That should work. Are there any errors in the log file (Help>Troubleshooting>View Log File) after saving the modifier asset? You are sure it is Modifier Asset, not Modified Assets, that you are  saving? Whata re you calling the morph? Is it a replacement for an auto-generated morph (tidying up the basic matching that DS does)?

I used Hex to create a morph to make a nose longer.  I saved the morph in morphloader when I sent it back to DS from Hex.  Then, I highlighted the morph on the parameters tab and saved that as a modifer under the "save as>support asset>modifier asset" tab.  The window opened up and I named everything and selected "Genesis 8" and then saved.  When I create a new scene, the morph isn't there.  What happened to it?  What am I doing wrong?

Absynthe is strong with Twizted Metal's aesthetic. I'm sure the makeup is compatible with other characters, and I might use the morph at very low strength for certain types of character. These are freebies. Can't complain. L7 HD morph is nice.to have, a lovely gift. The motorcycle is a wild fantasy design. I already had it, and it's also a nice gift. In all, I shall say Thanks Daz, and go on my merry way.

For instance, to rig a clothing item to Genesis figure, I just import OBJ file, rig it to Genesis with Transfer Utility. Modify Face Groups, create custom bones as needed, do weight mapping and finetuning, create modifiers as well as corrective morphs, etc. 

rokkr said:

Yeah... Great unexpected savings this month... If I spend half of what I spent last year, it'll be too much... And compared to 2023? That year, I almost had to pawn my pants... This year, it won't even come closer to a quarter thereof... And I bet this isn't healthy for the store... Looks like someone slacked Economics 101 classes... Forcing prices is never a good thing... Prices are determined by demand and supply, and, if you force them, people will buy less... Production costs for digital assets are almost like sunken costs... After that, the more you sell, the better. And selling 200 x $0.50 is better than selling 50 x $1.00. Of course, they have to manage the prices because, otherwise, they'll sink into nothing, but there are smart ways to do it and non-smart ways to do it. I think only newbies, who haven't been around in other PA sales, fall for that minimum price thing... They have nothing to compare. Even so, I think everyone would feel weird about a more complex asset, like, for instance, a house, with many props, and a higher MSRP flooring to the same level as a mere morph that's half the MSRP (just an example)...

That's not a new aspect of sales here. When there are fixed-price sales, I often find high-msrp items next to lower-msrp items and they're the same price. Also, there are high-msrp items that are quite old and not worth much because of that..It's a big factor in the Outlet Store offerings - There are some good deals, but they're not all good deals. 

crosswind said:

In addition to the products that others recommended, if you just need that wall + window, I quickly made one in Blender as attached.

Just merge or drag the DUF file into your scene and add a shader you like. There's a morph in the Prop to tweak hollow windows' size.

crosswind  You made me a window!!  It's perfect!  Thank you so much!!

The artist got back with me and the window is from  DMs Body n' Soul!

Cam Fox said:

Ainm said:

With minimum pricing sales, I work out what the full price would be based on my target percentage off and apply the current percentage of the sales page to find the price below which I'm not interested. Then I order from most expensive to cheapest and work my way down the list until I hit that price, at which point I close the sale. Minimum pricing doesn't offer artists any protection on the products they put the most work into and stops me buying in bulk on items I don't need but like.

But who knows - maybe the artists are seeing overall comparable or even better returns. But I suspect it'll be from a smaller pool of buyers, and coupled with an increased number of artists to compete with, I don't understand how that can be healthy for the store and good for the artists in the long run. Increasing sales counts should always be the aim for digital stores, in my view. It's always better to sell more than less for the same bottom line.

It doesn't feel like a healthy store. I was surprised that I was closer to one of the youngest than one of the oldest in that introductions thread from a month or two ago. I also think Daz has too many artists chasing the same sorts of users.

Personally, minimum pricing has vastly curtailed my spending here. Minimum pricing contradicts the advertised discounts from memberships/tokens/coupons/buy-ins. I also feel like Premier is a must for any serious shopping, so it's a squeeze from both sides.

Is it healthy for the store? Possibly! It depends on details like whether Daz is seeing growth in customers, if operating costs are rising and need to be recouped somewhere, if there's still strong demand for older items, etc. I assume Daz wouldn't split its Plus/Premier fees with the PAs; and minimum pricing and higher base pricing might attract new PAs to the store; and Outlet and Quick Grab might keep thrifty shoppers interested; so perhaps it all balances out.

Yeah... Great unexpected savings this month... If I spend half of what I spent last year, it'll be too much... And compared to 2023? That year, I almost had to pawn my pants... This year, it won't even come closer to a quarter thereof... And I bet this isn't healthy for the store... Looks like someone slacked Economics 101 classes... Forcing prices is never a good thing... Prices are determined by demand and supply, and, if you force them, people will buy less... Production costs for digital assets are almost like sunken costs... After that, the more you sell, the better. And selling 200 x $0.50 is better than selling 50 x $1.00. Of course, they have to manage the prices because, otherwise, they'll sink into nothing, but there are smart ways to do it and non-smart ways to do it. I think only newbies, who haven't been around in other PA sales, fall for that minimum price thing... They have nothing to compare. Even so, I think everyone would feel weird about a more complex asset, like, for instance, a house, with many props, and a higher MSRP flooring to the same level as a mere morph that's half the MSRP (just an example)...

In your video, it looks like you have the base Genesis 9 model (no morphs dialed in) loaded and the crop top appears to be modeled to fit the base Genesis 9. If that is the case, there is no need to select Current shape or Reverse Source Shape from Target, but selecting those should not have caused the problem of moving mesh shown in the video. I think crosswind's question may be important. When you imported the Maya OBJ into Daz Studio, was it in the proper position on Genesis 9, or did you have to move it into position? To work properly with the Transfer Utility, the imported OBJ must be the correct size and must be in the correct position, without any translation or rotation or scaling in Daz Studio. 

Edit to add: If you did more the Maya OBJ after importing it to Daz Studio, export the moved crop top to OBJ from Daz Studio and then import that OBJ and run Transfer Utility on it. It should work OK. If it does, then the mystery is why the Maya OBJ was not in the proper position to start with. Did you perhaps move Genesis 9 in Maya and model the crop top on the moved Genesis 9?

crosswind said:

Douglas said:

DoctorJellybean said:

Douglas said:

Hi all, two little things...

1) Is there a reason why under Shaping -> Actor there are big square icons with vertical sliders and not the orizontal ones ?

2) Under default keyboard shortcuts (View Control) the upper arrow icon is associated to CTRL+ATL+R or "reset camera" 
that switches viewport into Front view. On the viewport window the up arrow icon resets the viewport.
May be useful add a separate keyboard shortcut for RESET viewport and change the reset camera icon into the shortcuts list ?

Thanks to all developers !

Could you please show a screenshot  of the first point. Which Style are you using?

I'm using Hollywood Blvd with darkside, midnight style ( if you mean Daz UI ).

Since the character vendors (at least in this Daz store...) usually provide big size thumbnail images for character's Head and Body morph, as default, DS sets big Card in Shaping pane for all the morphs of non PHM/PBM morphs under Actor path.

You can uncheck Preferences > "Show Property Cards" in the context menu of Shaping pane ~~ to make morph properties as "horizontal morph sliders" ~~

Thanks crosswind, I never used shaping tab until now and shaping tab may be very useful in some cases. 
Characters has CTRL-*, FBM-* and FHM-* morphs with property cards but from now FHM morphs can't be switched into big size (vertical slider with big image) inside Shaping tab because it is a separate item outside the Actor section.
There are other morphs with his own property cards but only Actor can visualize the big thumbnails... all other items has only horizontal sliders with little icon like Parameters tab.
I don't know what we will see in new studio releases but for sure big icons sliders is the power of this Shaping tab, may all items in the tab will have his own ?

You mean Transfer Utility ~

Is there any Transforms value on the top ?

rokkr said:

jackal293 said:

Kind of a rant so sorry in advance, but I gotta say, the whole minimum price thing really makes this sale a lot less exciting than it used to be.  Like I understand having a minimum price for the outlet store and quick grabs, but what's the point in me jumping through all the hoops for those extra sale discounts if they get negated by the minimum price?

 

Yeah... Totally... I'm curious about a general opinion... Do you guys think this Daz policy will work and make people pay more or, on the contrary, it will backfire and people won't buy items with less discount (caught in the "minimal price" thing). I, for instance, if I notice an item has less discount than it was supposed to have, I don't buy it. I think it's even disrespectful not only for buyers but also for creators. Of course, every artist can price their items as they want, but prices somehow represent the complexity of an item and the effort that was put into it to make it. For instance, in the mid-range (65%), everything non-DO below ~$20 floors to the same $2.09 with maximum discount... Thus, a $20 MSRP item, for instance, a house with many props, and so on, will cost the same as a $10 MSRP, for instance, a mere morph...

It makes me buy less or even nothing. I have saved credit for some time waiting for a proper sale month like this, every time there was a caveat, and this one with minimun price is really stopping me again beside the stacking discounts. I was literally waiting for a decent monday/tuesday (because of double tokens) to pay premier, buy any buy-in and outlets to build tokens, and then wait up to two weeks to spend my credit as long as i have tokens for a a sale that include a good portion of what i want. If i were to do that, i would be wasting premier and first purchase because it would need to have planets align for me to get really low price on lots of newer stuff to make it worth it (i'm not paying 2.99 on ancient stuff, sorry not sorry). Something  that gets even more difficult with the added problem that now artist stores on sale have very limited amount of their items actually discounted.

Also agree on your example of different MSRP get leveled at the same limit.

SilverGirl said:

If they feel there needs to be a minimum price, I can get that... they need to stay in business. But why not tie it in to the tiers they already have for the discounts?

Tier 1 - 55% off - $2.99

Tier 2 - 65% off - $1.99

Tier 3 - 80% off - $0.99

(for example)

Certainlly that would be better. May still have the problem that a texture addon may get the same price as a bundle, but at least a lot more reasonable.

I'm new to Daz, and I'm following a tutorial on YouTube. Instead of using a dress mesh from Daz, I created my own mesh using the Gen9 model as the foundation in Maya. However, when I apply the Utility Transfer tool, the top mesh moves. I uploaded whats happening on Dailymotion.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9pvs3g

G8.1 loads G8 morphs but G8 won't see morphs created specifically for G8.1.
So if the morph causing the problem is a specific G8.1 morph you would not get an error when loading G8.

rokkr said:

jackal293 said:

Kind of a rant so sorry in advance, but I gotta say, the whole minimum price thing really makes this sale a lot less exciting than it used to be.  Like I understand having a minimum price for the outlet store and quick grabs, but what's the point in me jumping through all the hoops for those extra sale discounts if they get negated by the minimum price?

 

Yeah... Totally... I'm curious about a general opinion... Do you guys think this Daz policy will work and make people pay more or, on the contrary, it will backfire and people won't buy items with less discount (caught in the "minimal price" thing). I, for instance, if I notice an item has less discount than it was supposed to have, I don't buy it. I think it's even disrespectful not only for buyers but also for creators. Of course, every artist can price their items as they want, but prices somehow represent the complexity of an item and the effort that was put into it to make it. For instance, in the mid-range (65%), everything non-DO below ~$20 floors to the same $2.09 with maximum discount... Thus, a $20 MSRP item, for instance, a house with many props, and so on, will cost the same as a $10 MSRP, for instance, a mere morph...

In my opinion, universal minimum price is not a good idea. There should be exceptions or limitations of that policy when it comes to older products, for example.

jackal293 said:

Kind of a rant so sorry in advance, but I gotta say, the whole minimum price thing really makes this sale a lot less exciting than it used to be.  Like I understand having a minimum price for the outlet store and quick grabs, but what's the point in me jumping through all the hoops for those extra sale discounts if they get negated by the minimum price?

Yeah... Totally... I'm curious about a general opinion... Do you guys think this Daz policy will work and make people pay more or, on the contrary, it will backfire and people won't buy items with less discount (caught in the "minimal price" thing). I, for instance, if I notice an item has less discount than it was supposed to have, I don't buy it. I think it's even disrespectful not only for buyers but also for creators. Of course, every artist can price their items as they want, but prices somehow represent the complexity of an item and the effort that was put into it to make it. For instance, in the mid-range (65%), everything non-DO below ~$20 floors to the same $2.09 with maximum discount... Thus, a $20 MSRP item, for instance, a house with many props, and so on, will cost the same as a $10 MSRP, for instance, a mere morph...

I rarely rig conformers with the workflow of Figures Setup nowadays, but...

if you've already defined Face Groups as well as assignments to Bones before rigging with Transfer Utility, you should uncheck Face Groups in TU's options.

TU transfers no weight to custom bones... you need to either fill weight to them by bone selection groups or manually do weight mapping to them. 

Elor said:

While writing the ticket I submitted a couple of minutes ago, I saw that Base Feminine also has a morph created by Sveva and it was also not named in a way allowing Daz Studio to automatically load it. I'll fix it on my end too, because it can be a good starting point when creating full body morphs for characters based on Base Feminine.

While writing the ticket I submitted a couple of minutes ago, I saw that Base Feminine also has a morph created by Sveva and it was also not named in a way allowing Daz Studio to automatically load it. I'll fix it on my end too, because it can be a good starting point when creating full body morphs for characters based on Base Feminine.

I've created a custom hair to apply to a genesis 1 figure. I've been following a workflow similar to that of geografting where I've created vertex groups of the custom bones I wish to implement (e.g. lbangs00, lbangs01, lbangs02). I'm able to use figure setup to create a the basic figure with the above mentioned bones added to a bone hierarchy that is based on the genesis 1 from hip to head (orientation also mimicking genesis 1). This is followed by using the "Transfer Rigging (Figure space)" function to make sure the hip to head bones are in the same points and rotation. 

At this point everything APPEARS to be working as intended, figure looks about what I want and the vertex groups still have the correct geometry assigned to them.
Before using the "Transfer Utility" I hide the geometry that will beusing the custom bones as well as hide the corresponding (custom) bones in the node hierarchy. It's when I use the "Transfer Utility..." that I run into issues. The main General Option for this process I'm concerned with is "Weight Maps" I have "Remove Unused Bones", "Respect hidden Facets on Target" and "Merge Hierarchies" checked. (I tried running it with "Remove Unused Bones" unchecked which resuleted in the custom bones created by figure setup there, but the bones without any weighmapped geometry) The result is the hair with the genesis bone and the first bone of teh branching custom bones, but none of those custom bones are weight mapped, and the vertex groups are now empty.

I've tried numerous approaches to this issue, but would appreciate any help! Thank you!

The Optitex outfits weren't build around V4's T-pose, they use an A-pose similar to G8's, the arms are roughly the same, but the legs are half way between V4 and G8.

Now what you have with these is a Prop with a skeleton parented to it, delete the skeleton and the prop snaps back to it's default A-pose.

Like this you can use the dynamic prop directly with G8F, skirts work well with just a static drape, long pants will need an animated drape, you can then "freeze simulation" to bake the shape, export it as an OBJ and then import that OBJ for use with the Transfer Utility.