[Released] Thickener plugin [commercial]

16791112

Comments

  • AlbertoAlberto Posts: 1,436

    barbult said:

    I never see a progress dialog anymore, even though I have not selected "Silence Progress dialog". It look about two minutes to update the dynamic thickened item, which was 3.5 million quads. During the processing, Daz Studio was "Not Responding". Should I have seen a progress dialog?

    Yes, you should. What object was that? 

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223
    edited August 2021

    smaker1 said:

    Thanks to barbult for his complete tests (you can be hired by Daz :-) )  !

    And , of course, thanks to Alvin for this amazing plug-in !!

    her wink

    Post edited by barbult on
  • takezo_3001takezo_3001 Posts: 1,962

    Alberto said:

    takezo_3001 said:

    I have another question, can you make the generated mesh into dynamic clothing, and if you can, what setting will I have to use within the thickener program?

    Could you elaborate more on this? I'm afraid I don't understand the question.

    Can I use the thickened static mesh that was generated as a DForce object?

    And if so, how can I use the thickener program/mesh's parameter settings to set up the generated mesh for DForce?

  • smaker1smaker1 Posts: 281

    barbult said:

    smaker1 said:

    Thanks to barbult for his complete tests (you can be hired by Daz :-) )  !

    And , of course, thanks to Alvin for this amazing plug-in !!

    her wink

    ooops ! Excuse me  blush!

  • ChumlyChumly Posts: 793
    edited August 2021

    barbult said:

    smaker1 said:

    Thanks to barbult for his complete tests (you can be hired by Daz :-) )  !

    And , of course, thanks to Alvin for this amazing plug-in !!

    her wink

    Ooops... I was guilty too! 

    Regardless... I bought Thickener last night due to Barbult's endorsement + the PA's quick communication and desire to provide the best product possible.  The rest takes care of itself!

    Lastly...
    Barbult... you should really consider doing a youtube "how to" of some of the products you use... like this one and Ultra Scenerey...  I swear I'd subscribe!
    Have you tried Spring Dynamics?  Love to hear your thoughts 

    Post edited by Chumly on
  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    Chumly said:

    barbult said:

    smaker1 said:

    Thanks to barbult for his complete tests (you can be hired by Daz :-) )  !

    And , of course, thanks to Alvin for this amazing plug-in !!

    her wink

    Ooops... I was guilty too! 

    Regardless... I bought Thickener last night due to Barbult's endorsement + the PA's quick communication and desire to provide the best product possible.  The rest takes care of itself!

    Lastly...
    Barbult... you should really consider doing a youtube "how to" of some of the products you use... like this one and Ultra Scenerey...  I swear I'd subscribe!
    Have you tried Spring Dynamics?  Love to hear your thoughts 

    I have a whole Daz forum thread on my experiments with UltraScenery. I'm not inclined to mess with videos.

    I have Spring Dynamics, but I find Daz animation painful to deal with, so I don't do much animation. I think I only really used it once. I should try again. People have had trouble figuring out how to achieve some of the demonstrated effects, but as far as I know, the PA has never responded to questions about it. Don't expect the kind of exceptional PA support you get here in the Thickener thread! If you do a lot of animation and can pick it up cheap, it might be worth trying. I wonder how Spring Dynamics would interact with thickening....something to play with, perhaps.

  • AlbertoAlberto Posts: 1,436

    takezo_3001 said:

    Alberto said:

    takezo_3001 said:

    I have another question, can you make the generated mesh into dynamic clothing, and if you can, what setting will I have to use within the thickener program?

    Could you elaborate more on this? I'm afraid I don't understand the question.

    Can I use the thickened static mesh that was generated as a DForce object?

    And if so, how can I use the thickener program/mesh's parameter settings to set up the generated mesh for DForce?

    I don't think so. When I, accidentally apply dForce to an thickened object, it exploded. I suppose it's because the thickened object are closed meshes.

  • AlbertoAlberto Posts: 1,436

    barbult said:

    The issue with applying a materials preset to object 1, causing the the dynamic thickened object of object 2 to be rebuilt, has not changed in version 1.0.1.0. The rebuilt dynamic thickened object no longer loses its high resolution, so that is an improvement, but waiting for complex thickened objects to be rebuilt is a pain. I'll repose the question. I'm not sure it was answered before. (Or maybe I just forgot the answer.)

    Question: Why does applying a materials preset or shader preset to one object in the scene, cause the Dynamic thickened object of a different scene item to be rebuilt?

    I managed to avoid this reconstruction. 

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    Alberto said:

    barbult said:

    The issue with applying a materials preset to object 1, causing the the dynamic thickened object of object 2 to be rebuilt, has not changed in version 1.0.1.0. The rebuilt dynamic thickened object no longer loses its high resolution, so that is an improvement, but waiting for complex thickened objects to be rebuilt is a pain. I'll repose the question. I'm not sure it was answered before. (Or maybe I just forgot the answer.)

    Question: Why does applying a materials preset or shader preset to one object in the scene, cause the Dynamic thickened object of a different scene item to be rebuilt?

    I managed to avoid this reconstruction. 

    yessmiley 

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    Here is my silly Spring Dynamics Thickening experiment. Excuse the gray texture nudity. I don't know how to fit clothing to something like this. laugh

    Dropbox link I hope it works.

  • marblemarble Posts: 7,498

    barbult said:

    Here is my silly Spring Dynamics Thickening experiment. Excuse the gray texture nudity. I don't know how to fit clothing to something like this. laugh

    Dropbox link I hope it works.

     

    Is there anything that you can't do with this software @barbult ?  I seem to end up in forum threads where you have figured out the products that I have had most problems with. Ultrascenery was another ... and now Spring Dynamics - although I had a little more success experimenting with that. I think Mesh Grabber was another one, at least that was one that I bought and abandoned (dForce Companion yet another). Unusually I found Blender easier to use, even with exporting OBJ files, than trying to manipulate Mesh Grabber. 

    So I fully accept that the problems I have are my own and I do not meant to imply that the creators are lacking in skills. I just need a detailed how-to and your experiments do go a long way tp proving that, so thank you again.

  • RGcincyRGcincy Posts: 2,834
    edited August 2021

    takezo_3001 said:

    Can I use the thickened static mesh that was generated as a DForce object?

    And if so, how can I use the thickener program/mesh's parameter settings to set up the generated mesh for DForce?

    Yes, you can dForce a thickened object. How well it will work depends upon its construction and the parameters you choose to use.

    As an experiment, I created a primitive plane and angled it over another plane which serves as the collision object. I made a static thickened copy of the plane and offset it from the original plane. I did the same for a dynamic thickened copy.

    Add a dForce modifier to all three and run an animated simulation. The static thickened plane has slightly different behavior than the original plane due to the fact that it has an edge and second surface and ends up with a different drape. The dynamic copy mimics the original as the mesh is dynamically updated.

    Although you add a dForce modifier to all three, you cannot independently set the parameters on the static thickened copy as the surface pane does not show the dForce parameters. You can modify the dForce parameters of the original to change it and the dynamic thickened object draping but the static version remains locked to the default dForce parameters. Save and reopen the file, add the dForce modifier to the static object again, and the parameters will now appear and you can vary its dForce properties.

    Images L to R: Static - Original - Dynamic

    Frame 0: 

    Frame 12: 

    Frame 18:

    Frame 30: Static (left) shows slight differences. Dynamic (right) is a clone of the original (center) but with an edge and second surface. (Excuse the color change from previous set, redid and got the colors on the dynamic version reversed.)

    Frame 30 after changing original's density to 25: Note static copy did not change much (there's always some differences after every simulation).

    Frame 30 after saving/reopening file and setting density of original and static object to 25:  

    dForce thickener - frame 0.jpg
    614 x 487 - 17K
    dForce thickener - frame 12.jpg
    505 x 383 - 20K
    dForce thickener - frame 18.jpg
    479 x 361 - 19K
    dForce thickener - frame 30.jpg
    761 x 184 - 30K
    dForce thickener - frame 30 - density 25.jpg
    760 x 199 - 29K
    dForce thickener - frame 30 - density 25 - after save.jpg
    765 x 185 - 26K
    Post edited by RGcincy on
  • DaventakiDaventaki Posts: 1,624
    edited August 2021

     @RGcincy  Im only seeing one image not sure what happened to the others.

    I will say im having a interesting time playing with this.  And have learned a few things in the process.  Now if it was possible to select polygons or material sections and only thicken those areas it would be awesomest.  Since awesome is already taken for the plugin now.

     

    Post edited by Daventaki on
  • takezo_3001takezo_3001 Posts: 1,962
    edited August 2021

    Alberto said:

    takezo_3001 said:

    Alberto said:

    takezo_3001 said:

    I have another question, can you make the generated mesh into dynamic clothing, and if you can, what setting will I have to use within the thickener program?

    Could you elaborate more on this? I'm afraid I don't understand the question.

    Can I use the thickened static mesh that was generated as a DForce object?

    And if so, how can I use the thickener program/mesh's parameter settings to set up the generated mesh for DForce?

    I don't think so. When I, accidentally apply dForce to an thickened object, it exploded. I suppose it's because the thickened object are closed meshes.

    Thanks for the confirmation, yeah I had a couple of explosions as well!

     

    RGcincy said:

    takezo_3001 said:

    Can I use the thickened static mesh that was generated as a DForce object?

    And if so, how can I use the thickener program/mesh's parameter settings to set up the generated mesh for DForce?

    Yes, you can dForce a thickened object. How well it will work depends upon its construction and the parameters you choose to use.

    As an experiment, I created a primitive plane and angled it over another plane which serves as the collision object. I made a static thickened copy of the plane and offset it from the original plane. I did the same for a dynamic thickened copy.

    Add a dForce modifier to all three and run an animated simulation. The static thickened plane has slightly different behavior than the original plane due to the fact that it has an edge and second surface and ends up with a different drape. The dynamic copy mimics the original as the mesh is dynamically updated.

    Although you add a dForce modifier to all three, you cannot independently set the parameters on the static thickened copy as the surface pane does not show the dForce parameters. You can modify the dForce parameters of the original to change it and the dynamic thickened object draping but the static version remains locked to the default dForce parameters. Save and reopen the file, add the dForce modifier to the static object again, and the parameters will now appear and you can vary its dForce properties.

     

    Thanks for the info, I'll give it a go!
    Post edited by takezo_3001 on
  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933

    barbult said:

    smaker1 said:

    Thanks to barbult for his complete tests (you can be hired by Daz :-) )  !

    And , of course, thanks to Alvin for this amazing plug-in !!

    her wink

    If DAZ ever decides to make Barbult head of QA, it will make this store something like a 3D heaven!

    heart

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    Mustakettu85 said:

    barbult said:

    smaker1 said:

    Thanks to barbult for his complete tests (you can be hired by Daz :-) )  !

    And , of course, thanks to Alvin for this amazing plug-in !!

    her wink

    If DAZ ever decides to make Barbult head of QA, it will make this store something like a 3D heaven!

    heart

    I appreciate your confidence, but that sounds way too much like work! I am happily retired.

  • RGcincyRGcincy Posts: 2,834

    Daventaki said:

     @RGcincy  Im only seeing one image not sure what happened to the others.

    I may reload them all. If you don't load every image at once, the forum seems to drop previous attachments. 

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    RGcincy said:

    Daventaki said:

     @RGcincy  Im only seeing one image not sure what happened to the others.

    I may reload them all. If you don't load every image at once, the forum seems to drop previous attachments. 

    Forum image attachment handling has become pathetic. Now you can't even delete one image that you uploaded. It deletes them all and you have to start over and upload them all again.

  • RGcincyRGcincy Posts: 2,834

    barbult said:

    Forum image attachment handling has become pathetic. Now you can't even delete one image that you uploaded. It deletes them all and you have to start over and upload them all again.

    Agree, it's a pain especially for tutorials. That happened to me a while back and then corrected itself but is back again.

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223
    edited September 2021

    I have fun turning Daz primitives into abstract art pieces. I changed a 5 sided sphere primitive into this interesting vase with subD, Thickener, Mesh Grabber. and a shader.

    From this:

    To this:

    5 sided sphere with top removed.jpg
    2000 x 2600 - 3M
    Sphere thickener Mesh Grabber_001_Camera.jpg
    2000 x 2600 - 4M
    Post edited by barbult on
  • @barbult Nicely done! The purple glass vase is very realistic looking and it's amazing how much you can change a primitive with all the cool add-on tools that are now available. Thanks for the inspiration!

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    robertswww said:

    @barbult Nicely done! The purple glass vase is very realistic looking and it's amazing how much you can change a primitive with all the cool add-on tools that are now available. Thanks for the inspiration!

    You are welcome! I like just playing around with no preconceived idea of what will eventually be created. The purple glass shader is from Procedural Gem Shader for Iray.

  • AlbertoAlberto Posts: 1,436

    barbult said:

    Alberto said:

    barbult said:

    So now I am going back through my issues to see what is fixed. I started with the thickened plane, where the UV stretching looked OK on one side but not the other. In version 1.0.1.0 (the update) I see that the original problem that I saw at subD 0 is fixed, but there is a Border Subdivision problem. The problem may have been there before, but I looked only at subD 0 at the time.

    The problem I see is that the subdivision of the border mesh is not uniformly spaced in either UV direction. In the vertical UV dirrection the pattern isn't stretched over all of the subdivisions. (These are all static thickened objects.)

    Border Subdivision 0 - UV stretching is fixed

    Border Subdivision 1,2,3,4,5 - UV stretching is not uniformly spaced. Here is Border Subdivision 3 as an example.

    I see.

    It's fixed. I expect to be sending the fixing to DAZ next week.

     

    Fast work! I see that the stretching now covers the entire vertical UV direction, which will be a great help. But the spacing of the suvdivisions is still not uniform. The border subdivision nearest the top of the thickened object is wider than the other visible mesh subdivisions. I can't really see the bottom subdivision from this camera view (in either my example or yours). I don't know if it matches the others or not. The fact that the subdivision near the top is wider causes visible distortion in the pattern and the bump/normal texture. Is that mesh spacing something that you have control of and can improve?

    A different example, Border Subdivision  5

    It's fixed. Now the UV map stretches uniformly in the subdivided border.

    Before the update Version 1.1

     

    StretchingNonUniform.png
    377 x 398 - 128K
    StretchingNonUniformFixedV1.1.png
    377 x 398 - 129K
  • AlbertoAlberto Posts: 1,436

    Daventaki said:

     @RGcincy  Im only seeing one image not sure what happened to the others.

    I will say im having a interesting time playing with this.  And have learned a few things in the process.  Now if it was possible to select polygons or material sections and only thicken those areas it would be awesomest.  Since awesome is already taken for the plugin now.

     

    The version 1.1 allows to thicken only selected areas. The user can select surfaces or facets (using the Surface Selection Tool or the Geometry Editor Tool, respectively).

    This is an example. The thickness was a large value in this case.

    Here is the wireframe image:

    Note: The thickening of individually selected facets doesn't work with high-resolution meshes, it converts to base resolutions. The thickening of selected surfaces doesn't have such limitation.

     

    SelectiveThickeningV1.1.png
    960 x 720 - 361K
    SelectiveThickeningV1.1Wireframe.png
    821 x 474 - 243K
  • RGcincyRGcincy Posts: 2,834

    Alberto said:

    The version 1.1 allows to thicken only selected areas. The user can select surfaces or facets (using the Surface Selection Tool or the Geometry Editor Tool, respectively).

    Awesome, thanks for solving the UV issue and the added feature. Makes the product even better. 

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    It sounds like a great update! This is exciting!

  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223
    edited September 2021

    The Thickener update is in DIM already. I looked at the new UV stretching. It looks very nice at border subdivision 0 or 1. At border subdivision 2 or higher, there is a surprising amount of nonuniformity in the strecthing. Is something wrong?

     

    Screenshot 2021-09-14 012849.jpg
    1356 x 744 - 285K
    Screenshot 2021-09-14 012938.jpg
    1357 x 749 - 280K
    Screenshot 2021-09-14 013026.jpg
    1353 x 744 - 280K
    Post edited by barbult on
  • barbultbarbult Posts: 24,223

    I'm having a problem with dynamic thickeners and selected surfaces.

    If I have an object and select one surface and create a dynamic thickened object, then I select a different surface in the same object and create a second dynamic thickened object with different offset, as soon as the time line moves to the next frame, the thickened objects no longer use their correct offsets. The thickened objects don't seem to remember which surfaces they were supposed to affect. What is the proper workflow for situations like this?

  • Alberto said:

    Note: The thickening of individually selected facets doesn't work with high-resolution meshes, it converts to base resolutions. The thickening of selected surfaces doesn't have such limitation.

     

    So if we make a new surface from our selected polys before we use the thickener, this can circumvent this limitation?

  • AlbertoAlberto Posts: 1,436

    barbult said:

    The Thickener update is in DIM already. I looked at the new UV stretching. It looks very nice at border subdivision 0 or 1. At border subdivision 2 or higher, there is a surprising amount of nonuniformity in the strecthing. Is something wrong?

     

    No, it's an effect of the protrusion of the object. If you set the protrusion to 0.0 %, the uniformity is linear, but in this case, as the edges in the border are sharp, the subdivision is almost useless. But if the protrusion is increased, the first row in the border acts as a boundary between the border and the sides. so the edges are smooth now, and there is a transition between the sides and the border. Increase the protrusion more and you'll see how more rows act as part of the boundary. With extreme protrusion values, the uniformity is linear again.

    I think this behavior seems more natural.

Sign In or Register to comment.