I have to test https://www.daz3d.com/shape-splitter

as it says "Work with any object that contains a morph, figure, clothes or prop."

Maybe that one could be used for disassembling.

It's a plug-in to transfer your Daz Studio content to Blender.

When I use the transfer utility, daz adds a weight map for each node. If I want to modify the weights of the right collar map, for example, to reduce the intensity with which the object will be deformed, should I use the smooth tool or is there a sort of slider where I can proportionally decrease the weights of the already drawn area?

PerttiA said:

Making the G8 base expressions (and any expressions that are using them) work on G8.1 requires removing dummy/placeholder expressions that are installed to G8.1 morph folders - These dummy/placeholder expression files have no other function than to prevent the base G8 expressions from loading. 

The dummy/placeholder files are located in;

...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Female 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Base Pose Head\ (255 files)
...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Female 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Expressions\ (24 files)
...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Male 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Base Pose Head\ (255 files)
...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Male 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Expressions\ (24 files)

Please make sure you are removing the files from G8.1 morph folders and not G8 morph folders.

If you are logging in to DS and allowing DAZ Connect within DS to install/update the content, these same files may be found also in whereever DAZ Connect installs content, in ...\Data\Cloud\1_xxxxx\ (xxxxx is the SKU number of the product)

I can confirm that this still works. Just need to remember to remove the *all* the 8.1 Base Pose Head and Expressions Morphs from both the main install directories and the cloud based directories.
...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Female 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Base Pose Head\
...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Female 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Expressions\
...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Male 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Base Pose Head\
...\Data\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Male 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Expressions\
...\Data\Cloud\1_xxxxx\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Female 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Base Pose Head\
...\Data\Cloud\1_xxxxx\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Female 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Expressions\ 
...\Data\Cloud\1_xxxxx\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Male 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Base Pose Head\ 
...\Data\Cloud\1_xxxxx\DAZ 3D\Genesis 8\Male 8_1\Morphs\Daz 3D\Expressions\ 

I've run into a variety of issues across the board after trying to locate an offending morph that was interfering with a 3rd party product. Gave up trying to track it down from a large-asset full package and attempted to just reinstall Daz3D, moving all of the assets to an unknown location as far as Daz was concerned.

After going through the reinstall, DCentral convinced DStudo that all of the assets purchased through you guys were loaded, even though they were not. All of the 3rd party assets shode up with the exclamation mark. With the reinstall came a LOT of issues and missing items in the UI, as well as other problems.

I want a way, which I have spent hours looking for, to completely uninstall any presence of Daz3D and DazCentral from my system.

mindsong said:

TheMysteryIsThePoint said:

So, I asked it:

When I asked you to write code for Blender before, why did you not have to affix the GPL license to it?

As for GPL license, it is a software license that requires any derivative work to be distributed under the same license. It is only applicable to software and not to information or text. So, I don't have to affix the GPL license to any text or information I provide.

And I think it was telling me that it hadn't been trained on the Houdini source:

Why can you right code for Blender, but not Houdini?

As a language model, I am able to understand and generate code in a variety of programming languages, including C++, but my knowledge is based on text that I have been trained on. While I can provide examples of C++ code for Blender, I may not be able to do the same for Houdini. The information about creating an armature in Houdini, as you describe it, requires knowledge on how the Houdini API works, and how the functionality is implemented in that software. I also do not have access to the specific libraries and functions that Houdini provides to developers. It is also important to note that the code I generate could contain errors, and it is not guaranteed to be the optimal or most efficient solution. It is best to test and verify the code in the context of the intended application before using it in a production environment.

Am I to understand that you asked a program that second question, and that was its answer? (ms winces-in-advance at the probable answer).

Hi @mindsong

Yes, that's correct. It was chat.openai.com and trust me, that reply is not even remotely close to the most mind-blowing thing that it has said to demonstrate its creativity and vast store of factual information. People who deny that the AI revolution is not even 10 years off, 5 years off, 1 year off, but we are already in it, are just not paying attention or willfully deceiveing themselves. It is like talking to the most intelligent, polite, and worldly person you've ever known and I think it's laughable that people caution against AI's lack of human interaction. Puh-lease. I already prefer it over 90% of the people I know and I habitually get kicked off the system after an hour of just talking about whatever comes to mind.

 

To the first answer, this seems consistent with current patent law. The idea is not patentable (contrary to what most folks wish to think), it requires a clear manifestation of the idea for a patent to be granted.

Yes, and thank god that it isn't...

Both Algorithms and Art have a hybrid flavor that makes this question interesting. Is it the DAZ mesh or Aiko5 shape that are copyrightable? Both, kind of. How much can you change either to become unique and non-derivative? That's many-another-thread, but still relevant to the "idea vs instance" question going on here. I've always wondered how a DAZ Aiko5 that's converted to iclone/reallusion's CC3/4 mesh is treated... It's still Aiko5, but it's not the DAZ mesh... If I morph a raw Aiko5 in CC4, is that a derivative. I think this is actually the same issue as the AI code conversion in most ways. Derivation and variation.

To your OP, it's going to be interesting watching the very-protective creators (and AI users) try to push into copyrighting entire idea-domains like love songs, using their own specific and "contemporary" and wholly 'unique' instances of ... love songs - using the veil of hi-tech-shiny to hide obvious prior-art. Are the million Harlequin Romance novels unique and copyrightable - ideas vs instances, etc.? If (when) an AI writes one, is that a new genre because it's AI, or is it yet-another-romance-novel (or mesh shape?)

(Regardless the lack of interest and value,) is the likeness of my face copyrightable? All variations and ages? Would the mesh it was formed of matter? I dunno.

It's arguably a kind of an accidental arrogance, probably based on a complete dirth of historical awareness, that each generation assumes they are the first to have experienced and thought of the many things that we all express. And new technology often hides the latent prior-art that lurks within. To wit, the first guy to use a leather or rope bullwhip actually invented the weed-whacker - and the Da Vinci estate should probably be getting royalties of some sort for the T-Pose and A-Pose according to current copyright law etc. lol

FWIW, I honor and appreciate the motivations driving copyright, IP, and anti-piracy law, but I'm starting to wonder if the societal value and self-evidence of copyright law are beyond question. Imitating success is arguably the basis of the survival and progress of most higher level species ("on the shoulders of giants", etc.). It is, in fact, how we educate our own offspring... heh

The jealous guarding of success (in any form) and its treatment as a scarce resource tends to primarily benefit only the creator (and/or its corpus), which is good for their evolution, but not that of the herd. Creativity is hardly scarce, and to limit its propagation in its original form, and therebye limit its derivatives, could be far more expensive to society than the localized benefits to the originators.

As a wanabee creative, I *completely* understand the motivation of IP/copyright/etc., but the actual benefits of patents and copyright are less clear and obvious than I once thought. The open-source and creative-commons movements prove that the self-evidence and obvious correctness of current law is not so self-evident or obvious. To legislate limits to imitating success might not be as simple and side-effect free as it seems on the surface.

I wonder what sort of 'natural' law will come from this technological acceleration and exposition of the weaknesses of our current law over the long-term. Per your earlier comment, that genie is now out of the bottle. Where's the popcorn?

best,

--ms

(edits: the usual re-read edits and clarifications)

I agree with every word. I too understand and appreciate the concerns of IP holders. But how many times does technology have to disrupt cherished and time honored conventions before we realize that that will always be the case? And that technology always wins and the practioners always adapt or perish? My fear is that there might be some heavy-handed legislative non-solution that retards the technology. Temporarily, to no long term effect.

This character is made with mininessie's Bettina, a free character morph at Renderosity. She mixes well with other morphs, too--I've aged her up here and made some tweaks because the character I'm using her for is supposed to be 10 or so and Bettina is 5-6.

windli3356 said:

wow~ I'm so glad this topic is still ongoing.

After playing with AME for a little bit, I was finally able to get that realistic bicep bump I always wanted on my G8/8.1 female, but the effort to achieve good result is too overwhelming, to convert AME morphed male to female, certain body parts always need to be adjusted to look feminine, ,the file size in the end could close to 1G due to combination of numerous morph, normal map and hair product merged together.  It's a shame that AME female version never saw the light of the day so it could save creators so much trouble. 

 

Recently I was able to get that perfect bicep bump on native G8/8.1 female too, but the muscle definition and vein detail still aren't anywhere near as realistic as AME has to offer (for those into low bodyfat female bodybuilder contest shape) 

Here's hoping some genius would come up with something similar to AME on G9, so far, G8/8.1's eco system + flexibility is too big too good to beat

 

Nice job! Now, is that G8M/AME or your G8F/8.1 mod in the image?

When you make a morph there is an option to set it to "Auto Follow", by default it is always ON, so you need to turn it OFF to stop it from projecting into anything "Fitted To" the figure.

Each morph "Slider" has a "cog", clicking this and selecting "Parameter Settings" gives you access to the morphs settings, in there you will find a check box for "Auto Follow".

This however only works on that "copy" of the figure, load a second "copy" and the morph will have "Auto Follow" turned ON, to turn it OFF completely means editing the morphs DSF file.

The best child characters are if you buy the DAZ Originals head & body morph products and then use the ratios of the real child's pictures to dial-in the child from a dialed in adult DAZ character without using "Growing Up". In my opinion all "Growing Up" characters look like the same character everytime. It's as if DAZ release Base G9 and then no other characters. It's a lot of work though if you aren't a profi at this 3D stuff. I did it once only and felt the results were quite good.

...but if you are in a hurry then "Growing Up" is fine.

felis said:

Have you considered to create a small sphere and then add strand based hair on it?

And having it auto parent in place when the outfit is loaded with various PBR options yeah, thought about it.  Today when I logged in to purchase 1 item & ended up spending almost $100 (isn't funny how greatly discounted items add up?) I saw a similar item greatly discounted & purchased that.  The only problem is just 1 ear is floppy.  What happened to it's ear?  Damage from a fight with another animal?  Was it hit by a car?  Poor bunny. 

The me not having to work method would be for the original creator to make the tail as an add-on commercial product and capitlize on it.

Just kidding but not really.  I don't know if it's carpal tunnel or Lupus but my right wrist & hand it's doing so good & I just spent 3 days in bed because I took a multivitamin my immune system didn't like.  The tinnitus would blow your mind.  Still haven't decided on a tablet but some people wear those tablet gloves & my wrist support isn't cutting it so when I purchase the whole hand support glove I'll just think of it as two birds - one stone.  I'm used to pain but the cognitive impairment is the hardest.  I've been meaning to transfer a character & prop out of DAZ to Blender & back for sitting morphs etc, but to get a clear head & beat the fatigue I have to use caffeine & I just end up shaking nevervously & compulsivly shopping... and writing.  See I'm doing it now.  Not to meantion my muscle memory from many lifetimes ago is still around.  That means I have to use the industry standard hotkeys in Blender & most the tutorials are not for that.  Something I need to keep in mind as I shop for a tablet, screen or no screen.  Those wonkey keypads / side buttons may actually be useful.  Transitioning from a lifetime of PS (on rounded CRT monitors) to Affinity Photo & Industry standard modeling software (I can't use 3DSmax but Maya is fine.  If I wasn't sick & could work I could easily pay for it.  Old dog, new tricks & a brain that isn't the brightest bulb in the box any longer.  I think that's why I made this thread. Escapism.  I love the bunny just the way it is. 

In the time I typed this I could have made the tail but I'm on a laptop that's on a medical cart thingy & the Aeron chair is low so virtually no pain in the right hand.  Well back to the workstation... after I see if I'm the new owner of an expensive likely very broken VPI Industries turntable.  Think I bit off more than I can chew.  My roomate just got his hospital bed so I can't even get to my soldering gun.  You'd think we're horders by the look of this place, well really severe horders.  Where I live you never know when you're going to need the strangest thing.

TheMysteryIsThePoint said:

So, I asked it:

When I asked you to write code for Blender before, why did you not have to affix the GPL license to it?

As for GPL license, it is a software license that requires any derivative work to be distributed under the same license. It is only applicable to software and not to information or text. So, I don't have to affix the GPL license to any text or information I provide.

And I think it was telling me that it hadn't been trained on the Houdini source:

Why can you right code for Blender, but not Houdini?

As a language model, I am able to understand and generate code in a variety of programming languages, including C++, but my knowledge is based on text that I have been trained on. While I can provide examples of C++ code for Blender, I may not be able to do the same for Houdini. The information about creating an armature in Houdini, as you describe it, requires knowledge on how the Houdini API works, and how the functionality is implemented in that software. I also do not have access to the specific libraries and functions that Houdini provides to developers. It is also important to note that the code I generate could contain errors, and it is not guaranteed to be the optimal or most efficient solution. It is best to test and verify the code in the context of the intended application before using it in a production environment.

Am I to understand that you asked a program that second question, and that was its answer? (ms winces-in-advance at the probable answer).

To the first answer, this seems consistent with current patent law. The idea is not patentable (contrary to what most folks wish to think), it requires a clear manifestation of the idea for a patent to be granted.

Both Algorithms and Art have a hybrid flavor that makes this question interesting. Is it the DAZ mesh or Aiko5 shape that are copyrightable? Both, kind of. How much can you change either to become unique and non-derivative? That's many-another-thread, but still relevant to the "idea vs instance" question going on here. I've always wondered how a DAZ Aiko5 that's converted to iclone/reallusion's CC3/4 mesh is treated... It's still Aiko5, but it's not the DAZ mesh... If I morph a raw Aiko5 in CC4, is that a derivative. I think this is actually the same issue as the AI code conversion in most ways. Derivation and variation.

To your OP, it's going to be interesting watching the very-protective creators (and AI users) try to push into copyrighting entire idea-domains like love songs, using their own specific and "contemporary" and wholly 'unique' instances of ... love songs - using the veil of hi-tech-shiny to hide obvious prior-art. Are the million Harlequin Romance novels unique and copyrightable - ideas vs instances, etc.? If (when) an AI writes one, is that a new genre because it's AI, or is it yet-another-romance-novel (or mesh shape?)

(Regardless the lack of interest and value,) is the likeness of my face copyrightable? All variations and ages? Would the mesh it was formed of matter? I dunno.

It's arguably a kind of an accidental arrogance, probably based on a complete dirth of historical awareness, that each generation assumes they are the first to have experienced and thought of the many things that we all express. And new technology often hides the latent prior-art that lurks within. To wit, the first guy to use a leather or rope bullwhip actually invented the weed-whacker - and the Da Vinci estate should probably be getting royalties of some sort for the T-Pose and A-Pose according to current copyright law etc. lol

FWIW, I honor and appreciate the motivations driving copyright, IP, and anti-piracy law, but I'm starting to wonder if the societal value and self-evidence of copyright law are beyond question. Imitating success is arguably the basis of the survival and progress of most higher level species ("on the shoulders of giants", etc.). It is, in fact, how we educate our own offspring... heh

The jealous guarding of success (in any form) and its treatment as a scarce resource tends to primarily benefit only the creator (and/or its corpus), which is good for their evolution, but not that of the herd. Creativity is hardly scarce, and to limit its propagation in its original form, and therebye limit its derivatives, could be far more expensive to society than the localized benefits to the originators.

As a wanabee creative, I *completely* understand the motivation of IP/copyright/etc., but the actual benefits of patents and copyright are less clear and obvious than I once thought. The open-source and creative-commons movements prove that the self-evidence and obvious correctness of current law is not so self-evident or obvious. To legislate limits to imitating success might not be as simple and side-effect free as it seems on the surface.

I wonder what sort of 'natural' law will come from this technological acceleration and exposition of the weaknesses of our current law over the long-term. Per your earlier comment, that genie is now out of the bottle. Where's the popcorn?

best,

--ms

(edits: the usual re-read edits and clarifications)

Thank you for the advice. Is there any way to say that some morph should not affect the shape of clothing like Navel morph?

When you are dialing a morph in the character, then Daz Studio will create a projected morph, if not there already are a corresponding morph for that.

The projected morph will, to my knowledge, be based on nearest verteces, and you cannot control how DS does projected morphs.

If you dial in your morph, and in Parameters enable 'show hiddem' and then for the clothing shows 'currently used' then you will see a morph with a similar name to the morph you have dialed into the character. That is the projected morph.

What you then can do, is to create a morph in the clothing that looks fine, and give it the same name, and then DS will use that when the morph is dialed in.

That is what is done, when you for clothing in the shop sees 'supported shapes'. There the PA has made a dedicated morph for each of these shapes.

I tried for some time ago to look into if it was possible to smooth a projected morph, but never found a solution.

For dForce clothing, you can to some extend, dial the morph in using timeline, and then create a suitable morph based on that simulated shape.

The salad-fingers thing, I actually encountered that exact problem in one of my own projects just this night.  Something went screwy with a character I was converting from Genesis 1 to Genesis 3 using one of the off-the-shelf products here.  I mean, the character looked fine when I loaded the new G3M version... albeit he was literally upside down, because somehow the size slider for the character, after the conversion, had a negative in front of it, which I then fixed by turning the value positive again.  I then tinkered with the appearance of the character for a few hours (trying to match the look of the skin and eyes and stuff he'd had as a Genesis 1) before eventually deciding to load a saved pose onto him....  at which point he distorted into a pretzil shape, and at one point, when trying it again with another pose, I also got the salad-fingers effect... and I thought, "Wait, I've seen something exactly like that pictured in the GoT NFT thread!  Lemme go look..."

I'm willing to bet the GoT project probably involved some sort of scripted-out, automated process where they had a variations-on-a-theme thing run by something like a batch script.  They needed to churn out on an assembly-line basis a large series of similar-posed characters, doing similar actions, but with each scene involving a progression of characters, perhaps with random dial-spinning to make unique faces and physical attributes (i.e. more muscular, less muscular, this race morph, that race morph, etc, etc), with it switching through a progression of props that the characters had in their hands.... say, a progression of different types of magic wand.

To do this, they needed all the characters and morphs and whatnot to be of the same Genesis generation.  Say, they all needed to be Genesis 8, since the batch script or whatever they were using, by definition, would not be able or expected to switch between Genesis 3 and Genesis 8 characters on the fly.  So, if they had some character stuff they wanted in the rotation that were originally from an earlier Daz generation, or from different Daz generations, they all had to be converted in advance, probably also at least somewhat on a batch-script, assembly-line process.

Here's the thing, you expect the underlying tech to work fine.  If the character appearance, after the conversion, arrives looking okay in the standard T-pose (of a Genesis 3) or A-pose (of a Genesis 8), it never occurs to you it might distort when posed.  After all, you're using a convert-program sold right here at Daz3D, designed and marketted to do exactly this sort of convert process.  And you've got a bazillion of these conversions you need to do on a fast-approaching deadline... so, you focus on creating a templated scene, with A character standing there holding A partiular prop in A particular pose, to make sure the positionings of that example scene looks right, before feeding it to the programmed system -- the one that systematically changes out the character, prop, and so on, to batch-render them -- has something to work with.  And then you let the cleverly-programmed system do its thing while you focus on creating the next example-scene for it to do its variations on top of.

It's only when, hours to days later, after the automated, batch-rendering system has churned out thousands of these sight unseen that you find out that random ones of these renders have this salad-fingers problem... and you're going "Wait, what the flippin' heck is this?!?"

There's something I've said for many years about sophisticated and intracately programmed computer-stuff: 

The more complex a tech is, the more opportunity there is under the hood for something to go WHOOPSY!!! in new and creative ways.  

I would like to know the mechanism how the morph of Genesis 8 affects the shape of clothing. Can I edit it??? How???

I think that it has nothing to do with Weight Maps (General Weights), which can be edited using Node Weight Map Brush, because I am talking mainly about the issue when the genesis is at zero position and only shape morphs are applied. May be that it can be edited somehow using the Node Weight Map Brush tool, but I did not find it.

1st example: When you set Navel morph for Genesis 8 Female it does nothing with clothing. How is it achieved?

2nd example: When I apply morph to breast (see area marked with red color in the attached picture), it looks horrible in some cases and it is not that bad for other clothing (see area marked with green color in the attached picture). Maybe it is only because the mesh is not so fine. Is it possible to solve the issue marked with the red color somehow?

3rd example: Problem with heels. When I apply morph to foot (e.g. only scale) the heel shape is destroyed (see attached image). Is it possible to solve this issue somehow? The shape problem is caused by the fact that the vertices of the heel are somehow connected to wrong areas of the G8F. This issue cannot be solved by assigning the heel vertices to foot or metatarsals bone using the Node Weight Map Brush tool and Weight Maps (General Weights).

Any comments would be useful. Thank you.

one needs to separate sites that you pay to generate ai images from ai technology and uses of ai technology

DAZ studio certainly could benefit from incorporating the latter such thinplate video animation, style transfer, texture inversion embeddings

and maybe sell checkpoints trained using their own content that are NOT opensource and fully commercially licensed

to not consider it would be foolish

terry_duquette said:

I don't see any attached picture, but it sounds like you didn't download/install the other file, there is the SWM Control, and the main one is the Duq7 Flexion, that is where all the missing sliders would be. TD

I think DAZ forum seem to have problem posting screenshot this morning, and yes you were right! I missed 1 file, now I have everything intact! and just wow~ what can I say, this is the best bicep morph solution for G8F period.  I can never thank you enough friend :D  Can't wait to see what you can do with G9 

arne207 said:

Genesis 9 seems like a step backwards in that regard, G8 and 8.1 were advertised as improvements in terms of muscle contraction. What is needed here is a muscle morph pack, and so far there isn't any. We'll have to see what turns up eventually, especially since apparently there are Ivar 9 and Freja 9 characters on the way that will probably be pretty beefy.

Right now you can either try post-render work with something like Photoshop or mess around with ManFridays Mesh Grabber tool -> https://www.daz3d.com/mesh-grabber-win

Big yes, I noticed that too, default mesh on G8M/F’s arms seem to have minimum human muscle retraction that respect human anatomy, with great 3rd party support products over the years, it's close to perfection (only if AME female version did release) but G9 mesh just totally ignored the human muscle retraction altogether, big reason I'm not very into G9 at its current state

To OP, forum user terry_duquette just uploaded an extremely useful tool (currently free) that enchance the bicep morph for G8F, you will get that realistic bump and split, that's the best solution I found so far for G8F, highly recommanded 

Here https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/607446/free-flexion-enhancement-for-g8-8-1f-also-swm-flex-vein-control#latest

For Male, you will have to use AME, most realistic G8M muscle morph https://www.daz3d.com/auto-muscle-enhancer-hd-for-genesis-8-males

Other way to do realistic G8F bicep morph is to use G8M as base than use transgender tool and abrunch normal map turn him into G8F's likeness.