Heavy.

    There are fundamental differences between male and female bodies. Skeleton is different, particularly for the pelvic area. Fat distribution are also different. You can make adjustment morphs to account for a different base shape (in this case Heavy for V4 shape), but it adds unnecessary bloat to the figure.

    It is true for real bodies, but from my testing, when I transfer supposedly 'feminine' rig from G2F back to Genesis and dial male shapes, its bends don't have noticeably different 'female' weight distribution that isn't suitable for men. I haven't seen the proof that rigging in G2F (while is somewhat better) is as gender-specific as real world weight distribution would be. Morphs - yes, morphs could be more or less feminine, I agree about fat distribution, but two different heavy morphs - one for females, another for males, - can be added to unisex base too and user will be free to dial between them as he/she wants, if Genesis 2 was unisex, which we can't do in G2F.

    Heavyboned.jpg
    1086 x 928 - 158K
    Post edited by Kattey on
  • MistyMistMistyMist Posts: 15,579
    edited December 1969

    'RELEASE THE KRACKKEN'

    G2 Krakken morph set? :D

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,912
    edited December 1969

    'RELEASE THE KRACKKEN'

    G2 Krakken morph set? :D


    If what I googled on Krakken is true, I'm afraid some geo-grafting is needed ^^"

  • MistyMistMistyMist Posts: 15,579
    edited December 1969

    Kattey said:
    'RELEASE THE KRACKKEN'

    G2 Krakken morph set? :D


    If what I googled on Krakken is true, I'm afraid some geo-grafting is needed ^^"


    hmm?
    Does Krakken have girly bits? or manly bits?
    in which case, prolly have to wait for the Krakkn Pro bundle, and then i'll need a 2nd job to afford it.
    a Pro bundle would have, seaweed hair options, tentacle texture options, one in pink!

  • Knight22179Knight22179 Posts: 1,075
    edited June 2013

    Nice comparisons, Wowie. But I've seen people in all shapes and sizes, including women. Men and women can have similarities in body shape but no one is exactly the same.

    For example. Some men have what people call a "beer belly". Most of their fat goes to their belly and very little throughout the whole body. For other men, the fat distributes all over the place not just the belly. Same for women.

    Just because "gender specific morphs" may be a bit better in "some" areas doesn't erase the fact that a Unisex mesh is the one I prefer (and several others feel the same way). It gives me far more versatility and far more power to do what I want. I don't have to worry about "Gender Specific Morphs or clothes".

    In saying that, both comparisons you have provided I've seen in real life and both are plausible.

    These small differences between BF2 and Genesis are not significant enough to justify the gender split IMO.

    Post edited by Knight22179 on
  • MistyMistMistyMist Posts: 15,579
    edited December 1969

    where are the luv handles?

  • wowiewowie Posts: 975
    edited December 1969

    anikad said:
    Couldn't a morph pack fix the difference in genesis?

    As I wrote earlier, you can make a 'counter' morph to fix the differences. Bear in mind you have to that for every morph that's different. There could be a lot of morphs you need loaded in the figure that you don't necessarily use.

    I've been playing around with Genesis2Female and it's V4 shape, trying some of the joint bends. I have to say, I'm very impressed on how the figure holds the corrections I've made with almost every FBM and PBM. It was nearly impossible to do that in Gen4 and somewhat possible in Genesis (with the counter morphs I mentioned). But with this new figure, I don't need to.

  • wowiewowie Posts: 975
    edited December 1969

    Kattey said:
    wowie, when you dialed Heavy morph on Genesis and Gen4, did you dial native Heavy morphs (one from Genesis Evolution packs and one from Gen4 morphs++) or you transferred morphs between them to compare same shape?


    Evolution morphs. The point is that not the difference between the particular morph between generations, but between base shapes on the same generation.

    Kattey said:
    Because native morphs are different in shape as they always are in different generations. If we compare V4 native Heavy to G2F native Heavy for example: both morphs made for female base figures but they look different from each other too. Does it mean that one of them is suddenly not feminine just because it is different?

    That is possible, but why does the Evolution Heavy morph with M4 shape looks similar to the native Heavy morph for M4? Only DAZ can answer that. I'm just pointing at a possible reason why having gender specific bases are preferable.

    It is true for real bodies, but from my testing, when I transfer supposedly 'feminine' rig from G2F back to Genesis and dial male shapes, its bends don't have noticeably different 'female' weight distribution that isn't suitable for men. I haven't seen the proof that rigging in G2F (while is somewhat better) is as gender-specific as real world weight distribution would be. Morphs - yes, morphs could be more or less feminine, I agree about fat distribution, but two different heavy morphs - one for females, another for males, - can be added to unisex base too and user will be free to dial between them as he/she wants, if Genesis 2 was unisex, which we can't do in G2F.

    If I understand correctly, that will be using two different morphs for the same thing, but targeted at different bases with the same figure. You could do that I suppose and with some ERC code hide the complexity for users. But you still end up with two morphs (more deltas).

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,912
    edited December 1969

    If I understand correctly, that will be using two different morphs for the same thing

    Well, yes, just like Creature Creator Ogre and 3D Universe Ogre and Skullcrusher Ogre are all doing same thing - but it creates variety. And with unisex base figure for Genesis 2 but with two different morphpacks (one more 'feminine', one more 'masculine') it would help to create variety, instead caring for clothes for two separate figures.

  • StorypilotStorypilot Posts: 1,439
    edited June 2013

    Kattey said:
    If I understand correctly, that will be using two different morphs for the same thing

    Well, yes, just like Creature Creator Ogre and 3D Universe Ogre and Skullcrusher Ogre are all doing same thing - but it creates variety. And with unisex base figure for Genesis 2 but with two different morphpacks (one more 'feminine', one more 'masculine') it would help to create variety, instead caring for clothes for two separate figures.

    Exactly this. I go back and forth in my mind on the gender split, but this argument that oh no we might need two versions of certain morphs is very unpersuasive. We've got whole morph categories that are Female and Male in genesis 1, and I've got literally hundreds. I've got like 4 different ways to make nostrils bigger. I would not be hesitant to embrace Heavy Female and Heavy Male as morphs for the same figure.

    Post edited by Storypilot on
  • SimonJMSimonJM Posts: 2,955
    edited December 1969

    Just as a passing point, G2F Starter Essentials has popped up as an updated product for me in DIM.

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,912
    edited December 1969

    SimonJM said:
    Just as a passing point, G2F Starter Essentials has popped up as an updated product for me in DIM.

    What was updated?

  • cwichuracwichura Posts: 1,000
    edited December 1969

    Bug tracker listed the breast dials affecting the eyes as fixed, so that's probably in there. No idea if there are other changes.

  • ColdrakeColdrake Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Kyoto Kid said:


    ...and this model has a real, not hideous, smile as well as independent toes and more naturally formed hands.

    So does V6.

  • Herald of FireHerald of Fire Posts: 3,384
    edited December 1969

    Coldrake said:
    Kyoto Kid said:


    ...and this model has a real, not hideous, smile as well as independent toes and more naturally formed hands.

    So does V6.


    Unless you use the built in full face smile dialed to max, that grin is downright creepy! Everything else you said I agree with.

  • wowiewowie Posts: 975
    edited June 2013

    Kattey said:

    Well, yes, just like Creature Creator Ogre and 3D Universe Ogre and Skullcrusher Ogre are all doing same thing - but it creates variety. And with unisex base figure for Genesis 2 but with two different morphpacks (one more 'feminine', one more 'masculine') it would help to create variety, instead caring for clothes for two separate figures.

    OK then, here's something else to consider - corrective morphs, particularly for joint bends. In the third picture, I've applied some d-forms to Genesis M4 shape, to correct the butt and kness for this pose.

    For the second pic, I change the shape to Genesis Base male. The changes to the butt looks pretty OK, but the knees are way overdone. So there are differences even in the same gender.

    For the first pic, I switched the M4 shape to V4. The knee shape looked more like Genesis Basic Male's.

    Going by your argument, then I will have to make different morphs to do the same thing for each shape, rig them carefully so they will only be applied to each respective shape and only when the influencing limbs are manipulated.

    GM4.jpg
    800 x 1040 - 90K
    GBaseMale.jpg
    800 x 1040 - 85K
    GV4.jpg
    800 x 1040 - 84K
    Post edited by wowie on
  • Knight22179Knight22179 Posts: 1,075
    edited December 1969

    I don't see how the knees are way overdone. Looking at the comparisons you have provided they look very nearly the same with only slight differences.

    The rest is also only a slight difference in bending quality. I'm glad your providing references so people can plainly see for themselves that BF2 is barely a step up in bending improvements. Not much of an upgrade IMO.

    And yes, creating "Gender Specific" Morphs for BF2 (and soon to be BM2) will have to be made separately, even more so now than for Genesis. "Slightly" more realism isn't going to cut it here. BF2 and BM2 along with V6 will still never have the Morphing versatility of Genesis because Genesis is a Unisex mesh that can be realistically male or female.

    Shall I now provide render references of M5 alongside V5 to prove this?

  • wowiewowie Posts: 975
    edited June 2013

    I don't see how the knees are way overdone. Looking at the comparisons you have provided they look very nearly the same with only slight differences.

    With the Heavy morph dialed to 0.5. Still M4 and V4 shapes. I expect some creasing but crease position is different.


    Shall I now provide render references of M5 alongside V5 to prove this?

    I'd love to see them, thank you.

    Edit: Missed this.
    I'm glad your providing references so people can plainly see for themselves that BF2 is barely a step up in bending improvements. Not much of an upgrade IMO.

    Just to avoid confusion, those are with Genesis and not Genesis2. None of the renders I posted are with the Genesis2 Base.

    GV4Heavy.jpg
    800 x 1040 - 93K
    GM4Heavy.jpg
    800 x 1040 - 98K
    Post edited by wowie on
  • Agent_UnawaresAgent_Unawares Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Shall I now provide render references of M5 alongside V5 to prove this?

    What purpose would that accomplish, though? One can morph a sphere into convincing male and female figures with enough time and effort - that does not by any means make it a good base.

  • wowiewowie Posts: 975
    edited June 2013

    I was unhappy with the d-form set (didn't look right with M5), so I started another one. Here's a closeup of the knees in the viewport wireshaded mode.

    M4 and M5 (second and third) looks nice, but V4 and V5 (first and last) clearly have some pinching to fix.

    If you look closer at the mesh, you'll see the crease area are different in V4 compared to M4, M5(and to some degree, V5). I could fiddle around to get it right with V4 shape, but that will likely cause distortion in other shapes.

    V5.jpg
    382 x 938 - 59K
    V4.jpg
    382 x 938 - 66K
    M5.jpg
    382 x 938 - 76K
    M4.jpg
    382 x 938 - 75K
    Post edited by wowie on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 16,167
    edited December 1969

    ...hey guys, quick! There's a fire sale on Genesis "Classic" content.

    ...don't miss out on adding content to your library made for the most versatile figure mesh ever invented.

  • anikadanikad Posts: 1,860
    edited December 1969

    Kyoto Kid said:
    ...hey guys, quick! There's a fire sale on Genesis "Classic" content.

    ...don't miss out on adding content to your library made for the most versatile figure mesh ever invented.

    I almost wish I still had my pc membership because that sale. It must be amazing...

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,912
    edited December 1969

    Wowie, at my opinion, because human body is extremely versatile, there is no '100% right' way to do the knee and all your pictures valid. I can see people on streets (thankfully, summer) with knees of all different shapes, in often unpredictable combinations with age, gender, level of thinness/thickness/musclemass. Does it mean that some of those knee shapes are more feminine, some more masculine and some are unrealistic because a different real guy has different shape of knee? Because I saw many knees on females that would be fine on males and otherwise.
    As for bending, I see the point behind the comparison but I also think that just better done unisex rigging in unisex Genesis 2 would've solve those problems because nothing so far shown me otherwise.

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,912
    edited December 1969

    anikad said:
    Kyoto Kid said:
    ...hey guys, quick! There's a fire sale on Genesis "Classic" content.

    ...don't miss out on adding content to your library made for the most versatile figure mesh ever invented.

    I almost wish I still had my pc membership because that sale. It must be amazing...


    Well, I have 99% of stuff I wanted to have already ^^"

  • wowiewowie Posts: 975
    edited June 2013

    Kattey said:
    Does it mean that some of those knee shapes are more feminine, some more masculine and some are unrealistic because a different real guy has different shape of knee? Because I saw many knees on females that would be fine on males and otherwise.

    My point is not about which shape are feminine or masculine. With gender specific figures, morphs can be shaped for that particular figure rather than trying to make it work with all figures. For this example I picked the Heavy morph. But Genesis have a lot of shapes. What would the Heavy morph look on a toon figure, regardless of gender? On a troll or alien. How would my changes look? Or any morph available for that matter.

    Since Genesis is one-mesh-for-all-figure deal, I expect morphs created for it to behave well with the figure, regardless of pose and shapes. When I make changes to the mesh, I expect it to behave properly (no collision errors, unwanted polygon stretching) with all supported shapes. Clearly this is not, thus my changes is causing mesh collision errors with some shapes and not others (even with the same pose).

    What good is variety when the figure have mesh collision problems when posed? What good are all those shapes when I can't use them due to those problems? In that way, I always think of Genesis akin to Oracle's Java - write once, profile and debug everywhere. It is in this regard I consider Genesis2Female a step in the right direction. The changes I've made to the mesh don't cause problems with almost all shapes/morph dials I've tried.


    As for bending, I see the point behind the comparison but I also think that just better done unisex rigging in unisex Genesis 2 would've solve those problems because nothing so far shown me otherwise.

    Sure, Genesis and even Genesis2 probably could use better rigging. I still don't know why no one have ever attempted to make their own TriAx base figure (similar in concept to what Genesis supposed to be) or redid the weight mapping to achieve better results. Of course, you're welcome to try.

    Simply put, I want something similar to this - http://exocortex.com/products/species

    Post edited by wowie on
  • Herald of FireHerald of Fire Posts: 3,384
    edited June 2013

    wowie said:
    Kattey said:
    Does it mean that some of those knee shapes are more feminine, some more masculine and some are unrealistic because a different real guy has different shape of knee? Because I saw many knees on females that would be fine on males and otherwise.

    My point is not about which shape are feminine or masculine. With gender specific figures, morphs can be shaped for that particular figure rather than trying to make it work with all figures. For this example I picked the Heavy morph. But Genesis have a lot of shapes. What would the Heavy morph look on a toon figure, regardless of gender? On a troll or alien. How would my changes look? Or any morph available for that matter.


    I think what Kattey is trying to say is that with a gender split system, you're only going to get 'feminine' morphs in general for the female figure and 'masculine' morphs for the men. In truth, there are plenty of males who exhibit feminine physical qualities (and no, I'm not just talking about 'moobs') as well as some arguably 'manly' women. A unimesh gets past that issue by allowing you to use both male and female morphs for the exact figure you need.

    I think the real issue is that a lot of people, including myself, can't visualise how the mesh is so uniquely designed for women that it couldn't support a male figure as well as Genesis could. Considering people have already created male morphs for V6, I'd say that argument has already run flat.

    Still, I'm putting away my pitchfork and dowsing those flames. I'm not fully sold on V6, though I did buy the starter bundle and morph packs to see if it was worth a bigger investment, but I can see there are genuine benefits to the mesh at least, and I'm interested to see what their future plans are for it. You might love it, you might hate it, but arguing isn't getting us anywhere fast.

    Time to end the witch burnings...

    Genesis2_Witch_Burning.jpg
    1000 x 1000 - 955K
    Post edited by Herald of Fire on
  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,912
    edited June 2013

    wowie said:
    My point is not about which shape are feminine or masculine. With gender specific figures, morphs can be shaped for that particular figure rather than trying to make it work with all figures.
    Yes, but if we develop two morphs anyway (one for male shapes, one for female shapes), why we can't use unisex figure as a base? I've shown that Genesis mesh can morph itself not any worse than 'specialized' G2F mesh with all its female morphs - it is just a matter of what sculpts/morphs are added to Genesis. I still firmly believe that the G2F rigging (while better than Genesis') by itself doesn't provide any gender-specific aspects to merit default female shape or gender-split.
    Currently I could take default Genesis, replace its default rigging with G2F better rigging and weight system, use/add all G2F and Genesis morphs and shapes and I'll get fully unisex figure. My main problem is that I don't know how to adjust autofits because I lack technical knowledge in that area, but by itself, such unisex Genesis would be capable of doing best of both worlds and its male shapes don't look any less male than they were with initial rigging; same for female.


    For this example I picked the Heavy morph. But Genesis have a lot of shapes. What would the Heavy morph look on a toon figure, regardless of gender? On a troll or alien. How would my changes look? Or any morph available for that matter.
    This is why 'genepool' existed, I believe. If a toon creator cared to create a specialized Heavy morph for his/her toons, you could use that. if not, you could use any other heavy or chubby morph you had; you didn't have to beg the creator or wait for release or use workarounds. Splitting this genepool into many separate specialized figures is counter-productive to such process. Zev0 has a very good ability to show how his/her unisex (as for Genesis) morphs look on very different shapes.

    Clearly this is not, thus my changes is causing mesh collision errors with some shapes and not others (even with the same pose).

    I can say for sure that G2F or even Genesis 3 won't solve those problems either in this respect. As long as there are polygons and no algorithms on how to smoothly add/locally subdivide more polygons (and make it work with UVs, and rigging, and autofit, and everything) when you stretch/bend something unless you don't need to do anything much different from default shape ever. So again, G2F supposed benefit doesn't seem to be much to me here either.

    I still don't know why no one have ever attempted to make their own TriAx base figure (similar in concept to what Genesis supposed to be) or redid the weight mapping to achieve better results.


    Luthbel did :)
    Also there is Millenium Horse 2 which I think is TriAx too.

    Simply put, I want something similar to this - http://exocortex.com/products/species


    I believe for Genesis this would be a step back from what it is. And if there was/will be a way to save adjusted weight-maps for morphs in a way we save separate adjusted rigging/ERC freeze, this would be even better.

    Post edited by Kattey on
  • puddin8686puddin8686 Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    /data/DAZ 3D/Genesis 2/Female/Morphs/DAZ 3D/Base/PBMNavel.dsf
    /data/DAZ 3D/Genesis 2/Female/Genesis2Female.dsf yes the same send me and email told me to send what I already sent hope they get it fixed soon

  • Knight22179Knight22179 Posts: 1,075
    edited June 2013

    My point is not about which shape are feminine or masculine. With gender specific figures, morphs can be shaped for that particular figure rather than trying to make it work with all figures. For this example I picked the Heavy morph. But Genesis have a lot of shapes. What would the Heavy morph look on a toon figure, regardless of gender? On a troll or alien. How would my changes look? Or any morph available for that matter.

    And what's your point your trying to make here, Wowie? I've seen humans and animals in all shapes and sizes. No one has exactly the same body shape or size. Some men look more feminine than others and some women look more masculine than some men. Thus, my "Heavy Morph" is not going to look the same on M5 as it would on V5. If it did, then we wouldn't have variety. Variety is good. A Unisex Figure gives me that freedom more so than a gender split one. DAZ could have, and should have, worked on better rigging of a Unisex figure mesh like Kattey is saying. It's fully possible.

    Since Genesis is one-mesh-for-all-figure deal, I expect morphs created for it to behave well with the figure, regardless of pose and shapes. When I make changes to the mesh, I expect it to behave properly (no collision errors, unwanted polygon stretching) with all supported shapes. Clearly this is not, thus my changes is causing mesh collision errors with some shapes and not others (even with the same pose).

    What good is variety when the figure have mesh collision problems when posed? What good are all those shapes when I can't use them due to those problems? In that way, I always think of Genesis akin to Oracle's Java - write once, profile and debug everywhere. It is in this regard I consider Genesis2Female a step in the right direction. The changes I've made to the mesh don't cause problems with almost all shapes/morph dials I've tried.

    So you expect perfection then. Come now, Wowie, no figure is perfect. Every figure ever created needs improvements. The day a figure is created that is absolutely perfect in every way is the day we don't need another figure to replace one that is already perfect. That day will never come because there is always room for improvement.

    Genesis is not perfect, neither are it's morphs. Neither is V6 or BF2. Both serve their purpose and Genesis will always be better at far more variety than V6 will be. It's not perfect, but I'll take "close enough" morphs than a gender specific morph any day that "might" do the job just "slightly" better. I can deal with Genesis's problems if it means I can do what I want and not have to worry about gender specific morphs or clothes. If you can't use a figure based on the problems you don't want to deal with, go ahead. You'll be facing new problems with the next generation. Either way, your still going to have to face problems to overcome.

    Sure, Genesis and even Genesis2 probably could use better rigging. I still don't know why no one have ever attempted to make their own TriAx base figure (similar in concept to what Genesis supposed to be) or redid the weight mapping to achieve better results. Of course, you're welcome to try.

    Simply put, I want something similar to this - http://exocortex.com/products/species

    Good luck with that

    Post edited by Knight22179 on
  • GiGi_7GiGi_7 Posts: 829
    edited December 1969

    wowie said:
    Kattey said:
    Does it mean that some of those knee shapes are more feminine, some more masculine and some are unrealistic because a different real guy has different shape of knee? Because I saw many knees on females that would be fine on males and otherwise.

    My point is not about which shape are feminine or masculine. With gender specific figures, morphs can be shaped for that particular figure rather than trying to make it work with all figures. For this example I picked the Heavy morph. But Genesis have a lot of shapes. What would the Heavy morph look on a toon figure, regardless of gender? On a troll or alien. How would my changes look? Or any morph available for that matter.


    I think what Kattey is trying to say is that with a gender split system, you're only going to get 'feminine' morphs in general for the female figure and 'masculine' morphs for the men. In truth, there are plenty of males who exhibit feminine physical qualities (and no, I'm not just talking about 'moobs') as well as some arguably 'manly' women. A unimesh gets past that issue by allowing you to use both male and female morphs for the exact figure you need.

    I think the real issue is that a lot of people, including myself, can't visualise how the mesh is so uniquely designed for women that it couldn't support a male figure as well as Genesis could. Considering people have already created male morphs for V6, I'd say that argument has already run flat.

    Still, I'm putting away my pitchfork and dowsing those flames. I'm not fully sold on V6, though I did buy the starter bundle and morph packs to see if it was worth a bigger investment, but I can see there are genuine benefits to the mesh at least, and I'm interested to see what their future plans are for it. You might love it, you might hate it, but arguing isn't getting us anywhere fast.

    Time to end the witch burnings...

    All G1 shapes male or female, toon or monster can be converted to G2F, with a high probability, all G1 shapes male or female, toon or monster will be able to convert to G2M. D3D spoke about G2-to-G1 convertion, G1 would be the bridge between G2F and G2M. So, in morph I don't believe there are problems, but a change in flows of work. Problems come from uv-maps. Until I know, G2F doesn't work with any male UV and nobody had speak about M4 to G2M UV-map.

Sign In or Register to comment.
Rocket Fuel