Does dforce suck?

1246

Comments

  • PraxisPraxis Posts: 211
    edited January 2019

     

    LOL!  

    What's up with the shadowssurprise

     

    LOL!  

    What's up with the shadowssurprise

    looks like the lighting changed between renders as it's obviously joined sequences as one does

    I don't know - I can't find any changes in the Render Settings at Frame # 31, and I've no idea how to deliberately change the shadow intensity without changing the overall lighting intensity.  Any ideas would be welcome...

    Frame # 31 is the moment of collision with the "foot of the G2M figure", but I can't see how that could affect the IRay lighting.

    Its not joined sequences - its a single 80-Frame sequence, and the motion of the ball is entirely due to dForce simulation:

     

    Anyhow, nicely done:)

     

    Thank you - glad you liked it!

    To simplify the dForce simulation,  the collision with the "foot of the G2M figure" is actually a collision with a RGcincy Cube, i.e. a Cube that provides an easily-controlled collider during the dForce simulation, but is set to Invisible for  the Render of the Animation (see attached 1.jpg).  Likewise for the collision with the "wall" (see attached 2.jpg).  After collision, the first Cube needed to be moved out of the way so it didn't interfere with the returning ball.  In the collision with the G2M figure (see attached 3.jpg), the effect on the ball is per the dForce simulation.  All the other motions of the figure, and the position of the wall, were done later to suit the path of the ball.

     

    1.jpg
    641 x 480 - 45K
    2.jpg
    641 x 480 - 48K
    3.jpg
    641 x 480 - 48K
    Post edited by Praxis on
  • PraxisPraxis Posts: 211

    Cars are fun:)

     

     

    I really like this one; its clever and the lighting and reflections look fantastic - what HDRI did you use?

     

  • PraxisPraxis Posts: 211
    edited February 2019

    (removed duplicate post)

    Post edited by Praxis on
  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 6,539
    Praxis said:
     

    I really like this one; its clever and the lighting and reflections look fantastic - what HDRI did you use?

     

    Tks! Sorry don't remember the name of it, but go to HDRI Haven and look at the oudoor stuff, shouldn't be too hard to find;)

  • PraxisPraxis Posts: 211
    edited February 2019

    Tks! Sorry don't remember the name of it, but go to HDRI Haven and look at the oudoor stuff, shouldn't be too hard to find;)

    Looks like Autumn Crossing

    Thanks for that!yes

    Post edited by Praxis on
  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 6,539
    Praxis said:

    Tks! Sorry don't remember the name of it, but go to HDRI Haven and look at the oudoor stuff, shouldn't be too hard to find;)

    Looks like Autumn Crossing

    Thanks for that!yes

    Yup, no prob:)

  • hansolocambohansolocambo Posts: 262
    edited June 2021

    dForce isn't the culprit of everything. Exporting a cloth that doesn't behave as it should into Marvelous Designer, and simulating it there, often reveals that when dForce fails, it's not because of its code. It's because of the cloth itself. Made by random people willing to sell even when they obviously don't know much about polycount, a proper wireframe, or the necessity to weld weld vertices. 

    Often, fixing/optimizing the wireframe with a 3rd party app, then unwraping it again if necessary (RizomUV), enable dForce to suddenly simulate perfectly.

    dForce isn't Marvelous Designer that's for sure. But the main problem are objects sold, here and there, that are far from always made by profesional 3D modelers who know the basic rules of low poly modeling for soft body simulation engines. 

    Post edited by hansolocambo on
  • maikdeckermaikdecker Posts: 2,079

    hansolocambo said:

    dForce isn't the culprit of everything. Exporting a cloth that doesn't behave as it should into Marvelous Designer, and simulating it there, often reveals that when dForce fails, it's not because of its code. It's because of the cloth itself. Made by random people willing to sell even when they obviously don't know much about polycount, a proper wireframe, or the necessity to weld weld vertices. 

    Often, fixing/optimizing the wireframe with a 3rd party app, then unwraping it again if necessary (RizomUV), enable dForce to suddenly simulate perfectly.

    dForce isn't Marvelous Designer that's for sure. But the main problem are objects sold, here and there, that are far from always made by profesional 3D modelers who know the basic rules of low poly modeling for soft body simulation engines. 

    And especially with clothes PAs sometimes a too rigid weightmap with the model, which keeps it from simulating realistically. So adding a weightmap modifier and editing a bit usually helps.

  • It's not really that bad, but it's not really that good, either. Interestingly, I think its shortcomings are not necessarily it's fault, per se, but rather the lack of a competent modeling environment surrounding dForce, where problems can be easily fixed.

    I think Blender is much better For cloth sim, and has first rate modeling tools.

    I also think that anyone who is honest with themselves would have to also admit that Marvelous Designer is light years ahead of either of them. It's just so darned tolerant :). And it runs on the GPU.

  • KrzysztofaKrzysztofa Posts: 226
    edited June 2021

    TheMysteryIsThePoint said:

    It's not really that bad, but it's not really that good, either. Interestingly, I think its shortcomings are not necessarily it's fault, per se, but rather the lack of a competent modeling environment surrounding dForce, where problems can be easily fixed.

    I think Blender is much better For cloth sim, and has first rate modeling tools.

    I also think that anyone who is honest with themselves would have to also admit that Marvelous Designer is light years ahead of either of them. It's just so darned tolerant :). And it runs on the GPU.

    I thought dForce used the GPU? When I run dForce sims, I see the CUDA usage spike on my GPU.

    EDIT: well now that I'm doing a simulation, I don't see CUDA use, I must have been mistaken.

    Post edited by Krzysztofa on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 37,841

    ...wish I could still l get a copy of MD9 (which had a personal perpetual licence and worked on W7/8.1).  Not into subscription software and the latest version (10) no doesn't work with CPUs older than 6th gen Intel (Skylake).or Ryzen 5 (I have a 6 core Westmere Xeon which would work for version 9). When it was out I didn't have the funds, now that I do only the subscription version is available. I only have a very, very old version (MD2).

  • Krzysztofa said:

    TheMysteryIsThePoint said:

    It's not really that bad, but it's not really that good, either. Interestingly, I think its shortcomings are not necessarily it's fault, per se, but rather the lack of a competent modeling environment surrounding dForce, where problems can be easily fixed.

    I think Blender is much better For cloth sim, and has first rate modeling tools.

    I also think that anyone who is honest with themselves would have to also admit that Marvelous Designer is light years ahead of either of them. It's just so darned tolerant :). And it runs on the GPU.

    I thought dForce used the GPU? When I run dForce sims, I see the CUDA usage spike on my GPU.

    EDIT: well now that I'm doing a simulation, I don't see CUDA use, I must have been mistaken.

    dForce uses OpenCL, usually from the GPU but it can - at least with Intel CPUs - come from the CPU. OpenCL, like OpenGL but unlike CUDA, is an open standard with wide support.

  • SickleYieldSickleYield Posts: 7,572

    and here I was expecting a thread about how to make it suck like a vacuum devil as well as blow

    You can! Setting wind nodes to negative strength does indeed create a suction effect. I used this on some of my dForce magic set's setups.
  • KrzysztofaKrzysztofa Posts: 226

    @Richard Haseltine ah okay, that makes sense of what I saw in the task manager

    @SickleYield thanks for the tip! Btw I love your magic FX sets

  • SickleYieldSickleYield Posts: 7,572

    @Krzysztofa Oh thank you, I'm so glad you like them :)

  • Krzysztofa said:

    TheMysteryIsThePoint said:

    It's not really that bad, but it's not really that good, either. Interestingly, I think its shortcomings are not necessarily it's fault, per se, but rather the lack of a competent modeling environment surrounding dForce, where problems can be easily fixed.

    I think Blender is much better For cloth sim, and has first rate modeling tools.

    I also think that anyone who is honest with themselves would have to also admit that Marvelous Designer is light years ahead of either of them. It's just so darned tolerant :). And it runs on the GPU.

    I thought dForce used the GPU? When I run dForce sims, I see the CUDA usage spike on my GPU.

    EDIT: well now that I'm doing a simulation, I don't see CUDA use, I must have been mistaken.

    Sorry for wording that poorly; I meant that Blender does not use the GPU. dForce does, via OpenCL.

  • Making avatars for using outside DAZ..... and yes, dforce looking poor and sucks crying

  • JamesJABJamesJAB Posts: 1,759

    kyoto kid said:

    ...wish I could still l get a copy of MD9 (which had a personal perpetual licence and worked on W7/8.1).  Not into subscription software and the latest version (10) no doesn't work with CPUs older than 6th gen Intel (Skylake).or Ryzen 5 (I have a 6 core Westmere Xeon which would work for version 9). When it was out I didn't have the funds, now that I do only the subscription version is available. I only have a very, very old version (MD2).

    I know it doesn't solve the issue of no perpetual licesnce, but....
    Went digging and found this page. https://marvelousdesigner.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360036950292-System-Requirements

    Here are the actual minimum requirements for MD10.  Yes your machine should run version 10 just fine. (minimum CPU is any Core i5 @ 2.4GHz)  And what do you know... it will still run on Win7.

    "Minimum
    WINDOWS

    OS: Windows 7
    CPU: Intel Processor, Corei5 2.4 GHz
    RAM: 8GB
    4GB can run Marvelous Designer, but errors are highly likely when processing heavier files
    GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560
    Hard Drive: 10+ GB disk space available for full content installation
    Pointing Device: Three-button mouse"

  • JamesJABJamesJAB Posts: 1,759
    edited June 2021

    Double post... oops....

    Since I'm here anyways.  Not sure what kind of hoops you need to jump through, but there seems to be a student license that is $15 per month for 3 years.

    Post edited by JamesJAB on
  • fred9803fred9803 Posts: 1,412

    To put some sort of figure on the explosion issue, I get about 90%+ success for simulations (not exploding). That's pretty good as far as I'm concerned.

    Question - if I turn off self-collide would that help with the cloth intersecting problem that causes most of the explosions? I only render stills.

  • Faeryl WomynFaeryl Womyn Posts: 2,458

    JamesJAB said:

    kyoto kid said:

     

    "Minimum
    WINDOWS

    OS: Windows 7
    CPU: Intel Processor, Corei5 2.4 GHz
    RAM: 8GB
    4GB can run Marvelous Designer, but errors are highly likely when processing heavier files
    GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560
    Hard Drive: 10+ GB disk space available for full content installation
    Pointing Device: Three-button mouse"

    I have an i5 now, how do I find out how many GHz it has. ????? 

  • GeronimoGeronimo Posts: 1,672
    fred9803 said:

    To put some sort of figure on the explosion issue, I get about 90%+ success for simulations (not exploding). That's pretty good as far as I'm concerned.

    Question - if I turn off self-collide would that help with the cloth intersecting problem that causes most of the explosions? I only render stills.

    I turn self collide off all the time if I am getting an explosion. It sometimes helps a lot. I also use an animated timeline and dial in my character morph at the end for shapes that are not supported by the outfit.
  • MistaraMistara Posts: 38,675

    just had my first dforce hair experience.  hate it.

  • MasterstrokeMasterstroke Posts: 1,285

    SBH is a PITA.
    You can't render it in the preview,
    It is slow
    and for some reason it never looks good in the final render.

  • chevybabe25chevybabe25 Posts: 842

    Masterstroke said:

    SBH is a PITA.
    You can't render it in the preview,
    It is slow
    and for some reason it never looks good in the final render.

    You can render it in the preview. You just need to change the viewport line tesselation and change the preview pr hairs to ON to do so; OR use the Preview ON that some of the SBH hair PAS are providing.  It is done this way to keep your viewport responsive while you work.

  • richardandtracyrichardandtracy Posts: 2,757

    I have never got sbh dForce to produce nice looking hair. The hair is too coarse to look right. I am relieved that the only sbh hairs I have are freebies from DAZ. I'd have returned them if I'd paid money for them.

    dForce fabric hair/cloth is another thing entirely. On my machine it feels slow and unstable, but the results can be good. I can remember that the concept was in the forum in 2006/7 (maybe) and was impressed to see it working when I returned to DS in 2019. To get it to work a single purpose Finite Element Analysis module has to be created. I have tried to write my own finite element analysis program, and it's.. not easy to implement. I got one working after a fashion, but it was limited & not great, with array handling and optimisation being serious difficulties. The fact dForce works at all indicates an amazing amount has been achieved. As for the speed: I do try to do finite element analysis as part of my job and occasionally attempt large displacement dynamic analyses like those seen in the cloth dForce. The full blown engineering simulations, in comparison, are orders of magnitude slower than dForce cloth in DS, so I am not going to complain.

    Regards,

    Richard.

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 32,774

    ... and I cannot export it to iClone or Unreal Engine angry

  • KrzysztofaKrzysztofa Posts: 226

    I'm going to break the chorus of anti-SBH and say I love SBH and think it renders beautifully. If you don't like the shaders included, MMX and ChevyBabe both have SBH shader sets available (and as a bonus, both PAs frequent these forums and are very helpful/kind). Certain SBHs like the HM stuff can be a bit cartoony/unreal, but with MMX/ChevyBabe stuff applied to it, one can get nice photoreal results.

    Check out ChevyBabe's High Voltage Hair. It's heavy duty, but produces stunning results. Fair warning though, I don't even bother using this on my laptop, as it alone overwhelms my laptop's VRAM; I only use it on my big render machine, and even then its easy to tip into CPU rendering.

  • PixelSploitingPixelSploiting Posts: 307
    edited June 2021

     SBH is more hassle than it's worth. Good for very detailed portraits, takes too much time and resources for anything else. Polygonal hairstyles with good texturing can give same levels of satisfactionary results.

    It does have it's uses. It's great fur making fur.

    My gripe is not with SBH, but with the store readmes. If something is SBH it should always be clearly mentioned in the product description. It's not always the case, though. Often the hair is only mentioned as dForce with no explanation if it's polygonal with dForce physics or SBH.

    One time I ended purchasing a short SBH hairstyle because I had a few polygonal dForce styles and it was only described as dForce. It was on a sale, I had a few uses for it, but it should be always rigorously observed to label SBH as SBH and that's not given with every PA.

    Post edited by PixelSploiting on
  • GeronimoGeronimo Posts: 1,672
    edited June 2021

    My gripe is not with SBH, but with the store readmes. If something is SBH it should always be clearly mentioned in the product description. It's not always the case, though. Often the hair is only mentioned as dForce with no explanation if it's polygonal with dForce physics or SBH.

    One time I ended purchasing a short SBH hairstyle because I had a few polygonal dForce styles and it was only described as dForce. It was on a sale, I had a few uses for it, but it should be always rigorously observed to label SBH as SBH and that's not given with every PA.

    Agreed
    Post edited by Geronimo on
Sign In or Register to comment.