Digital Art Zone

 
   
3 of 5
3
How to cut a mesh ?
Posted: 12 September 2012 01:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2012-03-25

The Official Answer From Daz!

To get this all in one post, here was my question to Daz.

——————————the question

We have a discussion running on the Hexagon forum where this question came up. We wish to know if it is legal to do the following for public use.

1. Create a new mesh in Hexagon not using any of the Genesis geometry.
2. Save this to a obj.
3. Import the obj into Daz Studio.
4. Use one of the tools to fit your new mesh to Genesis, such as the transfer utility and smoothing modifier.
5. Export your mesh back out as an obj. or send to Hex.
6. Continue working on your personal mesh which now has been smoothed and fit via Daz Studio.
7. Use this mesh for public release.

When doing this, We do not see that any of the geometry from Genesis is being matched to the ‘new mesh’ geometry, but that the mesh is simply smoothed and perhaps moved in or out to better fit Genesis. The ‘new mesh’ is also not really shrinkwrapped to Genesis, as there is an offset in the smoothing.

—————————the answer

Kraig Hausmann, Sep 12 08:23 (MDT):

Hi John,

Yes, that’s fine, based on what you’ve said. The geometry is not considered derivative. In fact, the work flow that you propose is probably similar in some regards to the work flow used by published artists. If what you proposed was illegal, then nobody but DAZ 3D and people contracted by DAZ 3D would be able to make add-ons for DAZ 3D figures. But anyone can and may sell them on sites other than DAZ 3D.

It’s only a problem if the mesh is derived from a protected figure. Simply having the mesh fit to the geometry of such a figure is not a problem in and of itself. If you took the Genesis geometry and then modded it to make an outfit, that would be a violation of the terms of use.

Let me know if this issue has not been resolved or if you have other questions.

————————-end the answer

I was figuring this would be the response during my last post. Otherwise, how could we legally use the fit functions in Daz to fit anything to a Daz figure and sell it?

So, same is true for intermediate fittings while building your mesh.

SWEET!!!!

 Signature 

Visit My Dumor3D Store

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 01:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2322
Joined  2011-11-16

Well tyvm Dumorian for getting this clarified. It will help a lot of people knowing what is/is not valid in their creation and fitting workflow smile

 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 01:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  41
Joined  0

Good news indeed, thanks for getting it sorted through official channels.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 02:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2012-03-25

I will happily except donations of 1 penny per hour saved by 3d artist due to knowing they can do this. <thinking I’ll soon be a millionaire> NOT!

I’m just glad it came up in a thread as I was already thinking of doing this and just hadn’t tried it yet. I never considered that it might be a problem. Software licenses have a LOT of fine print. Not really understanding where a line lies, there was always a possibility that it would have gone the other way. Nice to know I won’t get into trouble for this.

All of that said and perhaps even just a bit back to the origin of this thread. The ‘suit’. Yes, having a good home built suit is fantastic. I would suggest attempting to have edges that follow what would normally be places where you may want to cut your suit. If for instance we are talking about a sleeve where it attaches to the body, the sleeve will most likely by a manifold on each end, but the hole left in the body may not. So, also a good thing to try to create manifolds where you might cut off a sleeve or pant leg. For those wondering about manifolds… if you select a couple of faces and hit loop, if it is a manifold it will loop all the way around.

All of that said, I have found the above goals difficult. There are so many clothing shapes out there and this goal could drive you nuts. But, your suit is a good mesh to do basics. Long pants, shorts, some underwear styles… long and short sleeve shirts, blouses or coats/vests. I stopped worrying about the seam areas on my suit as I do use a follow mesh utility in Silo. So my suit allows me to start any new shape… for instance a set of suspenders which cross in the back… My suit has no crossing in the back… just a rectangular grid.

As some of the software out there can ‘follow/wrap’ a mesh. Safety says do this only over your own creation, but I’m not going to pretend I know how all of the modeling programs work. What could be a derivative work would be starting with a Genesis mesh and using something that does an auto shrink wrap or follow on your mesh, where you don’t really know if it attached to any of the Genesis vertices or not. I assume vertices are the thing to worry over as copying a line or surface requires copying two or more vertices. This might be where the argument against shrink wrapping started? (Yes and now I’m rolling through the tutorials on Blender to see what different features it might have)

I continue to work on my ‘suit’ (yes, maybe the 10th one by now? wink ) and have a new goal for an even better fit! Although my early test are showing that the fit utility is getting me in some cases a better mesh and in some areas maybe a bit too much offset (too loose). I’d rather work with the new (what appears to be) smoother mesh after the fitting, and use the Hex smooth tool to move it inward instead of moving individual vertices in and out by hand.

 Signature 

Visit My Dumor3D Store

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 04:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5059
Joined  2012-04-07
dumorian - 12 September 2012 01:21 PM

The Official Answer From Daz!

To get this all in one post, here was my question to Daz.

——————————the question

We have a discussion running on the Hexagon forum where this question came up. We wish to know if it is legal to do the following for public use.

1. Create a new mesh in Hexagon not using any of the Genesis geometry.
2. Save this to a obj.
3. Import the obj into Daz Studio.
4. Use one of the tools to fit your new mesh to Genesis, such as the transfer utility and smoothing modifier.
5. Export your mesh back out as an obj. or send to Hex.
6. Continue working on your personal mesh which now has been smoothed and fit via Daz Studio.
7. Use this mesh for public release.

When doing this, We do not see that any of the geometry from Genesis is being matched to the ‘new mesh’ geometry, but that the mesh is simply smoothed and perhaps moved in or out to better fit Genesis. The ‘new mesh’ is also not really shrinkwrapped to Genesis, as there is an offset in the smoothing.

—————————the answer

Kraig Hausmann, Sep 12 08:23 (MDT):

Hi John,

Yes, that’s fine, based on what you’ve said. The geometry is not considered derivative. In fact, the work flow that you propose is probably similar in some regards to the work flow used by published artists. If what you proposed was illegal, then nobody but DAZ 3D and people contracted by DAZ 3D would be able to make add-ons for DAZ 3D figures. But anyone can and may sell them on sites other than DAZ 3D.

It’s only a problem if the mesh is derived from a protected figure. Simply having the mesh fit to the geometry of such a figure is not a problem in and of itself. If you took the Genesis geometry and then modded it to make an outfit, that would be a violation of the terms of use.

Let me know if this issue has not been resolved or if you have other questions.

————————-end the answer

I was figuring this would be the response during my last post. Otherwise, how could we legally use the fit functions in Daz to fit anything to a Daz figure and sell it?

So, same is true for intermediate fittings while building your mesh.

SWEET!!!!

Wonderful! This will make many people very happy I should think. It’s nice to be certain.

Thank you for posing the question and posting the reply.

 Signature 
Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 07:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  383
Joined  2003-10-09

dumorian:

Thank you for posting to DAZ officials the inquiry, so we could get an “official” response.

I finally feel vindicated for all my bitching on this subject (on the side of tools used are not the illegal issue)...


Having said that, I have both a statement, and a question for you.

*Question:  As it appears you are relatively new here, how long have you actually been modeling?

*Statement:  From reading your posts, I don’t believe you have a grasp on what “shrinkwrap” actually does.


Shrinkwrap modifiers (whether full-auto, semi-auto, or semi-assisted by hand;  i.e. “snap-to”, “coincident snap”, etc.) do not “attach” to the underlying “dummy” mesh whatsoever.  The dummy mesh is just used for coordinate approximations in 3D space.

Real world example;  Sit your azz down on a chair.  You have “put-on”, or “snapped” your azz to the chair, but you are in no way “welded” to the mesh (chair).  Now, put some “superglue” on your azz, and sit down again.  O.k., you just “welded” your azz to the mesh (chair), and are now part of the chair.  You, and the underlying mesh are now one.  See the difference?

Now, if you can create an entirely new azz mesh from your underlying chair mesh…  Well, then…  Color me impressed!


Thanks again for you inquiry, and posting the response.  I am saving this for future use (if ever needed).

 Signature 

Take care all..        “It’s easy to clean up when you got money.”        *Old Post Count:  Don’t know, don’t care…  *New Site Status:  Doesn’t matter one iota.
Ken

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 09:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  152
Joined  2007-08-25

Very cool thread, glad I got pointed this way. The legality issue, I’m very thankful for the offical response. I asked about the same process back in July, and the overall response was that the smoothing modifier shouldn’t be used in that way ( http://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewthread/4174/ ) so I dropped it from there. This new info makes a world of difference.

Btw, I didn’t see it mentioned, but the problem with the obj reverting when you send it out to OBJ or, I beleive, bridge, is that the clothing isn’t ‘frozen’ in the smoothed shape. Once Genesis is removed, it jumps back to where it was.
To solve this, in the Parameters / General section of your clothing, change Interactive Update from Off to On after smoothing. Then you can delete Genesis and export the clothing as an obj file (or ship it over a bridge, I think) . Once you’re done exporting, turn Interactive Update back off again, and you’re all set. Having it on will freeze the clothing item in the ‘smoothed’ position, and the result obj will have the smoothed/ moved surfaces you were looking for.

 Signature 

————-
2012: The world ended. We missed it. Maybe next time.
DVL_LVD @ ShareCG

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 09:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5059
Joined  2012-04-07
Ebahr - 12 September 2012 09:04 PM

Very cool thread, glad I got pointed this way. The legality issue, I’m very thankful for the offical response. I asked about the same process back in July, and the overall response was that the smoothing modifier shouldn’t be used in that way ( http://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewthread/4174/ ) so I dropped it from there. This new info makes a world of difference.

Btw, I didn’t see it mentioned, but the problem with the obj reverting when you send it out to OBJ or, I beleive, bridge, is that the clothing isn’t ‘frozen’ in the smoothed shape. Once Genesis is removed, it jumps back to where it was.
To solve this, in the Parameters / General section of your clothing, change Interactive Update from Off to On after smoothing. Then you can delete Genesis and export the clothing as an obj file (or ship it over a bridge, I think) . Once you’re done exporting, turn Interactive Update back off again, and you’re all set. Having it on will freeze the clothing item in the ‘smoothed’ position, and the result obj will have the smoothed/ moved surfaces you were looking for.

When I exported the ‘smoothed’ clothing .obj from D/S4, I simply ‘hid’ Genesis. Clothing stayed shaped as desired.

 Signature 
Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 September 2012 11:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2012-03-25
DaremoK3 - 12 September 2012 07:40 PM

dumorian:

Thank you for posting to DAZ officials the inquiry, so we could get an “official” response.

I finally feel vindicated for all my bitching on this subject (on the side of tools used are not the illegal issue)...


Having said that, I have both a statement, and a question for you.

*Question:  As it appears you are relatively new here, how long have you actually been modeling?

*Statement:  From reading your posts, I don’t believe you have a grasp on what “shrinkwrap” actually does.


Shrinkwrap modifiers (whether full-auto, semi-auto, or semi-assisted by hand;  i.e. “snap-to”, “coincident snap”, etc.) do not “attach” to the underlying “dummy” mesh whatsoever.  The dummy mesh is just used for coordinate approximations in 3D space.

Real world example;  Sit your azz down on a chair.  You have “put-on”, or “snapped” your azz to the chair, but you are in no way “welded” to the mesh (chair).  Now, put some “superglue” on your azz, and sit down again.  O.k., you just “welded” your azz to the mesh (chair), and are now part of the chair.  You, and the underlying mesh are now one.  See the difference?

Now, if you can create an entirely new azz mesh from your underlying chair mesh…  Well, then…  Color me impressed!


Thanks again for you inquiry, and posting the response.  I am saving this for future use (if ever needed).

Hi Daremok,

In this world of 3d modeling, I am new… just 6 months. I come from the dark side… LOL…. the CAD world where everything is very precise (highly automated custom cabinet software with CAD/CAM output - precise cut sheets and such, AutocadLT and TurboCAD). Want a surface, set the exact co-ordinates of the vertices. Aside from the cabinet software which doesn’t really let you get down to even the vertice level, most of the CAD packages I have worked with don’t really allow manipulation of edges nor surfaces but only vertices. Yes, you can offset or move a line which amounts to being an edge or a group of lines which could be a surface, but I can’t select a surface per se. So, although this world is a lot the same, it was a whole new way of thinking. Getting away from using known dimensions… feet, inches, cm, mm was really hard on my brain. So, I guess one could argue that the CAD world could be a bit more precise (the tools are for certain more constrained). A snap in the CAD world is a snap to a precise location, or as precise as math can be given we are not working in base 10 at the processor level.

Is shrink wrapping a generic term for the process or is it the name of an actual tool in some of the other modeling programs?

With your chair example, darn you take me off to where I don’t want to go…. Have one of the famous adult movie stars sit in that chair and mesh that to sell as a product and I bet you are seeing a lawyer really fast. My chair? Well, I don’t think it would earn you any money… although I have been told…  smile That, I just couldn’t pass up! Hmmm… a new use for memory foam? Unsuspecting victim sits. Gets up. Fill with plaster really fast… throw it into the 3d scanner… instant derriere mesh! Yes, my sense of humor is warped.

In this modeling world, to me, it would come down to the software used and the precision of the “shrink wrap”. A subjective topic without talking about specific software. I would think that if a shrink wrap tool snapped to too many vertices or created the same number of surfaces laid out about the same as the original mesh, trouble could follow. But, that’s just my opinion. I didn’t pose that question to Daz. Perhaps someone should? I certainly can see your point as well.

All of this said, I suspect a lot of folks will be a bit put out with this discovery of acceptable use. Folks that worked tons of hours fitting things by hand. And of course after all that hard work there would be some resentment of a faster way (cheating maybe?). I sort of suspect that is where some of the nay saying has come from on this whole subject.

Now… I get to start experimenting! Which settings in Studio give the best results? Which if any projection templates to use? And using that interactive update ‘On’ switch. Thanks for that Ebahr!

 Signature 

Visit My Dumor3D Store

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 September 2012 12:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1372
Joined  2008-01-01

Just to clarify shrinkwrap - the process, at least in Blender, is just that - it molds one surface to an underlying surface without changing the topology - only the shape to conform.

Exactly the same as the fitting to skintight process in Studio.

Here’s a pic of Genesis calf with a shrinkwrapped cylinder next to it - see that the two topologies do not match

Image Attachments
sock.jpg
Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 September 2012 12:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2012-03-25

Looking at your output, it sure looks legit! Now I am really looking forward to learning more about Blender! Re-reading the response from Daz leads ‘me personally’ to believe that this is not an issue. It is not a derivative of the Daz figure, just something fit to it. But again, that is ‘my opinion’. Maybe a question out to Daz Publishing could positively clarify doing this as well? My question to them was very specific in the use of Studio’s fit process. As a noob, and most likely I’ll never know the full answer as there are just too many softwares for doing this. I suppose some might attach/snap to the original figure’s geometry? What you show sure doesn’t look like it does.

 Signature 

Visit My Dumor3D Store

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 September 2012 01:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  152
Joined  2007-08-25

It’s confusing. If you notice, in my thread before on the smoothing mod, it seemed as if the smoothing mod method was a nono. Retopology, offset, and extraction methods make sense to be a no, since they are using the actual Genesis mesh. Shrink wrap, meshmatchers, and the such.. those keep coming up and typically lead to confusion all the way along.
Here’s a recent thread about it from the Commons forum, illustrating this point:
http://www.daz3d.com/forums/viewthread/7363/

*Edit: I should note, in most cases Daz is very helpful in trying to make creators jobs a little easier. Just look at the Transfer Utility, and the way it can help take away the pains of trying to rig a standard object. The confusion and vagueness on what tools and process are acceptable is understandable if you think of it from the businesses point of view. Say someone wants to user a tool like QRemesher from ZBrush to make a piece of clothing, or the shrink wrap method from Blender. If Daz out and out says no, a lot of people can not distribute their items. That sucks. But what if they said yes and allowed it, legally and overall?
Most people would simply use it as a quicker way to make clothing. The concern would be that person that takes Genesis, makes a near identical clone of it in one or two clicks, brings it into Studio and uses the Transfer Utility to rig it, then puts it up for sale on another site.
Effectively, they just stole Genesis then, and can sit there and yell all night that they had permission because Daz allows whatever method they use.
So it’s confusing, and sadly may stay confusing for a long time. I celebrate the response you got back, up above in this.

 Signature 

————-
2012: The world ended. We missed it. Maybe next time.
DVL_LVD @ ShareCG

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 September 2012 01:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2012-03-25

In your other thread, I see that Richard is an Administrator and I’ve seen lots of great post by him. However, there is a conflict in what is being said. I don’t know Richard’s position… Daz employee or not, nor what department if a Daz employee. But, my answer was directly from the Daz Publishing department which I would think is where the rights are understood and enforced.

Again, I expected this answer as a finished piece of clothing includes the use of the fitting in Studio. So, how can it not be alright? The second paragraph of Kraig’s response to me, seems to indicate that not only is using the smoothing/fitting acceptable, but it sounds like if you don’t simply mod the Daz figure to make clothes, you are good to go. This leads me to believe what Roygee shows above is acceptable use as well.

I’ll see if I can figure out how to invite Richard to view this thread so perhaps we can get down to a single answer in the forum.

 Signature 

Visit My Dumor3D Store

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 September 2012 01:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  152
Joined  2007-08-25
dumorian - 13 September 2012 01:25 AM

In your other thread, I see that Richard is an Administrator and I’ve seen lots of great post by him. However, there is a conflict in what is being said. I don’t know Richard’s position… Daz employee or not, nor what department if a Daz employee. But, my answer was directly from the Daz Publishing department which I would think is where the rights are understood and enforced.

Again, I expected this answer as a finished piece of clothing includes the use of the fitting in Studio. So, how can it not be alright? The second paragraph of Kraig’s response to me, seems to indicate that not only is using the smoothing/fitting acceptable, but it sounds like if you don’t simply mod the Daz figure to make clothes, you are good to go. This leads me to believe what Roygee shows above is acceptable use as well.

I’ll see if I can figure out how to invite Richard to view this thread so perhaps we can get down to a single answer in the forum.

We kinda X-posted here..See my edit in the post above, too smile I believe he is (Head?) of the Daz forum team here (- I may be wrong though), and normally a really good go to person for information. I typically see him, chloe, fixmypc and rbwiz giving really good and accurate answers. (some of those names may be off..LOL. )

 Signature 

————-
2012: The world ended. We missed it. Maybe next time.
DVL_LVD @ ShareCG

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 September 2012 02:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2012-03-25

Richard is a fantastic resource in the forum. He has helped me a number of times. I did send him a PM ‘politely’ asking him to look at this thread. wink

From the business perspective, IMO, Daz gains from more stuff for especially Genesis as well as their other characters. If we create products to be sold in the Daz store, they directly profit from that. The faster we can create it, the more they have in their store. The more items that are out there, again particularly for Genesis at this point, the more desirable it is to have Daz Studio. Microsoft gave away Internet Explorer. What happened to Netscape? I’m not saying I agree with those tactics, but if saturation makes you the leader, it is good for your business’ bottom line, if you can keep a positive public perception. So, allowing modelers to be as efficient as possible follows as good for business.

Either way you cut it, this whole area to me is a gray area and there are many shades of gray. Daz may have a different opinion on how some software wraps their form. I don’t know as I didn’t ask that question. It sounds like someone should.

 Signature 

Visit My Dumor3D Store

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 5
3