pseudocritic said:

felis said:

Richard Haseltine said:

SDwitch to the Joint Editor tool, in the Tool settings pane click the icon at top-left for Vertex Mode, and, with the trousers selected, see if there are any entries in the main area under Rigidity Groups. If there are, click the +  next to them and see which areas light up.

Shouldn't it be Geometry Editor? 

It was indeed Geometry Editor, and there wasn't anything next to Rigidity   I've never done a morph in ZBrush before—for anyone who has, is that something relatively easy to do and would it even work for the item if it deforms using existing  but non-supported morphs? I may just use it without altering the gens area, but I do prefer it for a more realistic look. Thank you everyone for your help so far 

You might try exporting the troublemaking sweatpants without the trouble making morph dialed in as an obj and then reimporting the obj in the Morph Loader Pro with the character's morph fully dialed in and that will transfer the morph to the pants so you dial it there. At least that's how I think how to could more easily fix it.

I'm not sure what you mean, if you are wanting to make clothes for a Genesis figure or other natively rigged figure then use the Transfer Utility - Edit>Figure>Transfer Utility), set the Source to the figure and the target to your mesh from ZBrush, it is better to use the zeroed figure as the object to model around if you can

Hi guys,

I am having a strange trouble. The UV layout looks fine at a glance, but if you load the mesh in Zbrush and turn "Morph UV" on, you'll see that each UV square is separated from the rest.

As a result, when I make an ID map based on polygroups, I get this wierd result.

Is there a quick fix for this problem?

terranullis said:

when g9 was first announced, i was fairly enthusiastic. but now i don't see the point for the reason this thread has been created.

if clothes or characters are going to be made for "feminine" or "masculine", it's the same thing as having the separate genders. it's just now more confusing.

some g8f clothes don't fit g8f when they have small breasts, and some don't fit properly when they have large breasts. i can see with g9 that male clothing might look warped on feminine g9 and female clothing might warp on masculine g9. correct me if i'm wrong, because i haven't used it much as there's not many clothes out strictly made for g9 so i'll give it the benefit of the dout. i'm not trying to be judgy, but i'd still be a bit surprised if this got "fixed" for g9 (i know it's often the result of PA morphs).

but if things ARE made separately (masculine vs feminine) - well, i just don't see the point of making things confusing by having one "figure" when you still buy clothing for the different genders anyway.

it feels like when tablets were released and they had SIM cards in them so you could use them to make calls. you COULD use it as a phone. or you COULD use it as a tablet. but in the end, you never carried it around with you because your phone fit in your pocket easier so it became more of a gimmick in the house than anything. and then collected dust.

i bought the g9 stuff, but i tend to slide back to g8.1 at the moment. i feel like it'll collect dust for a while.

 

It’s definitely not the same weight on disk, or the same amount of clicks until you have the asset adjusted to the figure. Each extra click that is applied goes to the stack of interruptions of the creative flow. It adds double work when converting a garment of the previous generation. Add all the morphs that will never have an equivalent in the other gender and add the others for which you will pay only once. So, I am surprised that there are still doubts about the technical differences between having separated or unified genders.

As for the issue of obligatory renders, it is a question of time and the type of artistic inspiration of the PA. Some are fascinated by rendering hairstyles in both sexes, others will love adjusting to the real world, and others will only be inspired by the gender in which they decided to make their product.

Of course, it is also matter of the customers to buy or not to buy a product on which they want to be 100% sure what it looks like in their favorite morph before making the purchase. If this is so crucial to sales success, the PA that makes extra renders will inform those who don’t, how wonderfully increased their sales by these extra, or if on the other hand, it is a waste of time for the PA and also this removes from the hand of customers a certain amount of products per year that will not be made because time was missed in renders that actually most of customers are not asking for.

Blender

Set Up Blender Units. Unit System : Metric System ; Length : Centimeters.

- Daz > Export as obj > Import in Blender > Create a Shape Key for the base/default shape > Create 1 shape key per custom morph > export those shaped Genesis as obj > Import in Blender with Morph Loader Pro

ZBrush

Install GoZ for DAZ Studio , Configure GoZ in ZBrush (specifiy the path to Daz). Then :

- Daz > File Send to ZBrush > Create a Layer for the base/default shape > Create 1 layer per custom morph > Tool GoZ to send the morph back to Daz as a morph slider.

N.B : Blender saves everything in the .blend file. Whereas ZBrush saves necessary files in a temporary folder (C:\Users\Public\Pixologic\GoZProjects\Default\My_Object.goz)

If ZBrush is amazing for creating morphs, this system of temporary files is terrible : you'll be able to work on your morph just fine, but if you sleep on it and work a day later, even opening the same Daz file and the same ZBrush file, you might end up with some issues (scaling, morph not conform, etc). I'm less used to Blender's sculpting tools, but it feels, with my "short" Blender experience, to be a way more stable and pro solution to create Daz morphs. On top of that ZBrush tends to weld vertices without asking if you're ok. And it's very easy to end up with a morph that won't work. Whereas Blender always respects the original topology.

I can't advise more one than the other. I used ZBrush for about 6 years, outstanding app really and ultra useful for Daz. I used Blender for only about a year... All I know is that the more I use Blender, the less I feel the need to go back to ZBrush.

maikdecker said:

felis said:

You can build an object with internal geometry, a la the dForce Add-On, and then they will kind of keep there shape. In general a low-poly object keep its shape better than a high-poly.

There is to my knowledge no parameter setting that really simulates a rigid object. 

&

MelissaGT said:

I'm fairly confident with dForce when it comes to hair and clothing...but I still have never been able to make solid objects reliably fall without deflating. I suppose I will have to buy something like that just to look at the dForce surface settings.  

Check out the How To Use dForce thread, and there the #s 26. Dropping an Object onto a Surface and 63. Momentum Transfer (linked on the first page of the thread) which might give you some further ideas how to manage to dForce things without squishing them (too much).

Also remember with gravity turned to 0 moving the box/basket/whatever UP to catch the static (but dForced) carrots in a timeline will catch them like pokemons... probably (haven't tried it myself, but from my experience it should work). 

#26 is as I said, low poly objects are better at keppeing their shape, and as there is used a low poly bounding box as carrier of the object, you will never get the objects to stack.

#63 is the best setting I have found for keeping an object in shape, but it will still deform more or less, depending on the situation, and is used in a zero gravity environment, so you won't get object to stack that way.  

felis said:

You can build an object with internal geometry, a la the dForce Add-On, and then they will kind of keep there shape. In general a low-poly object keep its shape better than a high-poly.

There is to my knowledge no parameter setting that really simulates a rigid object. 

&

MelissaGT said:

I'm fairly confident with dForce when it comes to hair and clothing...but I still have never been able to make solid objects reliably fall without deflating. I suppose I will have to buy something like that just to look at the dForce surface settings.  

Check out the How To Use dForce thread, and there the #s 26. Dropping an Object onto a Surface and 63. Momentum Transfer (linked on the first page of the thread) which might give you some further ideas how to manage to dForce things without squishing them (too much).

Also remember with gravity turned to 0 moving the box/basket/whatever UP to catch the static (but dForced) carrots in a timeline will catch them like pokemons... probably (haven't tried it myself, but from my experience it should work).

felis said:

Richard Haseltine said:

SDwitch to the Joint Editor tool, in the Tool settings pane click the icon at top-left for Vertex Mode, and, with the trousers selected, see if there are any entries in the main area under Rigidity Groups. If there are, click the +  next to them and see which areas light up.

Shouldn't it be Geometry Editor? 

It was indeed Geometry Editor, and there wasn't anything next to Rigidity   I've never done a morph in ZBrush before—for anyone who has, is that something relatively easy to do and would it even work for the item if it deforms using existing  but non-supported morphs? I may just use it without altering the gens area, but I do prefer it for a more realistic look. Thank you everyone for your help so far 

First you create some object in any 3d application. Then export it to obj format. Launch Daz Studio and import this object into the program. Details (for Blender) here:

Your prop is in the Daz Studio now. Morphs for it  are created in the same 3D application (the object is morphed by the tools of your program). Then the morphed object is also exported to obj file.

But now you don't import the object into Daz Studio as usual. You have to transfer it using the Morph Loader Pro plugin (with your prop active in the scene, of course). Details at the end of this video:

That is, the first obj file is your prop, and the second is its morph. The number and order of vertices must be unchanged, otherwise the Morph Loader will not accept the morph object and will report an error in the log file.

Mi pare una scemenza comunque, anche se non ti serve che si vedano non c'è bisogno di rimuoverli per venderli separatamente, basta il morph apposito che c'è sempre stato su tutte le figure.

E poi i morph HD prendono un mucchio di risorse.

Fai te a decidere se spendere venti dollari o giocarti due giga di VRAM ( e avere render neri sotto IRay causa sforamento) per avere l'ombelico sulla tua ragazza in bikini.

To get the figure even a bit "less bulky" you can use the following basic settings:

• Lithe 100%
• Thin 100%
• Drago HD 50%

If you also own some morph packs (Body Morphs for G8M for example), there's dedicated adjustments possible for shoulder width, neck length and whatevers..

Or you try to contact a PA or something able to design a figure that gives you 100% what you want.

GhostofMacbeth said:

He doesn't have to be bulky. Just a quick application of the thin and lithe morph from Daz. Not played the game so I am not sure if that is closer to what you are looking for.

billyben_0077a25354 said:

I will be returning this product.  I have used geografts before and the vendors always made them easy to copy the materials over to the Geograft by using scripts and having a copy materials button in the product.  This having to apply the skin mat 3 times is for the birds.  Also it will only work with single mat skins.  Any skin that includes the genitials mat does not work (I just tested every character I have).  All I have been able to get the geograft to work with are the single skins and chest skins for Victoria and Michael and the 8 base skins.  None of the PA model skins seem to work at all (at lease the models I have)   Also the morphs provided are very basic.  I would have liked to see a product that at least has the same nubmer of morphs as the nipple and neval morphs for the G3/8/8.1 generations.  It is amazing that this product got out of QC.  It is not up to DAZ Studio's usual standards.

I've used them on Nao, a PA character, and they worked fine with her genital mats. I might be misunderstanding what you mean by single skins. 

The biggest issue I've had with these is that they distort pretty badly when using the Breast Fullness Lower morph. They're not the most complete solution, but they're around the same level of detail as the official morphs if you need to keep your characters at low subdivision. This character is using them at subdivision level 1 and the geografts at 4. 

My steps for using them are load the geografts on the character > apply the PBR (or Iray Uber) shader to the geografts > copy the character's body texture > paste the body texture onto both geografts. 

The Torpedo Bra was fashioned to work with V9, it also works with G9 Female.

One selects the figure and dials in the morph. These types of morphs only work on the clothing.

Uploaded to Renderosity

The Torpedo Bra goes by several names including Bullet Bra.

Used in promo:
Lights, one of the Easy Portrait presets plus 1 sphere mesh light.
Fair Maiden Under Dress.
Voss Hair G9
Genesis 9's Victoria 9

Product includes ONLY the projections morphs for the Torpedo Bra. Just merge like folders together then open D/S and enjoy :-)

Mattymanx said:

Diomede said:

On topology and edge loops. - Reply to Oso3D but really a clarification for people less advanced than Oso3D.

Why do vintage modelers emphasize edge loops?  Recall the picture of the G9 torso mesh does not have any edge loops outlining the oval stomach musculature on the front of the human torso, nor does it have edge loops for the lower border of the rib cage.  Instead it has a flat grid.  As a result, if one were to just shrink wrap the base torso to a slim and healthy adult human, the edges of the grid do not line up with the edges of the rib cage or stomach oval.  It may still look OK depending on how dense the mesh is, which subdivision can aid, but major features would be dependent on internal deformation of squares, not outlines by edge loops.  (See attached pic).  However, that is inefficient if you know ahead of time that the shape you want has an oval stomach and a slope for the lower rib cage.  The same shape could be achieved with fewer polygons, less subdivision, less strain on computer resources.  In practice, people who struggle to have 3 or 4 Daz figures in a scene could have 7 or 8 if the mesh was more efficient. 

Other examples of issues include several joints. There have been complaints about rubbery joints reminiscient of V4 and M4.  Some of that is due to JCMs being occasionally deactivated, a bug which I am sure will be fixed (Thank you, Mada, for monitoring the forums and helping diagnose and solve that problem for users).  But another part of the issue comes from poor edge flow of the mesh in the joints.  If the edge loops better matched human skeletal and musculature structure then the rigging and weightmapping would have better results and there would be less need for morph fixes like JCMs.  

I have used the word 'vintage' in the term vintage modelers to try to signal that I know Daz believes the mesh of G9 is a step forward, not backward.  Daz3D is well aware of the points I have made about edge flow, and consciously chose the G9 mesh as is.  One possible good reason to do so would be a decision to rely more on mesh density and sculpting to define shape than selecting and manipulating individual edge loops.  

Just clarification.  I am on the Genesis 9 train.  I have had occasion to dabble in ZBrush and similar.  Looking forward to the people who open ZBrush for the first time and who can't figure out why they can only replicate a seemingly infinite number of spheres instead of sculpting the starting sphere.  :) 

 

There is a right time and place for doing edge loops to define a specific shape in any model, but Genesis 9 is a canvas to be built on top of, and it's mesh is the way it is to allow more creative freedom to those who build on it.  From the start, the Genesis figures were meant to be a multi-use figure that could be 1001 different people of all shapes and sizes.  So lets say the stomach area is defined for muscles, then morphing it into a pregnant belly or someone who is very heavy set becomes a problem as you have to sculpt out the detailed areas.  But doing a well toned body who is fit is much easier in this example.  Where as in the case of Genesis 9, with the mesh the way is it, is much easier to sculpt the body into either.

Well said. The base figure is just that...a base to build on. 

You would export G9 base, in base resolution as an obj, for sculpting on the character (for morphs).

You can export in a morphed version is you use 'reverse deformation' when creating the morph.

felis said:

No, a morph is based on the actual geometry, and the geometry between G8 and G9 is very different.

Besides, I am not sure what you are trying to obtain. The reason Bluejaunte includes the foot morph, is to be able to dial the foot morph out, as it can distoft footwear.

Can anyone point me in the direction of some sources for best practices tutorials for DS prop creation in 3DS Max? I'm looking to create props with morphs and multiple surfaces. Not looking to transfer figures from DS to Max.

Thanks.

He doesn't have to be bulky. Just a quick application of the thin and lithe morph from Daz. Not played the game so I am not sure if that is closer to what you are looking for.

Ruthven said:

Crios said:

Imago said:

Crios said:

Allora, io G9 non l'ho neanche scaricato, neanche per curiosità

Scaricatelo e goditi tutte le parti svolazzanti in giro e la mancanza di parti biologiche necessarie. In pratica hanno aggiunto "quelle parti lì" nel pacchetto ma hanno rimosso capezzoli e ombelico. Vai a capire.

Cioè hanno messo Ciuffa e Monsieur Parbleu nel pacchetto gratuito, e hanno levato l'ombelico?

 

Non nel pacchetto gratuito, nell'Essentials Expansion a pagamento.

Sempre meglio, comunque, che metterli solo nei pro bundle come prima.

Per quanto riguarda ombelico e capezzoli, però, è veramente una boiata; però non sono sicura di aver capito bene una cosa: ci sono nell'hd solo di Michael e Victoria? Su G9 non li vedi aumentando la suddivisione?

Mi auto-rispondo dopo essermi presa la briga di andare a verificare:

L'ombelico compare portando la suddivisione a 3; con la figura a risoluzione base è appena accennato, a risoluzione alta si vede meglio.

I capezzoli sono morph HD; che credo di per sè siano comunque già compresi nella figura base, perché non ho ancora preso né Victoria né Michael. Se renderizzi figure vestite non ti servono, o puoi attivarli anche solo appena appena. Quindi, in effetti, i geograft non servono, a meno che uno non voglia farli apparire anche su figure a suddivisione bassa.