Loading...
> >

daz ik fixed when ???? why use Alembic Exporter and not fbx?

Fixme12Fixme12 Posts: 589
edited December 1969 in The Commons

Doing animations in studio, all sounds great...
But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

what's use of Alembic exporter? i tought most applications use fbx for animation.
what 's the difference? (any vids that show this in progress?)

Comments

  • DZ_jaredDZ_jared Posts: 1,316
    edited December 1969

    The advantage of Alembic is that it contains animation data for the mesh that doesn't rely on the rig. This means you get a lossless animation when you transfer it. The information is based on vertex data so the animation looks the same no matter the application.

    A lot of people seem to have the attitude that if we release a new feature or do one thing it means we can't do anything else. The new Alembic exporter plugin isn't the only thing our developers have been working on.

  • Coon RaCoon Ra Posts: 200
    edited December 1969

    Any big difference from MDD?

  • GranvilleGranville Posts: 697
    edited December 1969

    That sounds intriguing. I didn't buy it because I don't understand which other 3d applications can import alembic. Also to what level of fidelity? For example, FBX doesn't import with fidelity to DAZ studio but you can export with full fidelity to iClone Can you suggest a resource to educate myself on Alembic?

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 108,056
    edited December 1969

    Alembic exports the movements of the vertices defining the mesh so it should give absolute fidelity, but without rigging so you can't usually repose the figure as you could in DS. Materials aren't exported, and it appears that the Lightwave importer at least doesn't preserve material zones; however if you importer does preserve zones the exporter will collect the textures ready for reapplication.

  • Digital Lite DesignDigital Lite Design Posts: 728
    edited December 1969

    One other advantage of Alembic that isn't being mentioned is file size. Alembic allows for HUGE file sizes, thus keeping you from having to break everything apart. Googling "Alembic" is pulling up several articles etc.....

    As far as which apps use it, it is best to look at the documentation for the applications you have/want to use, to see if they support it.

  • DAZ_SpookyDAZ_Spooky Posts: 3,100
    edited December 1969

    fixme12 said:
    Doing animations in studio, all sounds great...
    But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

    what's use of Alembic exporter? i tought most applications use fbx for animation.
    what 's the difference? (any vids that show this in progress?)

    FBX has very serious limitations in its weightmapping. Which gives you things like candywrapper elbows on a forearm twist. FBX uses the least common denominator when it comes to animation which is not always what you need and rarely what you want. .
  • DAZ_SpookyDAZ_Spooky Posts: 3,100
    edited December 1969

    Coon Ra said:
    Any big difference from MDD?
    Entire scenes with multiple objects, instead of one object. Or one object at a time.

    Multiple objects on the other end gives you significantly more flexibility.

  • Orion_UkOrion_Uk Posts: 231
    edited January 2014

    Hi, I have not used standalone for a while as I have been using Daz Plugin & Poser plus Blender intergrated mostly :P

    Seems (for me anyway) there is a problem or lack of my understanding something here as I cant seem to get smooth to work in Octane Render Standalone V1.26 or 1.27! I have smooth enabled.. Something I may have forgotten since being away from standalone version? I have posted over in the Otoy forums to see what the guys n gals think there but (just incase) if it is a problem with the Daz Exporter then I thought it might catch someones eye over here also :P

    In OctaneRender Standalone, I have brought in Genesis via Daz studio Alembic Exporter, just cant get smooth to work though!

    UPDATE: Added screen capture of an OBJ export from Daz studio (works a charm for stills, in standalone) of the same model which seems to load in just fine! Would the issue be with the Daz Exporter or within the OctaneRender Standalone 1.26 & 1.27 Builds?

    Thanks for reading :)

    Capture2.JPG
    1919 x 1019 - 166K
    Capture.JPG
    1074 x 720 - 276K
    obj_fine.JPG
    1615 x 979 - 154K
    Post edited by Orion_Uk on
  • Coon RaCoon Ra Posts: 200
    edited December 1969

    More likely something is wrong with every single poly's UV. Looks like every one is mirrored or flipped in place at least once. So, in this case smoothing in is not working. Someday I had such an issue with UVs, got to reexport entire set of models from DS with different export settings. I still have no idea what caused that UV flipping, DS export or Octane import.

  • Orion_UkOrion_Uk Posts: 231
    edited December 1969

    Coon Ra said:
    More likely something is wrong with every single poly's UV. Looks like every one is mirrored or flipped in place at least once. So, in this case smoothing in is not working. Someday I had such an issue with UVs, got to reexport entire set of models from DS with different export settings. I still have no idea what caused that UV flipping, DS export or Octane import.

    Thanks Coon Ra ;)

    Not sure how to fix it tho :(
    obj exported from DS works just fine in ORSA and the DS Alembic exporter does not have any options to resolve this (yet!)..
    will file a bug report with Daz seeing as it's prob the exporter then ?

    Many thanks for your reply :D

  • RuphussRuphuss Posts: 2,631
    edited December 1969

    DAZ_Spooky said:
    fixme12 said:
    Doing animations in studio, all sounds great...
    But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

    what's use of Alembic exporter? i tought most applications use fbx for animation.
    what 's the difference? (any vids that show this in progress?)FBX has very serious limitations in its weightmapping. Which gives you things like candywrapper elbows on a forearm twist. FBX uses the least common denominator when it comes to animation which is not always what you need and rarely what you want. .

    why no answer on the first part of the question
    But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

  • DAZ_SpookyDAZ_Spooky Posts: 3,100
    edited December 1969

    ruphuss said:
    DAZ_Spooky said:
    fixme12 said:
    Doing animations in studio, all sounds great...
    But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

    what's use of Alembic exporter? i tought most applications use fbx for animation.
    what 's the difference? (any vids that show this in progress?)FBX has very serious limitations in its weightmapping. Which gives you things like candywrapper elbows on a forearm twist. FBX uses the least common denominator when it comes to animation which is not always what you need and rarely what you want. .

    why no answer on the first part of the question
    But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

    I am not going to comment or speculate on what may or may not be in future versions of DAZ Studio.
  • RuphussRuphuss Posts: 2,631
    edited December 1969

    DAZ_Spooky said:
    ruphuss said:
    DAZ_Spooky said:
    fixme12 said:
    Doing animations in studio, all sounds great...
    But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

    what's use of Alembic exporter? i tought most applications use fbx for animation.
    what 's the difference? (any vids that show this in progress?)FBX has very serious limitations in its weightmapping. Which gives you things like candywrapper elbows on a forearm twist. FBX uses the least common denominator when it comes to animation which is not always what you need and rarely what you want. .

    why no answer on the first part of the question
    But, when do we see some fixes to the broken IK/FK setup, (problems like hip rotation, horrible unwanted foot movements).

    I am not going to comment or speculate on what may or may not be in future versions of DAZ Studio.

    you can just say "I don't know about that"
    so the question is not ignored
    and no one asks again

  • ginalandry71ginalandry71 Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    I'll ask again! Why don't Daz fix this broken ik. It's very frustrating when you spend a great deal of time posing and then the feet moved with out realizing it and then have to redo it.

  • Luv LeeLuv Lee Posts: 230
    DAZ_jared said:

    The advantage of Alembic is that it contains animation data for the mesh that doesn't rely on the rig. This means you get a lossless animation when you transfer it. The information is based on vertex data so the animation looks the same no matter the application.

    A lot of people seem to have the attitude that if we release a new feature or do one thing it means we can't do anything else. The new Alembic exporter plugin isn't the only thing our developers have been working on.

    Alembic has huge textures issues that have yet to be addressed of fixed by either Otoy or Daz...Lowering bump maps did not fix the problem, as you can see from the screne shot.  .I have created a painful, time constructive  work around until such time someone, eithr OTOY or DAZ,  actually tries to do something about this as I need to use the spherical camera  in OCtane for  a VR project I have been contracted to do.

    eyebrows.jpg
    1024 x 512 - 220K
    legs.jpg
    1024 x 512 - 117K
    legs.jpg
    1024 x 512 - 117K
    lips.jpg
    1024 x 512 - 211K
    lips-screenshot.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 549K
  • Luv LeeLuv Lee Posts: 230
    Orion_Uk said:

    Hi, I have not used standalone for a while as I have been using Daz Plugin & Poser plus Blender intergrated mostly :P

    Seems (for me anyway) there is a problem or lack of my understanding something here as I cant seem to get smooth to work in Octane Render Standalone V1.26 or 1.27! I have smooth enabled.. Something I may have forgotten since being away from standalone version? I have posted over in the Otoy forums to see what the guys n gals think there but (just incase) if it is a problem with the Daz Exporter then I thought it might catch someones eye over here also :P

    In OctaneRender Standalone, I have brought in Genesis via Daz studio Alembic Exporter, just cant get smooth to work though!

    UPDATE: Added screen capture of an OBJ export from Daz studio (works a charm for stills, in standalone) of the same model which seems to load in just fine! Would the issue be with the Daz Exporter or within the OctaneRender Standalone 1.26 & 1.27 Builds?

    Thanks for reading :)

    NO one will or has answered the question about the issue with alembic textures--it is the elephant inthe room--they don't give one  big crap apparently.

  • Luv LeeLuv Lee Posts: 230

    The only fix I have found is pulling the bump and texture maps into Photoshop and scaling them down tremendously (over half).  I also erased the eyebows  on the texture map rpelacing them with merchant resource brows, lowered the eyebrow file opacity  to my liking,  --  same with the lips.  It's the only thing we can do until someone cares enough to fix this glaring issue.

    Orion_Uk said:

     

    Coon Ra said:

    More likely something is wrong with every single poly's UV. Looks like every one is mirrored or flipped in place at least once. So, in this case smoothing in is not working. Someday I had such an issue with UVs, got to reexport entire set of models from DS with different export settings. I still have no idea what caused that UV flipping, DS export or Octane import.

     

    Thanks Coon Ra ;)

    Not sure how to fix it tho :(
    obj exported from DS works just fine in ORSA and the DS Alembic exporter does not have any options to resolve this (yet!)..
    will file a bug report with Daz seeing as it's prob the exporter then ?

    Many thanks for your reply :D

     

  • Fixme12Fixme12 Posts: 589
    DAZ_jared said:

    The advantage of Alembic is that it contains animation data for the mesh that doesn't rely on the rig. This means you get a lossless animation when you transfer it. The information is based on vertex data so the animation looks the same no matter the application.

    've lost this thread...

    so alembic (*.ABC) is an alternative to (*.MDD), only handle vertex data

    any solution in the works to solve the other animation problems of studio? and people can start, own animations and export them with alembic or fbx whatever.
    or some alternative solutions (plugins) to use genesis features in the big 6 main software?
    've seen a Genesis demo plugin in Maya and use all the morph's and pose straight in Maya.
    I wonder why this project was stopped...

    FBX is industry standard, i don't understand why FBX should be a problem with weightmaps? How the weightmapping is done in studio is this not main/stream standard?
    isn't there some export fix to have weightmap conversion to the big 6 list (maya, max, C4d, modo, lightwave, blender).

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 108,056

    Edit>Figure>Rigging>Convert to General Weightmapping will convert triAx (as used on Genesis and Genesis 2 Male/Female) to the one map per joint ssytem used in FBX. So, of course, will exporting FBX.

  • Fixme12Fixme12 Posts: 589
    edited October 2015
    Richard Haseltine said:

    Edit>Figure>Rigging>Convert to General Weightmapping will convert triAx (as used on Genesis and Genesis 2 Male/Female) to the one map per joint ssytem used in FBX. So, of course, will exporting FBX.

    then why the comment from Spooy about,

    FBX has very serious limitations in its weightmapping...

    guess every software use it's own system or is this weightmapping industry standard?

    Post edited by Fixme12 on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 108,056
    Fixme12 said:
    Richard Haseltine said:

    Edit>Figure>Rigging>Convert to General Weightmapping will convert triAx (as used on Genesis and Genesis 2 Male/Female) to the one map per joint ssytem used in FBX. So, of course, will exporting FBX.

    then why the comment from Spooy about,

    FBX has very serious limitations in its weightmapping...

    guess every software use it's own system or is this weightmapping industry standard?

    Because FBX does not support TriAx-style rigging, so you either convert in DS and tidy up before export or let DS perform an auto-conversion on export to FBX and tidy up in the destination application.

    Using a single map per joint is standard, as in widely supported (I don't know how many applications beyond Poser and DS support separate maps for each axis, or for different types of transform), though there may still be individual differences. There will certainly be differences in binding types (as in the standard Euler.angles used in Poser and TriAx vs dual quaternions used for Genesis 3 Female and in many high-end applications, and I think I have seen other possibilities mentioned too).

  • Fixme12Fixme12 Posts: 589

    with the dual quaternions used in Genesis 3 Female, the problems are solved not? tought that was the reason to step away from triax and use more standard system.

  • larsmidnattlarsmidnatt Posts: 4,511
    Fixme12 said:

    with the dual quaternions used in Genesis 3 Female, the problems are solved not? tought that was the reason to step away from triax and use more standard system.

    rigging still isn't right with G3F either.

  • DAZ_SpookyDAZ_Spooky Posts: 3,100
    Fixme12 said:

    with the dual quaternions used in Genesis 3 Female, the problems are solved not? tought that was the reason to step away from triax and use more standard system.

    FBX does not support Dual Quaterernion, in its current implementation either for the DS exporter or most importers. (Though it is, theoretically, possible, most haven't implemented it.) 

  • wolf359wolf359 Posts: 3,931

    To the OP:
    First on the matter of the DAZ IK system
    I feel your pain,
    ( OK not really because I now use Iclone pro with the 3D Exchange piepline application for most animation involving bipedal motion)

    On the Matter of Alembic vs MDD


    I am 17 completed minutes into my CG animated sci-fi Film Being rendered in maxon Cinema4D studio.
    I am using some Poser Native figures transfered to C4D with full functionality via a special third party C4D plugin that reads poser formats.

    I am also  usiing Daz genesis 1 & 2 figures via 
    obj. out /Export MDD Data.

    I only need animated genesis figures in C4D
    not Entire Daz Studio Scenes So I have no need for an expensive Alembic Exporter

    Nevermind  the Fact that My Old version of C4D
    ( R11.5) does not even support Alembic and I refuse to give Maxon more upgrade money when they insist that a $3600 USD CG application Needs NO Auto lipsync function or Dynamic Clothing with capbilites beyond draping table cloths,bedsheets, and window curtains. ( but I digress ).

    On the matter of FBX  I say forget it.
    Write it off as yet another Failed solution
    ( Like Collada,U3D etc) that never mangaged to keep up with the ever changing specs& standards
    of the various Applications they promised to unite
    asset wise. 

     

     

     

Sign In or Register to comment.