Versatility vs specificity

1246

Comments

  • RCDescheneRCDeschene Posts: 2,753
    edited December 1969

    Jabba101 said:
    If you flash the flesh in your renders, G2F should be on your radar - but if you mostly use fully-clothed characters, we're still waiting on costume makers raising the bar for the new figure, albeit this should come as no surprise because an improved base for character makers does not miraculously make it any easier for the wardrobe PAs to make their outfits.

    Some PA's have said one actually does. Genesis, according to them, was a huge improvement over Gen 4 to make clothing for. Part of the whole reason why Genesis 2 is the way it is is because PA's argued that gender-specific base figures would help them make character clothing even better.
  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited July 2013

    Jabba101 said:
    If you flash the flesh in your renders, G2F should be on your radar - but if you mostly use fully-clothed characters, we're still waiting on costume makers raising the bar for the new figure, albeit this should come as no surprise because an improved base for character makers does not miraculously make it any easier for the wardrobe PAs to make their outfits.

    Some PA's have said one actually does. Genesis, according to them, was a huge improvement over Gen 4 to make clothing for. Part of the whole reason why Genesis 2 is the way it is is because PA's argued that gender-specific base figures would help them make character clothing even better.
    And yet I'm seeing a lot of boobsacks even in default G2F shape with no morphs to custom-smooth other shapes. I'm running a little tally at that point, evaluating all new G2F clothes by skimpness, additional morphs and breastclinging factors, and it doesn't look like for G2F the majority of vendors upped their game, so all this 'improvement' didn't fix the problem it was supposed to fix.
    Post edited by Kattey on
  • IceEmpressIceEmpress Posts: 629
    edited December 1969

    Really? Just MOST? Not ALL? I thought the whole thing with abandoning Genesis as a concept was because sticking with separate male and female meshes meant that all those nasty clothes correction problems with a unimesh were going to now be a thing of the past. Wasn’t THAT the entire reason for the split?
    That's DAZ's official line in their promos, yes (or at least it's alluded to be the entire reason)

    We learned after more than a year of content development on the original Genesis platform that it became a “lowest common denominator” for some PAs who developed content that did not include gender specific details.
    The result was often clothing that did not look or work well on either the Gen 5 male or female figures due to the differences in the mesh and textures. Artifacts appeared such as stretching in the textures across the breasts on the females or extra/unnecessary geometry across the breasts, hips or glutes of the male.
    By splitting the two bases, DAZ and PAs are able to develop content that is quite simply of significantly higher quality because it takes advantage of and leverages those gender specific details that are inherently realistic in the human figure.

    This was actually close to my original assumption for the gender-split, that it somehow made things easier for PAs.

    and now we should be happy cause we’re sent back to V4 gender spiltting square one?
    Oh, but the split is even worse than that, my friend. For you see, while G2F goes back to the V4 model, it still doesn't work natively in Poser. The Poser-only base was already throwing in the towel for (i.e. boycotting) Daz products when V5 was released. Now it's only going to get that much worse.

    I can buy into the “even more gender-specific detailing” polemic right up until I drop her pants… umm, where’s the detail? Wait, wait, hang on, here’s a plaster cast static model of just the front half of the nether regions… it’s a bit like giving a kid a pretend bag of sweets then wondering why they’re not happy.
    Dude, the DAZ base characters have NEVER come with built-in genitalia. Those have always required you either get the morph expansion set (++/evolution/what have you for the gals) or a detachable man-tool. Too many of DAZ's advertisers shrink at the sight or very hinting of anatomical correctness, don't you know. Like *avert your eyes!!!* the word "genitalia", forcing PAs to use the quasi-codeword "gens". They're in the same demographic who refuse to run their ads on any basic cable network that dares to show uncensored bewbies-- (not even for the mere sake of feeding a baby) but of course they have no problem providing their ads for a network that shows the greusome uncensored deaths in Braveheart such as English soldiers being trapped in a cage and then slowly burned alive as they emit gut-wrenching screams of agony, or that evil diplomat's head exploding like a melon thanks to the handiwork of a morningstar, accompanied with a disheartening "SPLORCH!!" sound.
    (note to mods: that's a knock at DAZ's advertisers, not the DAZ staff)

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 46,120
    edited December 1969

    "Gens" isn't mandatory - the actual models are described as genitalia in the product pages for the Pro bundles that include them, but a lot of people seem to assume there's a rule against the term and use shorthands or euphemisms.

  • IceEmpressIceEmpress Posts: 629
    edited December 1969

    Ah, I did not know that. My point stands nonetheless since I recall another admin (or was it you?) stating that the reason that genital props are only sold in the pro bundles (as opposed to stand-alone) is due to advertisers.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 46,120
    edited December 1969

    I don'tt hink I've said that - as far as I know it's a question of the payment processing companies as much as anything, wanting to avoid being classed and billed as an "adult" site.

  • JabbaJabba Posts: 1,198
    edited December 1969

    But the point of not having "proper" genitals in the context of this thread is that by doing nothing to advance their development in line with the detail the extra polys bring to G2F, the argument for a need to gender-split the base mesh is significantly weakened.

    The improved definition possible with G2F is the result of extra polys, not because it's suddenly female or male. Issues that could suggest the contrary are mostly psychological, not technical.

  • vwranglervwrangler Posts: 3,078
    edited December 1969

    Jabba101 said:
    But the point of not having "proper" genitals in the context of this thread is that by doing nothing to advance their development in line with the detail the extra polys bring to G2F, the argument for a need to gender-split the base mesh is significantly weakened.

    The argument isn't weakened if the figure doesn't have "proper" genitals. If the argument is that the gender split was necessary for PAs to more easily produce gender appropriate clothing, then the genitalia have nothing to do with it. 3D Clothing has never taken the female genitalia into account -- seriously, 90% of the bikini-type stuff out there could NEVER be worn by an adult woman, however depilated, without her genitals actually showing. Accounting for genitals would make those outfits look very different indeed ... and would still have nothing whatsoever to do with the poly count in that area.

    Clothing generally only deals with the male genitals in terms of a bulge in the pants because having no shape at all there doesn't look right. And for most clothing, you wouldn't want genitals attached to the figure, because the gens themselves aren't malleable enough -- unless they get scaled down quite a bit, they poke through. Studio (or Carrara or Poser, for that matter) aren't to the point of dealing that well with soft body physics.

    (Note: I don't actually have a horse in this race. Apart from not being a PA of any sort, I've said, more than once, that I thought the better approach would have been to increase the poly count for both sexes in the appropriate areas of Genesis itself. I'm utterly baffled as to why PAs couldn't just design as they wanted without paying any attention to the fact that Genesis could morph into a different figure. That's what they did before, after all, despite the fact that V3Male and V4Male both exist. However, genitals have absolutely nothing to do with the clothing aspect of this particular issue.)

  • MallenLaneMallenLane Posts: 126
    edited July 2013

    I told myself i wasn't going to post anymore, because I feel like I'm addressing the same things over and over, but...

    I really have no idea where this thing about G2F and G2m using different meshes came from; they don't. I do cut for both genders simultaneously when modeling. The details for the male are already in there.

    Rigging acts on the base shape, and nothing else. No matter what you morph the mesh into, the rigging is still at the bottom of a stack of deforms (Base>Rigging>Morphs), and is operating according to that root shape. That can at times lock you into having to keep certain topology spacing, positioning, and basic volumes and shapes. The bend point happens to that expected base shape, and no matter where you move the joint center, that will still be the bend point as far as the weights are concerned.

    I've seen the idea of swapping or custom weights for each morph mentioned. That has come up before , and it's a bad idea. Rigging is already one of the most time consuming aspects of clothing creation. A move to custom blended weights would increase that workload exponentially.

    Topology flow, in the instance being talked about here, is mostly referring to spacing and detail spacial coherence; e.g. the nipple not being rotated around the curve of a breast, or the abs not pulled up higher than the obliques, a different part of the arm being used to sculpt an elbow, or things pinched too tightly together. All these topology flow situations (i actually call it topology drift) have an effect on clothing, and too much deviation from the base causes clothing to distort, crush, smear, etc. This again, locks you into a certain spacing and use of the topology, dictated entirely by the base shape.

    Then we get into deviation between extreme shapes. The base shape is like a road map, with landmarks, but not every shape is made with, or can be made with, minimal drift. And if every character used the exact volumes and lack of topology drift, well they would all look rather generic. So you deviate. The distance between the Genesis base, and a true female shape is rather wide from a topological spacing point of view; and there is no default set of female landmarks; meaning female characters can deviate quite a bit.

    This can turn clothing creation into a slight guessing game. Is the line of this dress going to end up in the same place as I think? What about on this morph? Oh, the spacing used to create the breast for this character (from scratch on every shape, so topology drift deviation is just how it goes) is different; is crushing, expanding, smearing my clothing shape. Or the seam that was supposed to be under the breast line, is now partially on it.

    Having a default female base gives a good set of landmarks and references for:

    -The bend points of the rigging.
    -The basic volumes being moved by the rigging.
    -The basic topology flow that can be followed for every subsequent female without having to make each a large deviation from the base itself.
    -A consistent set of landmarks for detail placement on clothing, which for the reasons above will end up staying in place more reliably.

    I suspect the next question will be: then how did Genesis get so many items that magically worked? The answer is not magic, but a lot of correctives and a lot of feature and detail compromises. That's the price of its flexibility.

    Post edited by MallenLane on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 28,449
    edited December 1969

    Kattey said:
    Jabba101 said:
    If you flash the flesh in your renders, G2F should be on your radar - but if you mostly use fully-clothed characters, we're still waiting on costume makers raising the bar for the new figure, albeit this should come as no surprise because an improved base for character makers does not miraculously make it any easier for the wardrobe PAs to make their outfits.

    Some PA's have said one actually does. Genesis, according to them, was a huge improvement over Gen 4 to make clothing for. Part of the whole reason why Genesis 2 is the way it is is because PA's argued that gender-specific base figures would help them make character clothing even better.

    And yet I'm seeing a lot of boobsacks even in default G2F shape with no morphs to custom-smooth other shapes. I'm running a little tally at that point, evaluating all new G2F clothes by skimpness, additional morphs and breastclinging factors, and it doesn't look like for G2F the majority of vendors upped their game, so all this 'improvement' didn't fix the problem it was supposed to fix.
    ...+1

    which is another reason I am reluctant to buy into this.

  • HaslorHaslor Posts: 394
    edited July 2013

    I have to say MallenLane for not wanting to post you did point out things very nicely.

    The Topology drift is an issue and starting with a Female and Male basic shape should minimize the issue. As for too much deviation you can see that in a few things where the Vendor has stated that their clothing have the ability to stretch.

    About the fact we only have the Genesis 2 Female:
    It doesn't surprised me that Genesis 2 Female came out first or the Genesis 2 Male would be lagging behind. For evidence to support the logic of releasing the Female first, you only need to look as the number of Male products vs the number of Female; Or more specifically at clothing. Let's face it, Victoria, of any generation, had more items in the store over Michael. Just head over to the store and click on Clothing and Accessories. As of the time I an writing there are 1336 V4 items and only 363 M4. The difference in the number of Genesis compatible figures female to male is only 1, but we are talking about the difference between 14 and 15. move back a generation and it is almost 3 to 1 in Victoria's favor.

    Another thing: V4 was released in December of 2006 and M4 didn't join her until almost two years later in October of 2008. (Dates pulled from the Documentation Wiki.) And wasn't there a Victoria 4 Male morph, so getting an androgynous female wouldn't have been impossible. And didn't Michael 4 have Mina, the Female morph set. And I would have to pull out DS3 to check this, but wasn't Figure mixing one of the features of DS3? (Though I am sure it was not to the extent of DS4 and Genesis.)

    And while I agree more than 95% the human body is gender non-specific. [edited so the point wouldn't get lost.] And let's face it women have more basic wardrobe choices then men. Most Man to have maybe three pairs of shoes (Sneakers, dress shoes, and boots) and most of their wardrobe is also as spartan and utilitarian. Some of women's clothing is as far from utilitarian as one can get and most women dress to please themselves. So art follows life and when your are is attempting to mimic life, this is a good thing.

    About the Choices DAZ 3D Makes without talking to the User base:
    Steve Jobs said something like 'If we had asked the consumers, what they wanted in a smart phone, the iPhone wouldn't exist.' Sometimes companies have to make choices, pick a direction, and step out. Some times they find greatness and other times they are never heard from again. if they are good they make course corrections and stay on the wave. What makes it good or bad is the voice of the consumer. The iPhone is a Success, IBM's OS2 while technically superior is a footnote in the history of computers, and we will not talk about the Tucker or Ford Edsel.

    For DAZ 3D to make the choice on Genesis and Genesis 2, which aren't natively supported in Poser (or any other 3D application), when I am guessing Poser has the Lion's share of the market; was a bold move. I see the DSON Importer for Poser as one of those course corrections.

    So while I enjoy genesis, even with all of it ubiquity, it might be a little gender diversity in the gene pool could be a good things. I agree with Mattymanx we are judging the merits of the book by only looking at the front cover; until we flip it over and see the back (Genesis2 Male) and read the introduction and maybe page 99 and 185, we can't really tell what all of the benefits and pitfalls will be.

    About the idea we will get better clothing:
    It was my understanding, part of the ease of creating clothes for Genesis was some of the tools and tool improvements, which were added to or made in DS4 and expanded on in 4.5 and now 4.6.

    I think SickleyYield said something about even though you can use the generically auto-applied morphs, it is far better to have the specific generated Morphs built in. Hence the reason we have seen Genesis clothing, which state Supported Genesis Shapes: A5, D5, M5, V5, etc... This isn't a new idea, while most V4 clothes will work on Stephanie 4, with a little tugging and stretching, the ones that come with the morphs for Stephanie are better.

    Personally I would like to see more factual period clothing and footwear. Yes, they had platform shoes in the Renaissance, (They were called Chopines and they were made to keep the bottom of a woman's dress out of the street muck. They were like over shoes that the house slippers slipped into) but they were not 5 inch stilettos and how could anyone run through the woodlands in heals?

    The Boobsacks are most likely a trade off on how many morphs/shapes of the V4 Morphs++ or Genesis shapes do you want to support with your tee-shirt and if you support them all what issues does it cause. Then there is Conforming TOO much, hence we have SickleYield's utilities for Genesis and Genesis 2 to give a more natural look and spanning between the breasts. The other issue conforming clothing has is it's lack of natural hang, which dynamic clothing solves to a point, but the dynamic clothing process requires an outside vendor, I don't think it is totally controlled by DAZ 3D or is there away for most clothing creators to create such products.

    About the issue of the inclusion or exclusion of Genitalia:
    I agree Opal42987: the US, and most of the world for that fact, would rather talk about anything other than the dreaded three letter word, which is feared more then some of the four letter words you can't say on TV or Radio. Look at the movie The Hunger Games, It is rated PG13 for intense violent thematic material and disturbing images - all involving teens. if you thought the movie was violent don't read the book, it is much worse, and the Age group the book is for 11-13 year olds. if they had Kat is a state of undress at any point it would have had an R rating. As it is I am sure it it went round and round with the ratings people to make sure it was PG13, so the kids reading the books could see the movie.

    I digressed to bring up the point that 'SEX', and all of its various side subjects, is verboten in most cultures. Given this mentality, I can see DAZ 3D standpoint of trying to tiptoe around the flaming pit of sexual morality, while offering us the ability to use those parts if needed. And vwrangler is right; if it was a permanently attached it would be a nightmare, to deal with and I have to agree the male part is a bit, well... ah... I mean to say... um... ah... It is a bit too inflexible to work around. (Had to find away to say that without it getting TOS'd out.) Thing is once you put clothes on a genital bump would solved the problem nicely. If you are creating the statue of Adonis remember, even he wasn't as... ah... grandiose or um... inflexible.

    To sum up:
    So Good or Bad, Like it or Not so much, Genesis 2 Female is here and just like with Genesis we will have to learn what makes it great or not.

    But think about the History of DAZ 3D Figures and about the fact that Genesis is just two years ( Approx. 7-26-2011) old, so I don't see Artists just throwing Genesis out; especially with the number of thing in the creation stream. And Another thing Victoria 4 still going strong, even after seven years, and there is new content being crated for her every day.

    So if you want ubiquity there is Genesis, if you believe a little gender selection is a good thing there is Genesis 2 Female.
    All about the choices you make and we as a community make. As I was told, most of the things we take for granted, in this 3D posing world, like morphs, ERC and JCM's were all program hacks created by the users, not the software developers. Thus proving Content Creators and Content Consumers are a powerful force.

    Just some thought
    Haslor

    Post edited by Haslor on
  • KickAir 8PKickAir 8P Posts: 1,865
    edited August 2013

    Haslor said:
    . . . Sometimes companies have to make choices, pick a direction, and step out. Some times they find greatness and other times they are never heard from again. if they are good they make course corrections and stay on the wave. What makes it good or bad is the voice of the consumer . . . So while I enjoy genesis, even with all of it ubiquity, it might be a little gender diversity in the gene pool could be a good things. I agree with Mattymanx we are judging the merits of the book by only looking at the front cover; until we flip it over and see the back (Genesis2 Male) and read the introduction and maybe page 99 and 185, we can’t really tell what all of the benefits and pitfalls will be . . .

    I joined up June 8th, 2005 -- I've dropped out for a few months a couple of times, but aside from that I've been using DAZ-Studio to make my art and have been active in this community for eight years. I got V3 that day in a DAZ|Studio beta, and M3 that weekend. I can't tell you how much money I've spent on this site since then because I'm terrified of adding it up. Despite that, I want to keep spending here, because DAZ comes closest to making the art supplies I need and has the potential to do even better.

    I'm not willing to shrug my shoulders and fatalistically wait to see how this falls out (especially since I vividly remember how the pre-Genesis gender-split lines worked out). I want DAZ to not only survive but thrive in a market full of potential customers who are increasingly aware of social justice issues, and who are buying accordingly. Genesis1 was a huge step in the right direction -- by releasing a figure that had male, female, and child options from day one it partially broke the male gaze privilege of female figures getting earlier releases and fuller accessory support. I'd hoped the trend was going to continue to the point where I could confidently promote this site without being undermined by the obvious gender imbalance, but the G2F betrayed that.

    Yes, female characters and their sexualized skimpwear sell better to the current customer base since it's heavy on the T&A fans, bless 'em. But any T&A fans willing to invest the time, effort, and money into 3D art are here already, there are very few left out there to attract. DAZ's untapped markets are largely made up of people who want to make art that they don't currently have the skill or time to make, and who already spend the bulk of their free time on their computers. Gamers are an obvious market segment to pursue, but DAZ has had trouble making inroads with them since they're more likely to photoshop screenshots than invest in incompatible software and content. Who else?

    The fandom communities are huge, and are mostly women who already make and share fanfic and fanart -- a perfect potential customer base. But they're strongly networked with each other and with the activist communities, and are unlikely to buy art supplies from a company that can't (or worse, demonstrably won't) provide up-to-date tools to depict an unbiased range of humanity. Any of them who come to the site for the first time today, what do they see? A splash screen and then a main store page skewed heavily to buxom women in skimpy or skin-tight sexualized outfits, muscly-men depicting male power fantasies, and a couple of horror-movie sets.

    Not only would the vast majority close the browser tab right there, but anybody going deeper would find the forums, where any like-minded current customers are being relentlessly beaten down with variations of the tired old “sex sells” excuse. Yes, sex sells, to the current T&A market. Is that enough? Because blatantly skewing the store towards that market locks DAZ out of a world of lucrative opportunities.

    Post edited by KickAir 8P on
  • IceEmpressIceEmpress Posts: 629
    edited December 1969

    The Topology drift is an issue and starting with a Female and Male basic shape should minimize the issue. As for too much deviation you can see that in a few things where the Vendor has stated that their clothing have the ability to stretch.
    If that's the case, then it means we'll also have to expect separate kid and baby models, since with the two genders the issue is more about curves and depth than it is about body proportions. And I'm guessing that body proportions (e.g. in kids vs adults) is an ever bigger hurdle in cloth rigging than sexual dimorphism is.

  • HaslorHaslor Posts: 394
    edited July 2013


    I joined up June 8th, 2005 -- I've dropped out for a few months a couple of times, but aside from that I've been using DAZ-Studio to make my art and have been active in this community for nine years. I got V3 that day in a DAZ|Studio beta, and M3 that weekend. I can't tell you how much money I've spent on this site since then because I'm terrified of adding it up. Despite that, I want to keep spending here, because DAZ comes closest to making the art supplies I need and has the potential to do even better.

    Yeah I don't look at that figure any more, it is scary.


    I'm not willing to shrug my shoulders and fatalistically wait to see how this falls out (especially since I vividly remember how the pre-Genesis gender-split lines worked out). I want DAZ to not only survive but thrive in a market full of potential customers who are increasingly aware of social justice issues, and who are buying accordingly. Genesis1 was a huge step in the right direction -- by releasing a figure that had male, female, and child options from day one it partially broke the male gaze privilege of female figures getting earlier releases and fuller accessory support. I'd hoped the trend was going to continue to the point where I could confidently promote this site without being undermined by the obvious gender imbalance, but the G2F betrayed that.


    I saw Genesis as a Logical progression. In Generation 1 they started with V1 and M1, in Generation 2 saw the addition of children and teens. Generation 3 saw even more figures and each of them needed to be tweaked and tuned. In Generation 4 you had three Figures, Victoria, Michael and Kid, all other Actors are Derived from these three figures. Generation 5 or Genesis brought all three of them together in to one mesh, so you could go from New born babe to the old haggard harridan, with the same mesh. You could even take a human and work through a series of steps to Werewolf or Mr. Hyde. without having to replace the base Geometry Figure, while making sure you got it in the right spot. I agree this was a great leap forward in many areas, even setting aside the Technical aspects.

    I am not sure Genesis 2 Female breaks this like I said we won't know that until Genesis 2 Male arrives, which I hope is very soon. As Holmes said, ‘It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment.' The point is the die is cast and the cloth wet, only after it is out of the bath will we know if the cloth is ruined or is saved.

    With my comment about they have to make decision: I was trying to state, some Technical choices have to be without consumer input. And some choices are good others are not so good. I see DAZ 3D as more at the edge of the wave in some respects, than Poser.
    I am going to make a comparison here, that I wanted to make and didn't previously and some may dispute. I compare DAZ 3D and Poser to Apple and Microsoft. Apple is more willing to step out of the comfort zone and embrace new technologies and leave behind others. I see DAZ 3D and DAZ Studio in that same light, they are willing to say, "You know this is a good idea, but what can we do to make it better?" DAZ created DSON to give the Poser community access to Genesis and Genesis 2 and all of the Studio Content, which doesn't have Poser counterparts.

    I am aware there are people who decide to boycott companies and products; and others people are like sheep and follow the heard. So Apps like the Boycott app help them quickly get their message out to all the other sheep, as does Facebook. (Something I see as an invasion of my personal space; so for those who care, I am Boycotting Facebook.) There is enough stratification in that regard over everything from bottle water to the clothes we wear. Some people don't like leather other people believe it is the best thing since sliced bread with honey butter. If people are seriously looking at a tool to do 3D posing, then they are not going to let the front page of the website stop them at looking at the tool, or at least I hope people really aren't that shallow.


    Yes, female characters and their sexualized skimpwear sell better to the current customer base since it's heavy on the T&A fans, bless 'em. But any T&A fans willing to invest the time, effort, and money into 3D art are here already, there are very few left out there to attract. DAZ's untapped markets are largely made up of people who want to make art that they don't currently have the skill or time to make, and who already spend the bulk of their free time on their computers. Gamers are an obvious market segment to pursue, but DAZ has had trouble making inroads with them since they're more likely to photoshop screenshots than invest in incompatible software and content. Who else? The fandom communities are huge, and are mostly women who already make and share fanfic and fanart -- a perfect potential customer base. But they're strongly networked with each other and with the activist communities, and are unlikely to buy art supplies from a company that can't (or worse, demonstrably won't) provide up-to-date tools to depict an unbiased range of humanity. Any of them who come to the site for the first time today, what do they see? A splash screen and then a main store page skewed heavily to buxom women in skimpy or skin-tight sexualized outfits, muscly-men depicting male power fantasies, and a couple of horror-movie sets. Not only would the vast majority close the browser tab right there, but anybody going deeper would find the forums, where any like-minded current customers are being relentlessly beaten down with variations of the tired old “sex sells” excuse. Yes, sex sells, to the current T&A market. Is that enough? Because blatantly skewing the store towards that market locks DAZ out of a world of lucrative opportunities.
    Yes, yes, I agree the whole "Sex is what keeps the fashion industry finding new and interesting ways to display the Human Female." But I find it interesting that in the rest of Nature it is normally the Males who are more colorful and strutting their stuff. I also would like to see more natural models and less T&A. Fantasy armor is just that a Fantasy. I got into this as a way to create illustrations for my fantasy world, which is very un the Fantasy Norm, there are no skimpily clad females running around in armor that says, "Look I have an opening right over my heart, please stab me." In the 60's my family owned a Drive-in theater and the Movie promotors were always trying to get my father to run the racier movies, but he stuck to his guns and mainly ran what would now be G, PG and PG13 movies. I think only ran one movie that would be considered an R and I think that was the Original M.A.S.H. We filled the drive-in every Friday and Saturday. I see DAZ 3D as taking some what of the same tack. "We don't need to show body parts." I know of a few people who believe their Puritanical attitude is cutting them out of "lucrative opportunities". It seems like you are saying they need to take an even higher stance and that will gain them a larger audience, while other say they need to lower those standards. I think they are trying for the balance point. I have stated several times, I would like to see Victoria sized to match a more Average Woman. In the US that is a woman is 5' 3.7 (162 centimeters) tall and weighs 152 pounds (69 kilograms). This corresponds to a Body Mass Index of 26.3 kilograms/meters² and wears a size 14. Reby Sky is more "Normal" in that regard. I think Victoria is the product of the Barbie Model mentality, which took hold in the sixties. before that models were more average. Heck my grandmother was a model in New York City, in the 1910's, and she was no waif. Today most Mainstream models range form 5'9" to 5'11", with outer fringe being 5'8" to 6" with the extremely rare exception down to 5'5" and as tall as 6'1". They are Thin - puts weight at 108 to 130lbs in proportional to height. This puts dress size 6-8 with the desired figure around 34B-24-34. While researching this answer I learned a very interesting fact. The Bra industry states the average Bra size has increased from 34B to 34DD in the last twenty years. I have to ask myself, Is that change a Natural increase, because it would mean there was a radical change in human genetics, in less than one generation. But then I remembered it could be due very unnatural change of breast augmentation. (I will leave my opinions about that out of this.) The reason I pointed to the statue of Adonis, was he was the seen as the pinnacle male, the gage to which all other men are judged. While the statue displays him in all his glory, he is rather diminutive compared to ah... well... M5's parts. But if we look at the Pinnacle of the female beauty at the time, Aphrodite, (by looking at the old Greek statues of her) she would be considered over weight by model standards, with a small bust. So what it basically comes down to is: DAZ Studio is a tool, the figures are the clay, and we the artist decide how to sculpt the clay. I don't see Genesis 2 Female as a bad bit of clay to be tossed back in to the bucket; but as another bit of clay with different properties, than say the V4 bit of Clay. If you don't like G2F clay, you can pick up the Genesis clay or even the V4, M4 or K4 clay. Heck there is nothing stopping you from reaching all the way back and picking out the Original Victoria and Michael clay. I've though of building an SSS Skin for Victoria 1, just to see what she would look like with a better skin. So think of Genesis 2 Female as just another bit of Clay, with a bit more or less ability then the other bits of clay. Again as artists, we are left to decide which bit of clay we work and what the bit of clay in our hands will become. Haslor
    Post edited by Haslor on
  • HaslorHaslor Posts: 394
    edited December 1969

    opal42987 said:
    The Topology drift is an issue and starting with a Female and Male basic shape should minimize the issue. As for too much deviation you can see that in a few things where the Vendor has stated that their clothing have the ability to stretch.
    If that's the case, then it means we'll also have to expect separate kid and baby models, since with the two genders the issue is more about curves and depth than it is about body proportions. And I'm guessing that body proportions (e.g. in kids vs adults) is an ever bigger hurdle in cloth rigging than sexual dimorphism is.

    As I have stated before, much to the displeasure of some people here in the forums, children are not Small Adults. So it is very possible there will be a Genesis 2 Child.

    There is a host of changes a human body goes through between the age of 3 and 17 for males and 3 and 13 for females. (Most females reach their full height by the age of 13.) I found it very difficult to take Genesis down to the size of a third grader and not have an issue with some body parts being out of proportion.

    Now to be honest, I have to say that was before Handspan Studios and Thorne released their Genesis Body Morph Resource Kit 2 and I haven't tried again. It allows for controlling some of the problem areas. I am also glad to see they are releasing these kits again for Genesis 2 Female.

    Haslor

  • KickAir 8PKickAir 8P Posts: 1,865
    edited July 2013

    Haslor said:
    . . . Generation 5 or Genesis brought all three of them together in to one mesh, so you could go from New born babe to the old haggard harridan, with the same mesh. You could even take a human and work through a series of steps to Werewolf or Mr. Hyde. without having to replace the base Geometry Figure, make sure you got it in the right spot. I agree this was a great leap forward in many areas.

    I am not sure Genesis 2 Female breaks this like I said we won’t know that until Genesis 2 Male arrives, which I hope is very soon. As Holmes said, ‘It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment.’ The point is the die is cast and the cloth wet, only after it is out of the bath will we know if the cloth is ruined or is saved . . .
    ::twitch!:: You said the s-word, now it's gonna take forever! D:

    Like Jabba101 said earlier, trying to condense a point to its essence can leave out needed info, sorry. So at the risk of going off-topic: sex sells, and I have no objection to selling sex . . . okay, I can hear you guys snickering in the back, you know what I mean! I have no objection to DAZ selling sexually attractive characters, I'd like to see more. And yes, my objection is to DAZ's balance point, but it's not to DAZ showing most but not all of the assets involved: it's to DAZ selling what's attractive to most straight men (and many lesbians) far in excess of what's attractive to most straight women (and many gay guys). What's worse, DAZ is selling to the T&A fans at the expense of the rest of us: because many T&A fans are squicked by the slightest hint of guy stuff or children getting too close to their sexual fantasies, our ability to show a loving couple snuggling in front of a fire or parents tucking their kids into bed has been severely eroded in the latest Genesis2 generation.

    And before anybody pipes up with more exhortations to wait for the G2Male and G2Kid to show up before passing judgement: why? That they're not here now is itself a huge part of the problem! As for the rest of it, why should we wait till it's too late to voice our concerns that we're being dragged back to the bad old days of getting T&A months or years first, then the ability to depict men and kids as a far less-supported afterthought if at all?

    .
    I am aware there are people who decide to Boycott companies and products and others people are like sheep and follow the heard. So Apps like the Boycott app help them quickly get the message out to all the other sheep, as does Facebook. (Something I see as an invasion of my personal space is I am Boycotting Facebook, for those who care.) There is enough stratification in that regard over everything from bottle water to the clothes we wear. Some people don’t like leather other people believe it is the best thing since sliced bread with honey butter. If people are seriously looking at a tool to do 3D posing, then they are not going to let the front page of the website stop them at looking at the tool, or at least I hope people really aren’t that shallow.


    Did you just call anyone who'd be discouraged by nearly relentless pageful after pageful of T&A “shallow”? Like it or not, plenty of potential customers do care about various social issues, and won't buy from companies that negatively impact them. But I'm not trying to drag this down into a deeper-than-thou competition because that's not the point: to be a DAZ customer you don't have to care about 3D tools, seriously or otherwise! To be a DAZ customer* you need to care about making art. Erotic art, profound art, funny art, tragic art, whatever. It doesn't matter what you want to do it with, the tools sold here just make it easier, you don't have to care about them. So yeah, people who care about the harm caused to others by skewed sexualization are likely to be put off by a company apparently selling that.

    * Of course, to be a DAZ customer you also need some free time, access to a computer, and spendable cash.

    Whoops, edited to add: I won't touch Facebook either, and I'm not on Twitter -- I'm on tumblr, LiveJournal, Dreamwidth, g+, and deviantART.

    Post edited by KickAir 8P on
  • zigraphixzigraphix Posts: 2,814
    edited December 1969


    Having a default female base gives a good set of landmarks and references for:

    -The bend points of the rigging.
    -The basic volumes being moved by the rigging.
    -The basic topology flow that can be followed for every subsequent female without having to make each a large deviation from the base itself.
    -A consistent set of landmarks for detail placement on clothing, which for the reasons above will end up staying in place more reliably.

    I get this... except for the remark about volumes being moved by the rigging. That would have been true with falloff zones, etc., but with weight maps, isn't it really surface being moved by the rigging? I'm not trying to quibble over words here, I'm just trying to understand how this works.

    Also, would making all Genesis Original female figures start from Genesis Basic Female have been a viable option to get the same "landmarks"?

    Will the weight maps of G2M be different than G2F? Is that part of the anticipated improvement of separate gender figures? Do you think there will likely be a child figure, again with the same mesh, but possibly with different weight maps?

    I realize that it feels to you like you're answering the same questions over and over, but I glean more understanding every time you post, and I really appreciate your explanations.

  • JabbaJabba Posts: 1,198
    edited December 1969

    I told myself i wasn't going to post anymore, because I feel like I'm addressing the same things over and over, but...

    I really have no idea where this thing about G2F and G2m using different meshes came from; they don't. I do cut for both genders simultaneously when modeling. The details for the male are already in there.

    Rigging acts on the base shape, and nothing else. No matter what you morph the mesh into, the rigging is still at the bottom of a stack of deforms (Base>Rigging>Morphs), and is operating according to that root shape. That can at times lock you into having to keep certain topology spacing, positioning, and basic volumes and shapes. The bend point happens to that expected base shape, and no matter where you move the joint center, that will still be the bend point as far as the weights are concerned.

    I've seen the idea of swapping or custom weights for each morph mentioned. That has come up before , and it's a bad idea. Rigging is already one of the most time consuming aspects of clothing creation. A move to custom blended weights would increase that workload exponentially.

    Topology flow, in the instance being talked about here, is mostly referring to spacing and detail spacial coherence; e.g. the nipple not being rotated around the curve of a breast, or the abs not pulled up higher than the obliques, a different part of the arm being used to sculpt an elbow, or things pinched too tightly together. All these topology flow situations (i actually call it topology drift) have an effect on clothing, and too much deviation from the base causes clothing to distort, crush, smear, etc. This again, locks you into a certain spacing and use of the topology, dictated entirely by the base shape.

    Then we get into deviation between extreme shapes. The base shape is like a road map, with landmarks, but not every shape is made with, or can be made with, minimal drift. And if every character used the exact volumes and lack of topology drift, well they would all look rather generic. So you deviate. The distance between the Genesis base, and a true female shape is rather wide from a topological spacing point of view; and there is no default set of female landmarks; meaning female characters can deviate quite a bit.

    This can turn clothing creation into a slight guessing game. Is the line of this dress going to end up in the same place as I think? What about on this morph? Oh, the spacing used to create the breast for this character (from scratch on every shape, so topology drift deviation is just how it goes) is different; is crushing, expanding, smearing my clothing shape. Or the seam that was supposed to be under the breast line, is now partially on it.

    Having a default female base gives a good set of landmarks and references for:

    -The bend points of the rigging.
    -The basic volumes being moved by the rigging.
    -The basic topology flow that can be followed for every subsequent female without having to make each a large deviation from the base itself.
    -A consistent set of landmarks for detail placement on clothing, which for the reasons above will end up staying in place more reliably.

    I suspect the next question will be: then how did Genesis get so many items that magically worked? The answer is not magic, but a lot of correctives and a lot of feature and detail compromises. That's the price of its flexibility.

    I do appreciate you taking the time to comment, and I'm sure everybody else does too. Perhaps some of your posts were swallowed-up in the forums as they weren't "official" company statements.

    There are some things you've confirmed that I'd only been guessing at before, so i must've missed some of them e.g. as it had been repeated often enough, I thought two separate male/female meshes were on the cards and couldn't understand that decision considering the lack of improvement to other elements. Sadly, when a company fails to communicate with its customers, gossip will fill the void. So thanks again for clarifying this.

    The rest becomes semantics, perception, and interpretation. Improved figure - for the company - for the customer - for the content creator... an improvement for one does not automatically mean it's an improvement for all. So it's up to each individual to decide if it's enough of an improvement to merit its adoption.

    Despite the concentration on the perceived negative aspects of Genesis 2, V6 & Gia are by far the best default shapes I've seen from DAZ, so please don't be thinking we don't like them, they're great pieces of work. We're just customers wanting our hard-earned cash to go a far as we can make it, and wrestling with why we can't have our cake and eat it. The thought of buying two of everything like the pre-Genesis days suddenly makes our wallets wince.

    Hindsight is a great thing, I know, and what's done is done. The company did not exactly manage customer expectation. We were to expect "better & improved" and so looked for something special, something with 'wow factor'. But this also requires content creators to up their game e.g. dresses/flowing outfits using auto-follow but with no added movement controls don't cut it, but equally got nothing to do with the base character they're for. Sorry, but no amount of improvements to a base mesh will give a flowing costume a good look if it's only auto-follow - this is a prime example of how content creators will fail to convince customers that the improvements were worth the gender split (and let's face it, most people render dressed characters, not nudes - the costumes need to match the figure's quality).

    Given the above, my question is more concerning content creators - Since the improved items have clearly not yet hit the store, do we have an E.T.A. of when to expect these improved products that Genesis 2 Female has enabled content creators to make? ...If they don't start hitting the store soon, it should come as no surprise if customers start to think the benefits of Genesis 2 might have been a wee bit exaggerated.

  • vwranglervwrangler Posts: 3,078
    edited December 1969

    I told myself i wasn't going to post anymore, because I feel like I'm addressing the same things over and over, but...

    I really have no idea where this thing about G2F and G2m using different meshes came from; they don't. I do cut for both genders simultaneously when modeling. The details for the male are already in there.

    Rigging acts on the base shape, and nothing else. No matter what you morph the mesh into, the rigging is still at the bottom of a stack of deforms (Base>Rigging>Morphs), and is operating according to that root shape. That can at times lock you into having to keep certain topology spacing, positioning, and basic volumes and shapes. The bend point happens to that expected base shape, and no matter where you move the joint center, that will still be the bend point as far as the weights are concerned.


    I'm glad that you posted again; that was the key point that I was missing, that it was the rigging that was being addressed more than the mesh itself. Thanks for explaining it again, and so clearly.

  • HaslorHaslor Posts: 394
    edited December 1969

    Haslor said:
    . . . Generation 5 or Genesis brought all three of them together in to one mesh, so you could go from New born babe to the old haggard harridan, with the same mesh. You could even take a human and work through a series of steps to Werewolf or Mr. Hyde. without having to replace the base Geometry Figure, make sure you got it in the right spot. I agree this was a great leap forward in many areas.

    I am not sure Genesis 2 Female breaks this like I said we won’t know that until Genesis 2 Male arrives, which I hope is very soon. As Holmes said, ‘It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment.’ The point is the die is cast and the cloth wet, only after it is out of the bath will we know if the cloth is ruined or is saved . . .
    ::twitch!:: You said the s-word, now it's gonna take forever! D:

    Like Jabba101 said earlier, trying to condense a point to its essence can leave out needed info, sorry. So at the risk of going off-topic: sex sells, and I have no objection to selling sex . . . okay, I can hear you guys snickering in the back, you know what I mean! I have no objection to DAZ selling sexually attractive characters, I'd like to see more. And yes, my objection is to DAZ's balance point, but it's not to DAZ showing most but not all of the assets involved: it's to DAZ selling what's attractive to most straight men (and many lesbians) far in excess of what's attractive to most straight women (and many gay guys). What's worse, DAZ is selling to the T&A fans at the expense of the rest of us: because many T&A fans are squicked by the slightest hint of guy stuff or children getting too close to their sexual fantasies, our ability to show a loving couple snuggling in front of a fire or parents tucking their kids into bed has been severely eroded in the latest Genesis2 generation.

    And before anybody pipes up with more exhortations to wait for the G2Male and G2Kid to show up before passing judgement: why? That they're not here now is itself a huge part of the problem! As for the rest of it, why should we wait till it's too late to voice our concerns that we're being dragged back to the bad old days of getting T&A months or years first, then the ability to depict men and kids as a far less-supported afterthought if at all?

    .
    I am aware there are people who decide to Boycott companies and products and others people are like sheep and follow the heard. So Apps like the Boycott app help them quickly get the message out to all the other sheep, as does Facebook. (Something I see as an invasion of my personal space is I am Boycotting Facebook, for those who care.) There is enough stratification in that regard over everything from bottle water to the clothes we wear. Some people don’t like leather other people believe it is the best thing since sliced bread with honey butter. If people are seriously looking at a tool to do 3D posing, then they are not going to let the front page of the website stop them at looking at the tool, or at least I hope people really aren’t that shallow.


    Did you just call anyone who'd be discouraged by nearly relentless pageful after pageful of T&A “shallow”? Like it or not, plenty of potential customers do care about various social issues, and won't buy from companies that negatively impact them. But I'm not trying to drag this down into a deeper-than-thou competition because that's not the point: to be a DAZ customer you don't have to care about 3D tools, seriously or otherwise! To be a DAZ customer* you need to care about making art. Erotic art, profound art, funny art, tragic art, whatever. It doesn't matter what you want to do it with, the tools sold here just make it easier, you don't have to care about them. So yeah, people who care about the harm caused to others by skewed sexualization are likely to be put off by a company apparently selling that.

    * Of course, to be a DAZ customer you also need some free time, access to a computer, and spendable cash.

    Whoops, edited to add: I won't touch Facebook either, and I'm not on Twitter -- I'm on tumblr, LiveJournal, Dreamwidth, g+, and deviantART.

    I apologize for my use of shallow, but I am a tech and as a Tech, I tend to ignore the flash and look at the tool.
    DAZ Studio is a Tool after all just like Photoshop or Poser and I will leave this topic at that point.

    As to the Genesis 2 set of figures and all of the generations of Figures: I see all the figures as moldable clay actors, each having their place on the stage. Genesis 2 is just another clay actor, or series of actors, to be placed on the stage. Each has their technical merits for use. If I had a large crowd scene of people milling about I could use Michael 1 for those people in the far background. I again say we will not know the Technical Merits of the Genesis 2 Family until see have all the information. And this is where I am going to leave this topic.

    Haslor

  • agent unawaresagent unawares Posts: 3,513
    edited December 1969

    Haslor said:
    Yes, yes, I agree the whole "Sex is what keeps the fashion industry finding new and interesting ways to display the Human Female." But I find it interesting that in the rest of Nature it is normally the Males who are more colorful and strutting their stuff.
    Not "normally," by any means. Consider spiders, for example. (Yes, let's be spiders.)

    While researching this answer I learned a very interesting fact. The Bra industry states the average Bra size has increased from 34B to 34DD in the last twenty years. I have to ask myself, Is that change a Natural increase, because it would mean there was a radical change in human genetics, in less than one generation. But then I remembered it could be due very unnatural change of breast augmentation. (I will leave my opinions about that out of this.)


    It's actually because more women are wearing the correct bra size now.
  • HaslorHaslor Posts: 394
    edited December 1969

    Haslor said:
    Yes, yes, I agree the whole "Sex is what keeps the fashion industry finding new and interesting ways to display the Human Female." But I find it interesting that in the rest of Nature it is normally the Males who are more colorful and strutting their stuff.
    Not "normally," by any means. Consider spiders, for example. (Yes, let's be spiders.)

    While researching this answer I learned a very interesting fact. The Bra industry states the average Bra size has increased from 34B to 34DD in the last twenty years. I have to ask myself, Is that change a Natural increase, because it would mean there was a radical change in human genetics, in less than one generation. But then I remembered it could be due very unnatural change of breast augmentation. (I will leave my opinions about that out of this.)


    It's actually because more women are wearing the correct bra size now.

    Female spiders are DEADLY. Don't ask, just take it as fact.

    That is good to know, I would hate to think there were enough breast augmentations happening to sway the figures that much.

    Haslor

  • IceEmpressIceEmpress Posts: 629
    edited December 1969

    Sorry if these have already been brought iup (too impatient to read page 8 yet)
    While researching this answer I learned a very interesting fact. The Bra industry states the average Bra size has increased from 34B to 34DD in the last twenty years. I have to ask myself, Is that change a Natural increase, because it would mean there was a radical change in human genetics, in less than one generation. But then I remembered it could be due very unnatural change of breast augmentation. (I will leave my opinions about that out of this.)
    I'd say it's the result of skyrocketing obesity rates, actually-- even though a 34 to 36 isn't that big of a difference. There's also a concern (so far either disproven or inconclusive from studies) that hormones in beef and milk (given to cows to make them produce more milk) could be affecting female breast size and earlier puberty rates, and contributing to the falling fertility in males, esp. in the US that cannot be explained away merely by rising obesity rates. (Male sperm count is falling worldwide, BTW, and not just in the US or industrialized countries.)

    I have stated several times, I would like to see Victoria sized to match a more Average Woman. In the US that is a woman is 5’ 3.7 (162 centimeters) tall and weighs 152 pounds (69 kilograms). This corresponds to a Body Mass Index of 26.3 kilograms/meters² and wears a size 14. Reby Sky is more “Normal” in that regard. I think Victoria is the product of the Barbie Model mentality, which took hold in the sixties. before that models were more average. Heck my grandmother was a model in New York City, in the 1910’s, and she was no waif. Today most Mainstream models range form 5’9” to 5’11”, with outer fringe being 5’8” to 6” with the extremely rare exception down to 5’5” and as tall as 6’1”. They are Thin - puts weight at 108 to 130lbs in proportional to height. This puts dress size 6-8 with the desired figure around 34B-24-34.

    The male characters are similar, actually, though to a lesser degree. IIRC Michael 3 is 6 feet tall, while Michael 4 is 6'2 or 6'3 *or maybe it's the other way around...). 6'2 is prettymuch the equivalent of 5'8 in females. And like the ladies, they possess that same tall, strapping hero build you so commonly see in comics, fantasy art, and the like, even when the men don't look like they're on steroids. M3 and M4 look close to your average male, but their base forms, like V3 and V4 base, are not what are popular-- the popular forms are the chiseled morphs with a 6-pack and a full jaw.

  • MurgatroydMurgatroyd Posts: 1,112
    edited December 1969

    Haslor said:
    There is a host of changes a human body goes through between the age of 3 and 17 for males and 3 and 13 for females. (Most females reach their full height by the age of 13.) I found it very difficult to take Genesis down to the size of a third grader and not have an issue with some body parts being out of proportion.

    Now to be honest, I have to say that was before Handspan Studios and Thorne released their Genesis Body Morph Resource Kit 2 and I haven't tried again. It allows for controlling some of the problem areas. I am also glad to see they are releasing these kits again for Genesis 2 Female.

    Arm, Torso, and Leg Lengths.
    Head, Hand, and Foot Propagating Scales
    Sternum Depth
    (all of the above in base or Evolution)
    Hip Small (Resource Kit 1)
    Straight Torso (Resource Kit 2)

    These are the keys to most of my recent work with younger characters. Sparing touches of Basic Child are also occasionally useful, but in general, I prefer to avoid it entirely.

    Sorry if these have already been brought iup (too impatient to read page 8 yet)
    While researching this answer I learned a very interesting fact. The Bra industry states the average Bra size has increased from 34B to 34DD in the last twenty years. I have to ask myself, Is that change a Natural increase, because it would mean there was a radical change in human genetics, in less than one generation. But then I remembered it could be due very unnatural change of breast augmentation. (I will leave my opinions about that out of this.)
    I'd say it's the result of skyrocketing obesity rates, actually-- even though a 34 to 36 isn't that big of a difference. There's also a concern (so far either disproven or inconclusive from studies) that hormones in beef and milk (given to cows to make them produce more milk) could be affecting female breast size and earlier puberty rates, and contributing to the falling fertility in males, esp. in the US that cannot be explained away merely by rising obesity rates. (Male sperm count is falling worldwide, BTW, and not just in the US or industrialized countries.)


    The beef and milk are just the tip of the iceberg. There are all sorts of estrogens and estrogen-like substances being dumped into the world around us, from fillers in plastics to drug residues in drinking water. I suspect future generations will have the same opinion of us for this that we have of the Romans' use of lead plumbing.
  • HaslorHaslor Posts: 394
    edited July 2013

    opal42987 said:
    Sorry if these have already been brought iup (too impatient to read page 8 yet)
    While researching this answer I learned a very interesting fact. The Bra industry states the average Bra size has increased from 34B to 34DD in the last twenty years. I have to ask myself, Is that change a Natural increase, because it would mean there was a radical change in human genetics, in less than one generation. But then I remembered it could be due very unnatural change of breast augmentation. (I will leave my opinions about that out of this.)
    I'd say it's the result of skyrocketing obesity rates, actually-- even though a 34 to 36 isn't that big of a difference. There's also a concern (so far either disproven or inconclusive from studies) that hormones in beef and milk (given to cows to make them produce more milk) could be affecting female breast size and earlier puberty rates, and contributing to the falling fertility in males, esp. in the US that cannot be explained away merely by rising obesity rates. (Male sperm count is falling worldwide, BTW, and not just in the US or industrialized countries.)

    I have stated several times, I would like to see Victoria sized to match a more Average Woman. In the US that is a woman is 5’ 3.7 (162 centimeters) tall and weighs 152 pounds (69 kilograms). This corresponds to a Body Mass Index of 26.3 kilograms/meters² and wears a size 14. Reby Sky is more “Normal” in that regard. I think Victoria is the product of the Barbie Model mentality, which took hold in the sixties. before that models were more average. Heck my grandmother was a model in New York City, in the 1910’s, and she was no waif. Today most Mainstream models range form 5’9” to 5’11”, with outer fringe being 5’8” to 6” with the extremely rare exception down to 5’5” and as tall as 6’1”. They are Thin - puts weight at 108 to 130lbs in proportional to height. This puts dress size 6-8 with the desired figure around 34B-24-34.

    The male characters are similar, actually, though to a lesser degree. IIRC Michael 3 is 6 feet tall, while Michael 4 is 6'2 or 6'3 *or maybe it's the other way around...). 6'2 is prettymuch the equivalent of 5'8 in females. And like the ladies, they possess that same tall, strapping hero build you so commonly see in comics, fantasy art, and the like, even when the men don't look like they're on steroids. M3 and M4 look close to your average male, but their base forms, like V3 and V4 base, are not what are popular-- the popular forms are the chiseled morphs with a 6-pack and a full jaw.

    Obesity might be the answer but it would also increase the band size of the Bra, not just the cup size. (for guys the number is the band size), but but the Milk hormones might cause the change from 34B to 34DD. I agree with Agent_Unaware buying the proper size could also affect the numbers.

    Actually according to this site, http://ahundredyearsago.com/2012/02/06/average-height-for-males-and-females-in-1912-and-2012/ the average american Male is 5" 9.9" or 177.55cm. so Michael is a lot closer to the Average than Victoria is to the Average Female.

    On this page you will find a chart for people around the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_height .

    height-male1-1.jpg
    960 x 720 - 47K
    height-female1.jpg
    960 x 720 - 45K
    Post edited by Haslor on
  • agent unawaresagent unawares Posts: 3,513
    edited December 1969

    opal42987 said:
    Sorry if these have already been brought iup (too impatient to read page 8 yet)
    While researching this answer I learned a very interesting fact. The Bra industry states the average Bra size has increased from 34B to 34DD in the last twenty years. I have to ask myself, Is that change a Natural increase, because it would mean there was a radical change in human genetics, in less than one generation. But then I remembered it could be due very unnatural change of breast augmentation. (I will leave my opinions about that out of this.)
    I'd say it's the result of skyrocketing obesity rates, actually-- even though a 34 to 36 isn't that big of a difference. There's also a concern (so far either disproven or inconclusive from studies) that hormones in beef and milk (given to cows to make them produce more milk) could be affecting female breast size and earlier puberty rates, and contributing to the falling fertility in males, esp. in the US that cannot be explained away merely by rising obesity rates. (Male sperm count is falling worldwide, BTW, and not just in the US or industrialized countries.)

    It really is mostly women choosing the right bra size.
  • IceEmpressIceEmpress Posts: 629
    edited July 2013

    I actually wondered if perhaps that had something to do with it, as I was aware that, at least 10 years ago, itr was statistically known that most women chose bra sizes too small.

    (and let’s face it, most people render dressed characters, not nudes - the costumes need to match the figure’s quality).
    Something just dawned on me-- perhaps part of the reason that so many clothing models for Genesis 2 have been meh is that she hasn't been out long enough for PAs to make good clothing for (unless they got early access to her, but I doubt it). Therefore, most of what we've seen so far doesn't have the effort and time devoted to it that the good stuff has, esp. since the Sickle Breast Fixer has only now just been released for Genesis 2, and the Sickle Rigging System hasn't been added for Genesis 2 yet.

    Post edited by IceEmpress on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 28,449
    edited July 2013

    Haslor said:
    . . . Sometimes companies have to make choices, pick a direction, and step out. Some times they find greatness and other times they are never heard from again. if they are good they make course corrections and stay on the wave. What makes it good or bad is the voice of the consumer . . . So while I enjoy genesis, even with all of it ubiquity, it might be a little gender diversity in the gene pool could be a good things. I agree with Mattymanx we are judging the merits of the book by only looking at the front cover; until we flip it over and see the back (Genesis2 Male) and read the introduction and maybe page 99 and 185, we can’t really tell what all of the benefits and pitfalls will be . . .

    I joined up June 8th, 2005 -- I've dropped out for a few months a couple of times, but aside from that I've been using DAZ-Studio to make my art and have been active in this community for nine years. I got V3 that day in a DAZ|Studio beta, and M3 that weekend. I can't tell you how much money I've spent on this site since then because I'm terrified of adding it up. Despite that, I want to keep spending here, because DAZ comes closest to making the art supplies I need and has the potential to do even better.

    I'm not willing to shrug my shoulders and fatalistically wait to see how this falls out (especially since I vividly remember how the pre-Genesis gender-split lines worked out). I want DAZ to not only survive but thrive in a market full of potential customers who are increasingly aware of social justice issues, and who are buying accordingly. Genesis1 was a huge step in the right direction -- by releasing a figure that had male, female, and child options from day one it partially broke the male gaze privilege of female figures getting earlier releases and fuller accessory support. I'd hoped the trend was going to continue to the point where I could confidently promote this site without being undermined by the obvious gender imbalance, but the G2F betrayed that.

    Yes, female characters and their sexualized skimpwear sell better to the current customer base since it's heavy on the T&A fans, bless 'em. But any T&A fans willing to invest the time, effort, and money into 3D art are here already, there are very few left out there to attract. DAZ's untapped markets are largely made up of people who want to make art that they don't currently have the skill or time to make, and who already spend the bulk of their free time on their computers. Gamers are an obvious market segment to pursue, but DAZ has had trouble making inroads with them since they're more likely to photoshop screenshots than invest in incompatible software and content. Who else?

    The fandom communities are huge, and are mostly women who already make and share fanfic and fanart -- a perfect potential customer base. But they're strongly networked with each other and with the activist communities, and are unlikely to buy art supplies from a company that can't (or worse, demonstrably won't) provide up-to-date tools to depict an unbiased range of humanity. Any of them who come to the site for the first time today, what do they see? A splash screen and then a main store page skewed heavily to buxom women in skimpy or skin-tight sexualized outfits, muscly-men depicting male power fantasies, and a couple of horror-movie sets.

    Not only would the vast majority close the browser tab right there, but anybody going deeper would find the forums, where any like-minded current customers are being relentlessly beaten down with variations of the tired old “sex sells” excuse. Yes, sex sells, to the current T&A market. Is that enough? Because blatantly skewing the store towards that market locks DAZ out of a world of lucrative opportunities.

    ...thank you.

    I'm in this from two angles, as a storyteller and a lover of fan art. I've already pretty much said my peace on more "everyday" (for lack of another term) clothing. I'm not into erotic fantasy, or titillating "club" clothing, I want something I can dress my Leela, Tracey, Mum Grande, Lady Emma characters in that they would be comfortable strolling the streets of 2060 London in (while not showing off their navels and cleavage - wait, Leela and Tracey have no cleavage, my bad).

    On the Fan Art side, I totally love the Cyberpunk genre, but have yet to see good "ware" (as we call it) for Genesis. Items like Data jacks, Chip slots, Cyber limbs (that work for both male and female characters), eyes, wires, weapon implants, and such. Yeah, I know one can use the Bot stuff in a pinch, but it really isn't quite the same. We have a plethora of Steam Punk clothing and props, but the "Cyber counterpart" is quite lacking.

    And getting back to the "skankwear" topic, I'm sorry, but cyber or futuristic assassins do not run around in brightly coloured overly revealing clothing, they wear stuff that supports their stealth and hiding abilities as well as protects them should they be discovered. Street Sams (a type of character from the Shadowrun world), wear armoured clothing that protects the "soft zones" not exposes them. Gut shots are the worst and usually often fatal so why would someone be running around the backstreets with their belly fully exposed (which is a fairly easy target to hit, especially with enhanced targeting systems)?

    ...and that goes for the police/security teams as well.

    Why? Because it's "sexy" and will sell.


    ...sorry, wrong answer.

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • KickAir 8PKickAir 8P Posts: 1,865
    edited December 1969

    Today the Girl6 for G2F is out, before we see a single Genesis2 male figure from DAZ. And it also includes "to give you the versatility you have come to expect from Genesis" in the promo blurb, even though, unlike Genesis, the G2F base was deliberately designed to exclude half of the human race and thereby gives no more than half the versatility of Genesis, if that.

    Good news is that two of the four new hairs today (why only two?) are also for Genesis and some of the Mil4s: Loyce Hair and Filippa Hair.

    Girl6VersatilityScreenshot01.jpg
    500 x 400 - 39K
  • JabbaJabba Posts: 1,198
    edited December 1969

    ...Because she is based on the Genesis 2 Female base, she can share most clothing, hair and morphs with Victoria 6 and other Genesis 2 Female figures to give you the versatility you have come to expect from Genesis...

    Well, when taken in context of the complete sentence, the ability to mix-and-match G2F shapes together is clearly the versatility to which it refers.

    Will we ever be able to mix-and-match male shapes too? We don't know because G2M is still nothing more than a rumour in the backrooms of DAZ HQ, but I'm guessing not or there wouldn't be a gender split. Chances are, we'd be relying on a PA to come up with a bridging function between the two.

    Also, even after G2M/M6/F6/H6/D6 etc etc get released, we'll presumably still be using Genesis 1 for most of our monster shapes... or will there be a G2Universal released after G2M that can officially bridge G2F/M and allow access to monster UV's? I would love to know what DAZ is planning.

Sign In or Register to comment.