Morphs from G3 to G8

1626365676870

Comments

  • Glad you like it @Singular Blues !

    This script is your gift to all of us. And what a gift! Thank you! 

  • Worlds_EdgeWorlds_Edge Posts: 2,040
    scorpio said:

    Thank you WandW and SB!

    Guess you got me on ignore.

    Never!  I also love all of your renders and would hate to miss anything by you.  I don't know how I missed your post, and I love visual instruction which you give - so many thanks @scorpio!

  • For the library, I transferred Mavka to a test library on another disk (not on my C drive) and it worked fine.

  • ImagoImago Posts: 3,746

    For the library, I transferred Mavka to a test library on another disk (not on my C drive) and it worked fine.

    Uhm... Could you please post your method? I mean, which options you ticked and how you chosed the morphs? I guess I'll not be the only one havig this problem, as SB said...

  • Worlds_EdgeWorlds_Edge Posts: 2,040

    For the library, I transferred Mavka to a test library on another disk (not on my C drive) and it worked fine.

    Your Mavka came out really great.  If I have success with transfers, looks like I'll be buying more older figures...

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 5,832
    mats76 said:

    I seem a bit sad that you won't be able to sell the script on the store, you deserve to get something back for all the hours you been putting in on this project. 

    Will you accept a small gift through paypal considering how useful the script has been to me? If so, is it the same paypal address as before?

    Don't be sad. If you are sad, then I have to be sad, and I was having a pretty good day (researching poses.* I've got an angle ^_^).

    Here, look at this render xmasrose (aka tulipe) did. 
    The MOON, Malenfant! Look to the moon!

    It's quite impressive, don't you think? Getting Genesis toon over to G8 seems to come with a lot needed eyeball adjustment, in my experience, so I'm quite impressed. Also, I didn't know that product existed :D

    Of course, I am broke (dude has owed me 15 bucks going on two months. I had to use everything I had to fix the (second) laptop screen I broke). So, I can't say no to a gift. But I will say this. I'm doing this work on the laptop this Forum bought for me when I broke the other. I have the ability to survive stressful situations because there was a bit of change left over, and I could replace a good but broken phone with a okay and cheap phone. Also, look at that render again. I'm getting paid.

    But, if that hasn't moved you, yes. My PayPal remains the same. But there will be some kind of buy me-a-coffee on the project website for GenNext (the basic structure of which is also being donated). Moreover, seriously, guys. I have Zoloft, and that has helped me dig out of my fear/depression to some extent, but the fact that I am even able to begin to think positively at all is because you guys made me realize that I can help people feel good enough that they'll pay me on the chance that I'll deliver.

    How much is a sense of self-worth worth? As far as I am concerned, I owe YOU. And let's be honest, going Open Source means I'm asking more of you, not less. I'm just hoping that  all of you owning a part of what this could become is a kind of repayment on that debt. 

    Edit: *Researching is equal to reading Manga. But it really is research. It's just fun, as well.

    Aren't you a darling :). *lots and lots of virtual hugs*

    Laurie

  • xmasrose (aka tulipe)xmasrose (aka tulipe) Posts: 1,346
    edited May 2019

    I installed GenNext like I said on another drive in its own library. And added it to DS using Content directory manager.

    First loading G8F and Genesis.

    Then followed the steps Diva already recommended. See captures and files transferred.

    Also, and I don't know it is important but, I had transferred also Genesis Basic Female previously.

    Hope it helps. Ask any questions you wish but I don't know if I'll have the answer wink

     

    mavka.jpg
    791 x 842 - 261K
    mavka head.jpg
    787 x 843 - 312K
    mavka files.jpg
    608 x 188 - 64K
    Post edited by xmasrose (aka tulipe) on
  • I installed GenNext like I said on another drive in its own library. And added it to DS using Content directory manager.

    First loading G8F and Genesis.

    Then followed the steps Diva already recommended. See captures and files transferred.

    Also, and I don't know it is important but, I had transferred also Genesis Basic Female previously.

    Hope it helps. Ask any questions you wish but I don't know if I'll have the answer wink

     

    It's possible that having the basic female shape helped, but I don't know. Depends on how Mavka was built. What you did is largely correct. Mavka is one of those cases, though, that can lead to problems when transfering from Genesis.

    Best practice, here, would be to mark the Mavka shape as "Body" and then use the third Bake Mode Option, FBM (special). Modern "FBMs" are not FBMs the way they were in days of yore. The morph the full body, but don't touch the head. Old FBMs reshaped everything, including the head. Then, the head morph (if present) was allowed to 100& negative, so you could cancel out the head, if you wanted. Because the way the Head Body splitting works by default, I'm not sure what would happen is you tried to run the Head/Body transfer like you would for a G3 to G8 (in general, mark head, mark body, set Bake mode to Bake). The FBM special modifier tell the script to handle the Head and body in a different form that preserves the shapes and methods as they were on the original figure.

    Other than that detail, that description is a good way to do a transfer. 

  • I'll try that method later then.

    Here another quick one (done with one of the beta) with Jasmin  : sorry I get the You do not have permission to upload files message!

  • ImagoImago Posts: 3,746

    Nope, it doesn't work for me.

    However, my whole library is intalled in a custom path not only the script. I'm saying this because I had the thought it wasn't clear. Maybe this info can be useful to find the bug!

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 5,832
    Imago said:

    Nope, it doesn't work for me.

    However, my whole library is intalled in a custom path not only the script. I'm saying this because I had the thought it wasn't clear. Maybe this info can be useful to find the bug!

    My library isn't installed in the default path either (nor with the default name, so possibly a further problem). I'm going to try it now and if it works for me, that's not the problem ;). I shall get back to you...

    Laurie

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 5,832
    edited May 2019

    Ok, I have G8M and Genesis installed in one content folder, I have the script installed in another content folder and I saved the result to still yet another content folder. Worked like the proverbial charm. So I'm not exactly sure what your problem might be Imago :(.

    Laurie

    David 5 on G8M:

     

    David 5 on G8M.JPG
    785 x 883 - 109K
    Post edited by AllenArt on
  • ImagoImago Posts: 3,746
    AllenArt said:

    Ok, I have G8M and Genesis installed in one content folder, I have the script installed in another content folder and I saved the result to still yet another content folder. Worked like the perverbial charm. So I'm not exactly sure what your problem might be Imago :(.

    Laurie

    David 5 on G8M:

     

    Thanks! At least now I know my library is ok!wink

    I'll keep trying, perhaps I'm doing something wrong...

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 5,832

    Ok, I have G8M and Genesis installed in one content folder, I have the script installed in another content folder and I saved the result to still yet another content folder. Worked like the perverbial charm. So I'm not exactly sure what your problem might be Imago :(.

    Laurie

    David 5 on G8M:

     

    Imago said:
    AllenArt said:

    Ok, I have G8M and Genesis installed in one content folder, I have the script installed in another content folder and I saved the result to still yet another content folder. Worked like the perverbial charm. So I'm not exactly sure what your problem might be Imago :(.

    Laurie

    David 5 on G8M:

     

    Thanks! At least now I know my library is ok!wink

    I'll keep trying, perhaps I'm doing something wrong...

    For David I did have to do the BODY as FBM Special rather than the other way because his body morph is actually his head AND body. I guess we'll run into that a lot with Genesis 1 especially.

    Laurie

  • Finally working!

    Jasmin from 3DU

    19_G8F Genesis Jasmin.denoised.png
    600 x 800 - 442K
    19_G8F Genesis Jasmin head.denoised.png
    600 x 800 - 506K
  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 5,832

    Just some quickie renders of the David 5 to G8M conversion. He's wearing Nix's skin in these, but you can definitely tell it's David 5 ;).

    Laurie

     

    David-5-on-G8M-Nix-Skin.jpg
    933 x 1200 - 146K
    David-5-on-G8M.jpg
    1022 x 1800 - 243K
  • Bad  news, peeps. Daz has objections. IANAL, but I am also not dumb. Right now, their objections are not specific enough to directly respond to but my understanding of the relevant agreement suggests the interpretation they are using in one claim. I believe the other claim doesn't represent an impediment, but I have asked for clarification.

     

    Of course, I am not dumb, so it didn't take long to locate the grant of authority they are starting from. Because of certain elements rherein, which are not in dispute, . I have had to take the git link down. This comes to the point of this post. I am physically unable to respond to their request beyond what I have already done. The password to the git is very strong and I don't have it where I can get to it. So, in accordance with the EULA we all agreed to, I have to ask anyone with the git lunk not share it.

    Again, don't freak out. I believe the claims are addressable in an amicable fashion. But I will be taking steps that will render the git version in operable as soon as I can log in. I'm bound to that much.

    I'm not here to paint Daz as the villain. While I can't know what the outcome will be, or if I understand their basis until they respond, I do suspect whay one claim is based on, and if so they are in the right. Because of that, I am trying to halt distribution S quickly as possible.

     

    None of the claims is a dealbreaker. They aren't even that hard to deal with, though it will be a bit tedious. I already plan on getting that done soonest. I still have to halt distribution of the likely indisputably violating materials by all means. I'm not sure basis of the second claim, as the file addressing that is obviously in the git. I can only imagine the issue is belief that an attribution is missing or the attribution is incorrectly placed. Here I am willing to go "nuclear" and place the attribution file everywhere, and attribute every Daz sample.

    I don't think it needs to go that far, but I am honestly confused by that assertion. So, I want you to know my confidence about that one, while hig, may be based on bad assumptions.

     

    In the interest of full disclosure, there may be no solution that allows the project to live. There's probably more than one trump in EULA that can't be disputed. Daz has not invoked them, so I proceed on the assumption that they seek to have the issues they raised addressed and appropriate remedy enacted. Which comes full circle.

     

    If you have the git link do not share it for. For those who wish they had it, be patient. I think I can get this resolved in a r3w days (allowing that it is the weekend and a holiday weekend to boot).

     

    Sorry about the typos and autocorrect. I am not supposed to be online right now.

  • MollytabbyMollytabby Posts: 1,114
    edited May 2019

    Thank you Singular Blues for your wonderful script! It's fabulous and I really appreciate all the time and effort you've put into creating this. I'm an inexperienced 3D user and the script makes possible something I couldn't even try on my own.

    This is my first attempt at using it, using Kieko 6 (using a skin from one of the Girl 8 characters I have ... but I can't remember which one!). I followed @Divamakeup 's excellent step by step process.

    Keiko 6 G8F morph.jpg
    1000 x 1500 - 411K
    Post edited by Mollytabby on
  • MollytabbyMollytabby Posts: 1,114

     

    Oh, I'm sorry Singular Blues. I didn't see your post above while I was posting my Kieko 6 image. I hope this sorts itself out for you. 

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 5,832
    edited May 2019

    Why did I think this was gonna happen? Oh, right. Daz....lol.

    Frankly SB, if I were you, I'd hang it up. Save yourself the grief and frustration. You don't owe anyone anything, especially us. But it was a gallant effort.

    Laurie

     

    Post edited by AllenArt on
  • FSMCDesignsFSMCDesigns Posts: 10,523
    AllenArt said:

    Why did I think this was gonna happen? Oh, right. Daz....lol.

    Frankly SB, if I were you, I'd hang it up. Save yourself the grief and frustration. You don't owe anyone anything, especially us. But it was a gallant effort.

    Laurie

     

    Have to agree. IMNSHO if DAZ really wanted a product to transfer morphs, it would have been a reality a long time ago. You SB, were like Obi-Wan Kenobii, our "only hope".of this happening

  • marth_emarth_e Posts: 119

    Bad  news, peeps. Daz has objections. IANAL, but I am also not dumb. Right now, their objections are not specific enough to directly respond to but my understanding of the relevant agreement suggests the interpretation they are using in one claim. I believe the other claim doesn't represent an impediment, but I have asked for clarification.

     

    Of course, I am not dumb, so it didn't take long to locate the grant of authority they are starting from. Because of certain elements rherein, which are not in dispute, . I have had to take the git link down. This comes to the point of this post. I am physically unable to respond to their request beyond what I have already done. The password to the git is very strong and I don't have it where I can get to it. So, in accordance with the EULA we all agreed to, I have to ask anyone with the git lunk not share it.

    Again, don't freak out. I believe the claims are addressable in an amicable fashion. But I will be taking steps that will render the git version in operable as soon as I can log in. I'm bound to that much.

    I'm not here to paint Daz as the villain. While I can't know what the outcome will be, or if I understand their basis until they respond, I do suspect whay one claim is based on, and if so they are in the right. Because of that, I am trying to halt distribution S quickly as possible.

     

    None of the claims is a dealbreaker. They aren't even that hard to deal with, though it will be a bit tedious. I already plan on getting that done soonest. I still have to halt distribution of the likely indisputably violating materials by all means. I'm not sure basis of the second claim, as the file addressing that is obviously in the git. I can only imagine the issue is belief that an attribution is missing or the attribution is incorrectly placed. Here I am willing to go "nuclear" and place the attribution file everywhere, and attribute every Daz sample.

    I don't think it needs to go that far, but I am honestly confused by that assertion. So, I want you to know my confidence about that one, while hig, may be based on bad assumptions.

     

    In the interest of full disclosure, there may be no solution that allows the project to live. There's probably more than one trump in EULA that can't be disputed. Daz has not invoked them, so I proceed on the assumption that they seek to have the issues they raised addressed and appropriate remedy enacted. Which comes full circle.

     

    If you have the git link do not share it for. For those who wish they had it, be patient. I think I can get this resolved in a r3w days (allowing that it is the weekend and a holiday weekend to boot).

     

    Sorry about the typos and autocorrect. I am not supposed to be online right now.

    Why that doesn't surprise me... sad

     

  • Singular BluesSingular Blues Posts: 729
    edited May 2019

    Guys, really. I failed to understand the EULA (who doesn't). There is another way to do this that doesn't run afoul of the objections Daz raised and really isn't that hard to do. I didn't do it originally because previous attempts made what I did the quickest parh. Futher, assuming the letter of their objections to be true, and I don't have reason to doubt them yet, I would pass legal must3r, or be really close, if it was for sale in their store. It's not a trumped up charge.

    I have done what I can to inform Daz of my intention. I will finish my EULA obligations as soon as I can get the laptop online without risking it being stolen. I will then make it compliant with the objections and put it back up.

    Let's give Daz the benefit of a little doubt. They have to aggressively defend their rights or the law says they give them up. I want to resolve this as nicely as possible, but I also have defend as aggressively as I can. I believe I am correctly interpreting my rights as the EULA limits them. I am simply allowing that Daz may have  failed to communicate all objections, and that the attribution questions is pretty muddy to me.

     

    Fact is, tho, as far as the IP objection raised, I am the bad gut. I should have checked more carefully. This isn't over by a long shot. I can correct for the objections raised. I could be an ass about it and do it such that it would be impossible to suggest an EULA violation (topologically, all genesis figures can be simplified to spheres. It hard to claim the sphere is IP) but I won't because that's making it harder than it has to be. I just need to make the transfer shape something that can only be seen as aset of copies of itself, and in no way a clone of anyone's IP. If anything, we all should have seen that as a problem. We just got excited.

     

    Keep Calm

    And

    Make More Art

    Post edited by Singular Blues on
  • marth_emarth_e Posts: 119

    Bad  news, peeps. Daz has objections. IANAL, but I am also not dumb. Right now, their objections are not specific enough to directly respond to but my understanding of the relevant agreement suggests the interpretation they are using in one claim. I believe the other claim doesn't represent an impediment, but I have asked for clarification.

     

    Of course, I am not dumb, so it didn't take long to locate the grant of authority they are starting from. Because of certain elements rherein, which are not in dispute, . I have had to take the git link down. This comes to the point of this post. I am physically unable to respond to their request beyond what I have already done. The password to the git is very strong and I don't have it where I can get to it. So, in accordance with the EULA we all agreed to, I have to ask anyone with the git lunk not share it.

    Again, don't freak out. I believe the claims are addressable in an amicable fashion. But I will be taking steps that will render the git version in operable as soon as I can log in. I'm bound to that much.

    I'm not here to paint Daz as the villain. While I can't know what the outcome will be, or if I understand their basis until they respond, I do suspect whay one claim is based on, and if so they are in the right. Because of that, I am trying to halt distribution S quickly as possible.

     

    None of the claims is a dealbreaker. They aren't even that hard to deal with, though it will be a bit tedious. I already plan on getting that done soonest. I still have to halt distribution of the likely indisputably violating materials by all means. I'm not sure basis of the second claim, as the file addressing that is obviously in the git. I can only imagine the issue is belief that an attribution is missing or the attribution is incorrectly placed. Here I am willing to go "nuclear" and place the attribution file everywhere, and attribute every Daz sample.

    I don't think it needs to go that far, but I am honestly confused by that assertion. So, I want you to know my confidence about that one, while hig, may be based on bad assumptions.

     

    In the interest of full disclosure, there may be no solution that allows the project to live. There's probably more than one trump in EULA that can't be disputed. Daz has not invoked them, so I proceed on the assumption that they seek to have the issues they raised addressed and appropriate remedy enacted. Which comes full circle.

     

    If you have the git link do not share it for. For those who wish they had it, be patient. I think I can get this resolved in a r3w days (allowing that it is the weekend and a holiday weekend to boot).

     

    Sorry about the typos and autocorrect. I am not supposed to be online right now.

    Why that doesn't surprise me... sad

     

    Guys, really. I failed to understand the EULA (who doesn't). There is another way to do this that doesn't run afoul of the objections Daz raised and really isn't that hard to do. I didn't do it originally because previous attempts made what I did the quickest parh. Futher, assuming the letter of their objections to be true, and I don't have reason to doubt them yet, I would pass legal must3r, or be really close, if it was for sale in their store. It's not a trumped up charge.

    I have done what I can to inform Daz of my intention. I will finish my EULA obligations as soon as I can get the laptop online without risking it being stolen. I will then make it compliant with the objections and put it back up.

    Let's give Daz the benefit of a little doubt. They have to aggressively defend their rights or the law says they give them up. I want to resolve this as nicely as possible, but I also have defend as aggressively as I can. I believe I am correctly interpreting my rights as the EULA limits them. I am simply allowing that Daz may have  failed to communicate all objections, and that the attribution questions is pretty muddy to me.

     

    Fact is, tho, as far as the IP objection raised, I am the bad gut. I should have checked more carefully. This isn't over by a long shot. I can correct for the objections raised. I could be an ass about it and do it such that it would be impossible to suggest an EULA violation (topologically, all genesis figures can be simplified to spheres. It hard to claim the sphere is IP) but I won't because that's making it harder than it has to be. I just need to make the transfer shape something that can only be seen as aset of copies of itself, and in no way a clone of anyone's IP. If anything, we all should have seen that as a problem. We just got excited.

     

    Keep Calm

    And

    Make More Art

    Hope this can be solved soon, SB. I can only feel respect for all your hard work.It's such an amazing plugin. 

  • gerstergerster Posts: 964
    AllenArt said:

    Why did I think this was gonna happen? Oh, right. Daz....lol.

    Frankly SB, if I were you, I'd hang it up. Save yourself the grief and frustration. You don't owe anyone anything, especially us. But it was a gallant effort.

    Laurie

     

    Have to agree. IMNSHO if DAZ really wanted a product to transfer morphs, it would have been a reality a long time ago. You SB, were like Obi-Wan Kenobii, our "only hope".of this happening

    Daz is offering such a tool, out of the box, 

    http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/referenceguide/interface/action/index/dztransferutilityaction/start

     

  • EllessarrEllessarr Posts: 1,265

    it would look weird but one question, where's the link to download the script??? it's on his signature?? i was looking at all the comments but could not find the proper link for it.

  • nonesuch00nonesuch00 Posts: 15,851

    Adding credits for DAZ 3D in all the source is the easy part, even if the code was written 100% by you, but at 15MB for your ZIP file,  then was the problem that some geometry or vertex listings of some type from the source DAZ/PA models included they are complaining about that will be harder to eradicate in the tool you wrote? Is that the reason why maybe the results were better than DAZ Studio's own tools?

    Good luck if you choose to proceed but if the above is true your improved results may be eradicated and the best you can do is as automate what DAZ Studio's own tools do (as with Zev0, RSSY and maybe other PAs leverage DAZ Studio's own tools to create automated assistive products.

    Thanks in any case! 

  • No link until I can properly respond to the legal problem detailed above.

     

    As for the file size and what not,  the issue is that the clones are clones. But they don't have to be. I mean, they do, but they don't need to be distributed with the script. They could be built locally by a setup tool that, itself, contains no Daz shapes,  or built at runtime, such that they only exist while the script is running. I think the latter is preferable. The script generated better results than Daz's tools because those tools aren't intended to do what the script does. Using them that way is a hack. The script is just a machine precise hsck.

    The included clones aren't required to be Daz shapes. They just need to match topologically. Generating the required morphs can then be done the same way as the transfer object is generated. (Reading the current state of the figure verts directly into an obj file).

     

    Admittedly, theory and practice don't always line up, but the change I plan to build does the same work in theory, but it doesn't start with "knowledge" of the Daz shapes. Rather, it's like I had a custom character that I happened to have made for all Genesis figures. If that is not allowed, there's a whole lot of freebies that violate the EULA.

    The process does need the Daz shapes for Baking, but I can generate those with existing code and reverse source shape from target.. Except for the figure names, there isn't much in the script that couldn't be generated on the fly. But it gets beardy, one hopes Daz's objections are limited to those they've detailed. I can fix that and get back to studying. If not, I am confident I can fix any other technical concerns.

  • Singular BluesSingular Blues Posts: 729
    edited May 2019

    Just to be absolutely clear, the intent of GenNext was to bridge everything, eventually. But the purpose was to bridge the gap between GenX(2) and G8. G3 <=> G8 transfer does that, and GenNext can do that without clones. That was complete and stable before Christmas.

    Moreover, Daz agreed the basis of that didn't have sample code in it. Again, using th existing CC Attribution file in the script header, with a url for every script sample will cover all bases, and there will be a path from Generation 3 to Genesis 8. It's just a matter of coverage for any changes post review that Daz might feel infringe on the samples.

     

    EDIT: as of 0743 EDT, 2019 25 May, the Repo is down. I considered going private, but the net result is the same as deleting it. As far as I'm concerned, I've held up m yend of the EULA. I've already tried to make that clear to Daz, and I've asked them to clarify if they disagree with my interpration. Until I hear from them, I'm proceeding as outlined. In theory I could probably get all the necessary work done today, but I'm not promising that. It will be tedious, and I should take the opportunity to correct some issues that relate to the clones shapes' interaction with the A pose. In practice, I'm not promising that because I haven't decided what shape the the clone will have, or exactly how to be sure it doesn't represent a match to any other IP. That latter shouldn't be an issue if I go wierd enough, but too wierd will likely lead to failure of the script. In any event, no matter how quickly I get this done, I'm not going back up until tomorrow morning, at the earliest. Don't hold your breath.

    Post edited by Singular Blues on
Sign In or Register to comment.