it needs to load already in position to use the transfer utility

one way I fix this is

convert prop to figure,

move it using the bone

then convert figure to prop again before using the TU

I'm trying to create clothing over a figure

I export gen8 as an obj into blender

model a prop around the figure

delete the figure

export the prop as an obj out of blender

import the prop into studio

position it on the figure

use the transfer utlity

and it the result move down on the figure

what am I doing wrong?

I noticed you are exporting from Studio at 1%, so are you scaling back up when you import the morph? Why not just export at 100%?

See here, the two bones with gradient weight for smooth bending, and in the geometry editor, selected the place for finetuning with an extra bone. I do not want to make a morph because tweaking bones are more flexible

DAZ Bridges is a Plan B in case Nvidia is abondoning Iray (which is quite possible) The Blender GUI has improved greatly in the past couple of releases. However it's still a proverbial pain in the a55. I keep trying to migrate to Blender but keep leaving out of frustration.

It's a matter of perspective; I've like Blender's UI since 2.50; I don't like Studio's. I can work with it, but I don't like it.

 

 

Yes, I have asked before but I have not been able to grasp the idea of .blend files with respect to a content library. I'm still finding it difficult to understand the logic of doing it the Blender way but, having watched a few more videos I can see how it is done. As I said, if that new Asset Management system is adopted in the standard release, I will be much more comfortable if it works they way it is shown in that video. 

There's still one thing that is unclear to me. If you first need to put your assets into a .blend file (or multiple .blend files) does that mean that you can't have a library of installed assets (as we have with DAZ Studio) without first having loaded each and every one into a .blend file and stored it somewhere? So I could not, for instance, purchase an asset from somewhere or grab one from my DAZ Studio Content Library and have it available to Blender without having first loaded it into a .blend file in order to be able to append it into any other .blend file? Then the further question arises - how do I get it into the first .blend file if it already needs to be in a .blend file in order to append it? I have to admit that the only way I have imported objects into Blender so far is from DAZ Studio, either by .OBJ import or by Diffeomorphic.

Of course not.

Just like Studio assets need creating - which PAs do for most people, Blender files also need creating. However, we can also create our own Studio assets. They can be morph assets, pose assets and others. Now, there are Blend files available from Daz, but last time I checked they were broken - wrong scale and wrong position; materials also weren't the best. Diffeo does a brilliant job.

Blender works differently, I usually suggest folks stop thinking about how it's done in Studio, and learn how it is done in Blender; then they can look at corrolations to help them better transfer and manage assets.

If you want to create a blender asset; load up something - pick something relatively simple as a learning process.

Load it Studio; export using Diffeo plugin (remembering to run the script).

Import into Blender using the Diffeo plugin.

Optionally make any adjustments you feel would be useful including making sure all items are in a Collection and that the Collection has a name.

... Then save as a Blend file. You can then append the collection as I describe.

EDIT:

My advice is don't save local textures or pack them into the blend file; use the original location.

If you create any custom textures, have those in a custom folder, which I also have accessible by Studio.

Well, it does seem to me that, despite staring with "Of course not ..." you go on to confirm what I suggested - that assets need to be loaded into Blender and saved as .blend files. I understand that Blender works differently to DAZ Studio, I just wanted confirmation that the way I described it was they way to do it. I'm like all the others who find Blender somewhat confusing - I'm just trying to learn its idiosyncrasies. 

By the way, someone else mentioned "save and pack" in another post and I spent a good while trying to figure out what "pack" meant. I eventually found it and what it does:

https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/files/blend/packed_data.html

I put in bold the part my post mainly related to. That was saying that blend files don't magically appear just like studio files don't magically appear. They both have to be created. I'll be more clear and add an addendum: Daz does provide Blend files, although I've not had any work that I've tried.

Yes. Honestly, I do get what you are saying - I can see that .blend files do need to be created. I was just trying to explain my confusion over the way Blender uses .blend files for a scene and also as containers or even as an asset library. I'm still not sure I have my head around that that - especially when it comes to things like poses and materials.

 

The same is true in Studio. The real difference that Studio has is that it has a robust asset management system. Blender doesn't yet. It is very good at appending - and as far as I'm aware - everything is a data block, which in theory means you can append anything. Basically, if it is in a folder you can append it - sometimes figuring out how to use it once append can be fun. But for the more normal (from a Studio perspective) items are simple to Append.

A subset can be saved by the user (as can a normal save), and both can be merged; many things can be saved by the user - or purchased by them - poses, shaders to name two popular ones as well as props and characters. All can be merged into Studio, although Shaders and poses depend on what is already present.

In Blender you can Append (merge) a material even if there is nothing loaded that can use it; it will lurk until required, but can disappear when closed.

Edit:

There are a couple of extra steps with poses, but once created and saved in the Blend file, appending is just the same.

Click on Append > navigate to the file, open it > Action folder (if there is no action folder then there are no stored poses).

Object Data Properties (image of a dude running) > Pose Library Section > in there you can create, select existing and switch between current ones.

As you can see from the images, there is no pose library currently selected, which is why the image shows new; clicking on the down arrow opens the window to select a library, but as there isn't one present, we can't.

After appending one from the Action folder you can see there is now a library present (i include Rigify in the name so I know it was created when the character had rigify); you will notice the 0 (zero) before the A-Pose - Rigify; this means that it has no fake user and could be deleted when the file is saved. If you have more than one pose library, click on the shield (visible in the fourth image) this will protect the data block, which in this case is a library. An F appears in place of the 0 - not shown. The fourth image shows some of the poses in the library. They can be full or partial poses and named as you see fit.

NOTE: There are no individual poses, only pose libraries; you can chose how many poses to group in the libraries.

The Scale option does exactly as one might assume: it scales the entire figure, either up or down, in all dimensions. In other words, one ends up with a smaller or larger version of the figure or character while maintaining the proportions. The Height slider, on the other hand, adjusts only the vertical (Y-axis height) of the figure or character from the neck down, while maintaining the width and depth proportions. The neck and head are largely unaffected and remain approximately the same size. As a consequence, adjusting the height slider up makes the figure/character taller but thinner proportionately, and adjusting the slider downwards makes the figure/character stockier. It is usually better to use the height slider first prior to spending time getting the body proportions where you want them, as these will be changed when the height slider is applied. If you are applying a pre-existing character morph, be advised that any difference in height between that character and the default will result in an additive effect if the Height slider is used.

For me, this discussion is shining a light on just how useful DS/DAZ's content management actually is - I think it's easy to take for granted. Have you considered exactly what "installing" new content that one has purchased looks like? How much work (time) does it actually entail?

I have a ton of content purchased at DAZ, and 2 of the main reasons I do so is convenience and time savings. Don't get me wrong, I use Blender and like it quite a bit. But as a replacement for DS . . . I'm not really close to being there. To me, any money spent on a beefy GPU to render in Iray will quickly be made up in time saved *not* having to try to manually replicate the content management system somehow, tweak mats, etc.

- Greg

I'm inclined to agree although I do think it will be to my eventual benefit to learn how to transfer content to Blender and render in a different engine. I would also like to take advantage of the animation workflow that I'm told is far better in Blender. But yes, the potential time gained from faster renders does seem more than offset by the complexity of Blender for tweaking materials and the manner by which content is loaded and saved. 

So far my efforts at rendering in both Cycles and Eevee have fallen short of expectations - especially when we are assured that the diffeo bridge does such a good job of translating materials. I'm sure it does and I truly appreciate the work that has gone into the add-on but I have not yet found my experimental renders to match the quality of IRay. If I were to render everything in Cycles, I doubt that I would complain but I certainly can't yet mix renders from both engines if I am producing a story consisting of successive images. That said, I'm the first to admit that my Blender skills are sub-novice level and I doubt that my first IRay renders were anything to be proud of either.

We are calling it a .blend "file" , but a more descriptive term would be "container" , as it holds objects or references to objects (materials, meshes, etc.)

I'd never actually looked at ML Advanced until I saw this post. I use MP Pro.

Can't you just uncheck the single file option again in the dialog to get batch import?

In order to even be allowed to use the batch option i have to always uncheck the single file box then it allows me to use the batch option, it crashes if more than 1 morph is loaded at once...

To be honest its not a major issue for me, just seeing if there are any ways to fix this..

Well, DeadP for M4 is a clothing set -- it just happens to cover the entire body, as it's a full bodysuit -- so GenX can't touch it. You'd need to work with Riversoft Art and ask your question in the product release thread to find out why it won't convert.

To get M4 -- and ONLY YOUR BASE M4 -- to show up in the GenX dropdown, you drag and drop the icon from the Content Library to that open space in the GenX pane. I think that's all you need to do to get it to show up as an item, but I'm not certain, since it's been a very long time since I did that. (I don't know if GenX will work with Smart Content; it came out long before Smart Content existed, and I don't think it was updated to become Smart Content-aware.)

After that, in order to get your M4 pose injection files to work, you'd need to also drag and drop the M4 Morphs++ icon onto GenX -- AFTER doing M4. That won't, I don't think, create a new M4 dropdown option; it just makes it possible to use the INJ files to create the characters. You will need to do this every time you want to transfer a new character to G3 -- select M4 from dropdown, add Morphs++, add character INJ file,

How much do those suits cost that Hollywood movie studios use on human actors to transfer poses and movement when they are animating something?

I did a quick look and you could get the suit (the cheapest part under $500), sensors, cameras, and cables under $20,000 Us if you are trying to capture complex things like facial expressions. This is assuming that you have the computer hardware, techs to run the software etc...

That works Kerya.

@OP

The object you exported from MD for Studio, import in Blender, you can create the morph there and export and import into Studio. I don't know how familiar you are with Blender and transfering to Studio.

For me, this discussion is shining a light on just how useful DS/DAZ's content management actually is - I think it's easy to take for granted. Have you considered exactly what "installing" new content that one has purchased looks like? How much work (time) does it actually entail?

I have a ton of content purchased at DAZ, and 2 of the main reasons I do so is convenience and time savings. Don't get me wrong, I use Blender and like it quite a bit. But as a replacement for DS . . . I'm not really close to being there. To me, any money spent on a beefy GPU to render in Iray will quickly be made up in time saved *not* having to try to manually replicate the content management system somehow, tweak mats, etc.

- Greg

I'm inclined to agree although I do think it will be to my eventual benefit to learn how to transfer content to Blender and render in a different engine. I would also like to take advantage of the animation workflow that I'm told is far better in Blender. But yes, the potential time gained from faster renders does seem more than offset by the complexity of Blender for tweaking materials and the manner by which content is loaded and saved. 

So far my efforts at rendering in both Cycles and Eevee have fallen short of expectations - especially when we are assured that the diffeo bridge does such a good job of translating materials. I'm sure it does and I truly appreciate the work that has gone into the add-on but I have not yet found my experimental renders to match the quality of IRay. If I were to render everything in Cycles, I doubt that I would complain but I certainly can't yet mix renders from both engines if I am producing a story consisting of successive images. That said, I'm the first to admit that my Blender skills are sub-novice level and I doubt that my first IRay renders were anything to be proud of either.

Face Transfer or its ilk are unlikely to succeed; it's intended to work on realistic faces, and will be unwilling/unable to morph a face that much.

I would suggest searching DeviantArt; I'm pretty sure some characters have already been reproduced for G8. And I believe some of the common freebies sites have versions of some outfits for Studio.

(I will however caution you against paying for these assets anywhere. Blizzard provisionally allow some use of their assets for fanart, but paid assets are in breach of that, and a lot of the sites out there that do things like this are used for money laundering).

DAZ Bridges is a Plan B in case Nvidia is abondoning Iray (which is quite possible) The Blender GUI has improved greatly in the past couple of releases. However it's still a proverbial pain in the a55. I keep trying to migrate to Blender but keep leaving out of frustration.

It's a matter of perspective; I've like Blender's UI since 2.50; I don't like Studio's. I can work with it, but I don't like it.

 

 

Yes, I have asked before but I have not been able to grasp the idea of .blend files with respect to a content library. I'm still finding it difficult to understand the logic of doing it the Blender way but, having watched a few more videos I can see how it is done. As I said, if that new Asset Management system is adopted in the standard release, I will be much more comfortable if it works they way it is shown in that video. 

There's still one thing that is unclear to me. If you first need to put your assets into a .blend file (or multiple .blend files) does that mean that you can't have a library of installed assets (as we have with DAZ Studio) without first having loaded each and every one into a .blend file and stored it somewhere? So I could not, for instance, purchase an asset from somewhere or grab one from my DAZ Studio Content Library and have it available to Blender without having first loaded it into a .blend file in order to be able to append it into any other .blend file? Then the further question arises - how do I get it into the first .blend file if it already needs to be in a .blend file in order to append it? I have to admit that the only way I have imported objects into Blender so far is from DAZ Studio, either by .OBJ import or by Diffeomorphic.

Of course not.

Just like Studio assets need creating - which PAs do for most people, Blender files also need creating. However, we can also create our own Studio assets. They can be morph assets, pose assets and others. Now, there are Blend files available from Daz, but last time I checked they were broken - wrong scale and wrong position; materials also weren't the best. Diffeo does a brilliant job.

Blender works differently, I usually suggest folks stop thinking about how it's done in Studio, and learn how it is done in Blender; then they can look at corrolations to help them better transfer and manage assets.

If you want to create a blender asset; load up something - pick something relatively simple as a learning process.

Load it Studio; export using Diffeo plugin (remembering to run the script).

Import into Blender using the Diffeo plugin.

Optionally make any adjustments you feel would be useful including making sure all items are in a Collection and that the Collection has a name.

... Then save as a Blend file. You can then append the collection as I describe.

EDIT:

My advice is don't save local textures or pack them into the blend file; use the original location.

If you create any custom textures, have those in a custom folder, which I also have accessible by Studio.

Well, it does seem to me that, despite staring with "Of course not ..." you go on to confirm what I suggested - that assets need to be loaded into Blender and saved as .blend files. I understand that Blender works differently to DAZ Studio, I just wanted confirmation that the way I described it was they way to do it. I'm like all the others who find Blender somewhat confusing - I'm just trying to learn its idiosyncrasies. 

By the way, someone else mentioned "save and pack" in another post and I spent a good while trying to figure out what "pack" meant. I eventually found it and what it does:

https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/files/blend/packed_data.html

I put in bold the part my post mainly related to. That was saying that blend files don't magically appear just like studio files don't magically appear. They both have to be created. I'll be more clear and add an addendum: Daz does provide Blend files, although I've not had any work that I've tried.

Yes. Honestly, I do get what you are saying - I can see that .blend files do need to be created. I was just trying to explain my confusion over the way Blender uses .blend files for a scene and also as containers or even as an asset library. I'm still not sure I have my head around that that - especially when it comes to things like poses and materials.

 

Think of the blend file like a scene file in DS, but searchable. Imagine if in addition to clicking and loading a scene you could right click it, or whatever, and select any element from that scene (if someone wants to add this feature to ds I'd be all for it)

or for a stonemason environment you could load it all in, or load in a single building right out of the same file

DAZ Bridges is a Plan B in case Nvidia is abondoning Iray (which is quite possible) The Blender GUI has improved greatly in the past couple of releases. However it's still a proverbial pain in the a55. I keep trying to migrate to Blender but keep leaving out of frustration.

It's a matter of perspective; I've like Blender's UI since 2.50; I don't like Studio's. I can work with it, but I don't like it.

 

 

Yes, I have asked before but I have not been able to grasp the idea of .blend files with respect to a content library. I'm still finding it difficult to understand the logic of doing it the Blender way but, having watched a few more videos I can see how it is done. As I said, if that new Asset Management system is adopted in the standard release, I will be much more comfortable if it works they way it is shown in that video. 

There's still one thing that is unclear to me. If you first need to put your assets into a .blend file (or multiple .blend files) does that mean that you can't have a library of installed assets (as we have with DAZ Studio) without first having loaded each and every one into a .blend file and stored it somewhere? So I could not, for instance, purchase an asset from somewhere or grab one from my DAZ Studio Content Library and have it available to Blender without having first loaded it into a .blend file in order to be able to append it into any other .blend file? Then the further question arises - how do I get it into the first .blend file if it already needs to be in a .blend file in order to append it? I have to admit that the only way I have imported objects into Blender so far is from DAZ Studio, either by .OBJ import or by Diffeomorphic.

Of course not.

Just like Studio assets need creating - which PAs do for most people, Blender files also need creating. However, we can also create our own Studio assets. They can be morph assets, pose assets and others. Now, there are Blend files available from Daz, but last time I checked they were broken - wrong scale and wrong position; materials also weren't the best. Diffeo does a brilliant job.

Blender works differently, I usually suggest folks stop thinking about how it's done in Studio, and learn how it is done in Blender; then they can look at corrolations to help them better transfer and manage assets.

If you want to create a blender asset; load up something - pick something relatively simple as a learning process.

Load it Studio; export using Diffeo plugin (remembering to run the script).

Import into Blender using the Diffeo plugin.

Optionally make any adjustments you feel would be useful including making sure all items are in a Collection and that the Collection has a name.

... Then save as a Blend file. You can then append the collection as I describe.

EDIT:

My advice is don't save local textures or pack them into the blend file; use the original location.

If you create any custom textures, have those in a custom folder, which I also have accessible by Studio.

Well, it does seem to me that, despite staring with "Of course not ..." you go on to confirm what I suggested - that assets need to be loaded into Blender and saved as .blend files. I understand that Blender works differently to DAZ Studio, I just wanted confirmation that the way I described it was they way to do it. I'm like all the others who find Blender somewhat confusing - I'm just trying to learn its idiosyncrasies. 

By the way, someone else mentioned "save and pack" in another post and I spent a good while trying to figure out what "pack" meant. I eventually found it and what it does:

https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/files/blend/packed_data.html

I put in bold the part my post mainly related to. That was saying that blend files don't magically appear just like studio files don't magically appear. They both have to be created. I'll be more clear and add an addendum: Daz does provide Blend files, although I've not had any work that I've tried.

Yes. Honestly, I do get what you are saying - I can see that .blend files do need to be created. I was just trying to explain my confusion over the way Blender uses .blend files for a scene and also as containers or even as an asset library. I'm still not sure I have my head around that that - especially when it comes to things like poses and materials.

How much do those suits cost that Hollywood movie studios use on human actors to transfer poses and movement when they are animating something?

Hello, I do apologize upfront as this is my first ever post on the Daz3D. As the title says I need help with making overwatch style characters. I have tried myself with widowmaker but I am still not happy with the results. I have tried all sorts of different ways to get close or the exact shape, mainly the face, for example face transfer and using morphs but to no prevail. I dont know if I am missing something or don't know what I am doing wrong and would like some guidance. I have attached an image of the best result but still not happy with it.

I admit to wanting a baby. I have all the babies in the store, here and at Rendo, and I stil don't have one that...is very cute. I try, but babymaking is not my skillset.

 

I don't need kids. I've got the angelwings kids from Rendo and growing up. I probably render a kid or two a year. 

Mininessie made a morph for Caryn that is actually quite cute. You can find it in the freebies forum. I think the Small World morphs for Caryn & Tobyn are cute, too.

In simple terms, the greatest computer performance will be with a sufficient amount of physical memory.  How much is sufficient depends on what the user is doing.  If the physical memory isn't large enough then Windows will use the page file.  Worth mentioning is that the page file will be slower than physical memory, even with an SSD.  If you go to the Task Manager in Windows you can look at the performance tab and get an idea of how much physical memory and page file is being used.  In simple terms, the more that the operating system has to shuffle things off to disk (page file), the slower the computer will seem to run.  This latency will be less with an SSD due to the faster data transfer but it will still be slower.

If you are rendering in iRay and using the GPU for the render then the physical memory requirement is lower because the GPU uses memory on the graphics card.  If the iRay render (or 3Delight render) is using the CPU for the render then the amount of physical memory is a concern because the textures and other data is residing in physical memory and not in the graphics card memory.

There is an argument (or belief) that Windows will find a way to use the page file no matter how much physical memory you have.  The key is to have enough physical memory for the operations that you are doing.  I have always maintained that memory upgrades are the cheapest bang for the buck in terms of performance, followed by an SSD.  

"GPU for the render then the physical memory requirement is lower because the GPU" 

Though my suspect physical memory requirement will be much more than GPU memory because, physical memory will require to transter those data to GPU memory. Otherwise a huge page file will generate temporarily everytime when a render going to start.

I can't speak to that in depth as I don't have an iRay supported GPU.  My renders are all CPU based.  That said, I would like to see some hard data (such as a graph over time of physical, page file and GPU memory usage).  You make an interesting point.

In simple terms, the greatest computer performance will be with a sufficient amount of physical memory.  How much is sufficient depends on what the user is doing.  If the physical memory isn't large enough then Windows will use the page file.  Worth mentioning is that the page file will be slower than physical memory, even with an SSD.  If you go to the Task Manager in Windows you can look at the performance tab and get an idea of how much physical memory and page file is being used.  In simple terms, the more that the operating system has to shuffle things off to disk (page file), the slower the computer will seem to run.  This latency will be less with an SSD due to the faster data transfer but it will still be slower.

If you are rendering in iRay and using the GPU for the render then the physical memory requirement is lower because the GPU uses memory on the graphics card.  If the iRay render (or 3Delight render) is using the CPU for the render then the amount of physical memory is a concern because the textures and other data is residing in physical memory and not in the graphics card memory.

There is an argument (or belief) that Windows will find a way to use the page file no matter how much physical memory you have.  The key is to have enough physical memory for the operations that you are doing.  I have always maintained that memory upgrades are the cheapest bang for the buck in terms of performance, followed by an SSD.  

"GPU for the render then the physical memory requirement is lower because the GPU" 

Though my suspect physical memory requirement will be much more than GPU memory because, physical memory will require to transter those data to GPU memory. Otherwise a huge page file will generate temporarily everytime when a render going to start.

Not a problem unless you have more VRAM than RAM and you are rendering huge scenes, and there is really no point in having that little RAM