Zbrush Topology has changed (But I didn't do anything)
deleted user
Posts: 1,204
On some items. for some weird reason when I Goz. it says "Topology has changed" But I changed nothing. All I did was send to zbrush. Move it a little and Goz. And thats the error I get. But it's only doing it on some items and not on others. It's weird. I can't say for certain that it's zbrush, or Goz, or daz, or the item. All I know is that this isnt normal and shouldnt be happening.
Here is a short clip of whats going on. https://www.dropbox.com/s/b6iyeod5aseai83/Example.rar?dl=0
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Did you send the item across at current resolution? If it has SubD applied that is an immediate chnage (adding a lot more division to the model).
no
watch the video pls
The video, without captions or commentary, is not informative to my eyes (though it's better than some). Please at least supplement it with some description of what you are doing, and screenshots of dialogues.
I checked out the video and the Option box shows that Export at current resolution is unchecked. As far as I understand that means GoZ should default to sending a base resolution figure and so there should not be any change to the topology. Unless you deleted or added polygons in Zbrush and I did not notice that. This does seem the GoZ is behaving strangely.
I have found that GoZ behaves strangely with DS 4.9.3.166. Occasionally it refuses to send a modified figure back to DS when pressing the GoZ button in Zbrush after moving/smoothing the mesh. Restarting both Zbrush and DS and sending the figure again usually works, but it seems clear to me that this version (1.6.3.166) of GoZ is a bit unstable (or DS is).
I take it you have never used zbrush before for minor fixes cause if you have you'd see the issue straight away. The problem I'm having should be fairly obvious to anyone with any experience with using Zbrush in Daz.
@ Angel - Wings
I have watched your video, I'm using ZBrush and DazStudio side by side but I don't use GoZ at all.
I see that you fix the deformations on the shoes with the smoothing brush. Damn it would be brilliant if GoZ could be realy used this way and could be aid you to seamlesly integrate it into your workflow like you tryed to. However GoZ sadly doesn't work that way.
I have used GoZ once but I had some problems because I missunderstood the concept behind and it gave me so much disadvantages over other methodes that I quit using it.
See my old post related to that in section Why I dont use GoZ here. Also My workflow without GoZ could be of to intrest for someone familiar with ZBrush. Its an realy old post and I was using DS4.6 - the GoZ plugin had also been upadated since.
Back to the video. First of all it makes me wonder why it looks like the hole scene gets imported over to ZBrush maybe the figure is parented to the couch? I thought if you only select the figure only this one and everything like the clothes fitted to and objects parented to gets imported to ZBrush this could be some reason why GoZ refuses to import the new shoes morph back to DS.
But what do you want to achieve? If you simply want to fix the deformations on the shoes you may should overthink your workflow on that. I think the deforamtions come from the character morph on the figure and are not well autogenerated to the shoes or maybe thers an issue with the weightmaps who knows? So I would first zero the figure pose and see what morphs causing the problem here and fix that first before I would work on the whole scene again nice work done btw.
My research and experiments with old GoZ also lead me to the fact that there was so called loose geometry generated within the exchange files. To be precise - if you select a fitted cloth and use GoZ there are what I would call "ghost" vertices of the figure fitted to - like reference points within the exchange geometry file. Maybe try it out - export the GoZ geometry as an obj out of ZBrush into an geometry editor like blender and you will see what I mean. This also can cause problems with the GoZ exchange files like I mentioned before and so the files are not reuseable but only for the one GoZ session that tends to crash at the end. So I lost many hours of work on my masterpiece morph in ZBrush and desperately tryed to recover the GoZ session with the exchange files.
I hope that helps somehow.
couch is parented to the actor. also im not looking for a new workflow. this workflow has worked seemlessly for me for 5 years. only now its just become a problem. im looking for a cause and effect.. not a new workflow to avoid fixing the issue. thanks for the tips though. as far as the deformation of the shoes. thats cause its meant to fit G2 and not only is it on a g3, its also child proportions which always distort clothing.
Hi Syrus, I also send figures/clothing etc to Zbrush using GoZ. Mostly GoZ sends back the morph/alteration I make in Zbrush perfectly. Sometimes GoZ refuses to send back to DS and then the work is lost as a restart is required. Sometimes the morph I make is to smooth out polygons that have been greatly distorted by a pose or by DS autofit trying to fit clothing to a morphed figure and not doing a great job about it. In the latter case I sometimes find that when GoZ has sent my morph back to DS, the wrinkles/distortion are not properly smoothed out, as they clearly are on the Zbrush screen. I guess this is to do with JCMs overruling my smoothing morph. It can be very irritating. However, if a figure is sent to Zbrush with GoZ in base resolution which is the default choice in the option box as shown in Angel-Wings's video, GoZ should not change the figure geometry. Sure it is possible to add/remove geometry deliberately, but the video does not show this happening. I think this is evidence of an instability in the latest version of GoZ.
BTW you said:
"But what do you want to achieve? If you simply want to fix the deformations on the shoes you may should overthink your workflow on that. I think the deforamtions come from the character morph on the figure and are not well autogenerated to the shoes or maybe thers an issue with the weightmaps who knows? So I would first zero the figure pose and see what morphs causing the problem here and fix that first before I would work on the whole scene again nice work done btw."
In an ideal world you may be right but in reality there are so many issues with morphs being transfered between figures innacurately or meshes not having sufficient polygons to follow the lead figures pose, or other issues causing mesh distortion, that it is much quicker to give clothing a quick smoothing in Zbrush and then use that as a "fix" morph in DS. You mentioned how brilliant it would be if GoZ would allow Zbrush to integrate seamlesly in DS.
Yes it would, but it would be even better if basic tools like Smooth / Push-Pull / Shrink-Expand Brushes were already built in to DS. Then you could use them on the fly as we saw Angel-Wings working in Zbrush. The Smooth modifier in DS is very admirable but having brushes is so much more flexible and intuitive.
OK I'm glad to hear that the GoZ plugin in some state of versions before allready did work for you - I'm not up to date on that.
I have to admit that using GoZ the way you did in the video is an efficent "quick and dirty" method to fix the distortions before rendering still images and I didn't know that it once was possibel to do it this way. Its just my own perfectionism that I dont think of that in the first place and allways try to fix every morph untill I have allmost perfectly fitting clothes. Maybe I will give GoZ a second chance if the current problems are fixed.
Smoothing and push mod and deformers... 1998 tec on 2017 toys. iRay came before basic brushes and move tools?... Really Guys? O.o
xD
Not sure I understand your point AW. Zbrush is full of smoothing / push-pull and other brushes. I don't think the current versions of Zbrush can count as 1998 tec. Again, not sure what point you are making about iray and brushes, unless you are meaning that advanced texturing has been considered (possibly wrongly) as more important than mesh modification tech via brushes. On the latter issue, I think both are important, but I'm saddened that intuitive, direct and real time mesh modification tech (brushes!) has been somewhat left behind in DS.
I was refering to Daz. :P
What we need to understand is that DAZ doesn't want Studio to simply be a different looking clone of Poser, so is focusing on providing a different set of features, even though some Studio users may want other things instead.
Come now daywalker, if DAZ3d included technology in to DS which is presently included in Poser, Blender and many other 3D rendering packages, it would not mean that DS would be or even look like a clone of Poser. DS has the ability to pose 3d figures as does Poser, DS has the ability to render 3d scenes as does Poser and the two software packages share many other features, this does not make one a clone of the other.
There are many differences between Poser and DS and if DAZ3d decided to include features (directly or via plugins) like intuitive mesh manipulation tools (such as brushes) or real physics features such as collision detection, gravity, wind etc which could directly influence clothing and hair, then DAZ3d would surely do so in it's own way and so DS would still not be a clone of Poser. In fact, the more advanced features that DAZ3d include in DS the less it would look like a Poser clone and the more it would look like a world leader in 3d figure manipulation and rendering.
That would be like gimp refusing to add "Saturation and Contrast" to their list of features.. As to not copy photoshop... when in fact most programs offer some sort of saturation control.
Unless it's a patented idea... It's open game and in the world of commerce. Those unwilling to adapt and evolve and heed adivce from those who pay their bills with purchaces, starve. I'll admit I've never in my life seen a website that will delete your comment or lock your thread just cause your not happy with the product until I got on Daz Forums.Which plays a large part of why I wont get too involved. I'm a paying customer who's opinion don't matter... Daz is lucky to still be in busniess... but then again I suppose it's easy to make yourself look good when you silence those with issues. or PA's will gang up on you for daring to criticise their, offten times, unethical methods.
Or Daz themseflves who has the power to allow us artists to partake in artistic design with HD capablity but would rather keep that tec to themselves... I've stated 20 times. If they sold that plug in for 99.99 USD they would rack up a huge score so fast. I, and many others have stated many times we would gladly pay 100+ for HD abilitys. If they think they are making more off selling PA HD morphs... I can name 3 people who have bought 1 or 2 V7 HD kits... Which is less then 100 right there. Between 3 people who would gladly pay 100 for the plugin... So just in my small group of peoples they have already lost 240.00, 340 if you count me cause I wont buy HD... I dont support what I consider greed cause then I'm just contrubuting to the problem. So.. 340.00 that I can account for that I know for a fact that they have lost.
PA's can still make a killing of HD kits as well... I mean I can make my own shaders. Nothigns stopping me from making ym own shaders I do all the time but I still buy shaders from Daz as well... there is tones of people who would rather buy the kits cause their either lacking in abilitys or dont have the time or the tools to make their own. but Artists who DO have the tools and skill set at our disposale like myself we want to make art as best we can... And correct me if I'm wrong but isnt daz about art?... Let me put it in terms that will make you understand how rediculous it is. If I were a painter and I went to a paint shop and I wanted a fine brush for fine detail and the shop owner says... Nope But i'll paint those details for you.. for a price... It's like... Not only greedy, but its also insulting to the artist. Like... You have to be one slummy shop owner to act like that...
I hate to say it.. I really do cause I love daz, but as a loving customer I'm a little concerned... At the rate Daz is going their going to put themselfves out of busniess.
Pease Daz, don't fall into the catigory of company's that had great potentual and then got greedy and fell... That would be tragic. As a long standing Daz junky. We rise together or we die together... =(
Onto the topic - Still no word. So I guess I'm alone in this weird glitch which says it might be me... Let me chalk up a list of items it does this to and if someone would be so kind as to GoZ them and see if it happens to them as well that would be appreciated.
I try to get into the habit of testing GoZ before I spend a lot of time on a morph in Zbrush. A simple pull brush and see if GoZ will send it back correctly. If so I can undo and continue. If not... I know I have to start uninstalling and reinstalling things.
As I say, I try to be in this habit but it is .... annoying.. if I forget and GoZ fails.
PS... add me to the list of folks who would pay $100 for access to HD mesh morphing.
You can add me to that llist also. I have had this Zbrush problem in the past, but since upgrading to ZB4R7P3, I havent had any issues as yet. But then again, I don't morph / render near as much as what you do.
Negative comments/ratings can get deleted on some store sites, which is why I don't especially care for rating/comment systems. And the idea that there is only one way (the one you don't have access to) to accomplish what you want to do is odd, especially when most of the folks that do have access to said tech don't bother with using it, or only use it for certain things.
The big thing people still don't get with the HD tool is that you are basically required to know how to make your morphs in low poly. If you don't know how to do that, the tool is useless to you. Normal maps are generally mentioned to to use since you don't have access to the tool; however if you don't feel you have enough polys to scuplt and you have zbrush, turn on dynamic subdivision. It gives the illusion working with more polys without subdividing the mesh.
Hi Male-M3dia, I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying that the HD tool is essentially useless because all the morphs we might want to make can be done with low poly meshes, or are you saying that the HD tool is a more advanced tool and is only useful for those that can already make morphs with low poly meshes?
If the latter, then that is cold comfort to those who can make morphs in low poly meshes and would like to use the more advanced HD tool but can't as it is only available to PAs. Yes, I know that becoming a PA is an option, but I hope you can appreciate that some people just don't want to be a PA. Some people who are highly skilled in morphing may want to keep it as a hobby and don't want to get involved in commercialisation of their free time activities. Some people are really good at playing golf, but don't want to become professional golf players. Does that mean that they should be denied access to the best equipment?
Basically you need to know how to make low poly morphs before using the tool. The tool isn't a shortcut for those that can't sculpt in low poly. For those that can sculpt in low poly and don't have access to the tool then you can get a similar result by creating normal maps. People in the industry are sculpting low poly and with normal maps without the the tool and it hasn't stopped them from making their work, so it shouldn't really stop anyone else that knows how to do it. The only way right now to get to the tool is to be a PA and release content for sale using it; if you don't want to sell then you're using normal maps to make your characters, which will give you the detail you need. Between normal maps and dynamic subdivision in zbrush, you should have more than enough to make personal use characters without paying extra or waiting on a tool to be released; that's something you can do today.
There we have it. When it comes to making high definition morphs for Genesis 3 figures, PA's have a choice of either HD tool or displacement type maps (or both methods). Non PAs have no choice, only the displacement type maps approach is available.
The two methods of morphing are compatible but follow very different work flows. Male-M3dia pointed out quite reasonably that skill in low poly morphing is a prerequisite to using a HD mesh morphing approach. Surely then the same argument is true for the displacement map approach. Before one can use this approach successfully one must have attained a certain high level of skill in map making.
Some people have the mesh morphing skills but not the map making skills.
Would you tell a sculpter that he/she was not allowed to use fine tools for sculpting, but nevermind you can still produce nice artwork by learning how to paint?
It is clear that DAZ3d wishes to retain control of it's HD technology for Genesis 3 figures, and that is perfectly within their legal right. However, one may question whether DAZ3d is providing the best service to it's customers by taking this approach.
Having a dynamic mesh is a brilliant idea for managing computer overhead requirements of meshes, but not when the user only has access to a fixed low definition version for personal morphing, in my opinion. I would much prefer a Genesis 3 with a fixed mesh of 100000+ polygons and accept the computing overhead compared to having a fixed low poly ( <20000 polygon) version that only PA's can morph at higher poly counts. I can understand why DAZ3d does not want to just make their HD technology freely available. However, why won't DAZ3d just sell a licence to use the HD technology for personal, non-commercial morphing, to those users who want to do this. This would surely produce significant revenue for DAZ3d and satisfy the desires of many of their clients to enjoy their hobby as fully as possible. The complaints would stop and everyone would be happy. Where is the problem?
And even though the PAs have access to it, what percentage of the characters sold in the DAZ store actually have the PAs actually used it for? I would be surprised if it's any higher than about 5%. And characters sold at other stores don't use it, since as far as I know, DAZ doesn't allow that.
I don't think that's the proper comparison. The sculptor is still able to use the fine tools to do his work; if a company has a brand of doing the sculpts differently which is their brand and proprietary, he doesn't have access to that, but he can still do good work. If the sculptor doesn't realize that there are extra steps that needed to be done to get the extra functionality and for his use, he's using the more effective workflow for non-commercial use. If someone doesn't want to sell then they are better off using the normal maps as that's more efficient. Right now you can think of the HD as a brand unique to DAZ3D, and they're not under any obligation to hand out or sell something that is unique to their store. People can make fried chicken at home, but KFC isn't obligated to sell or tell you their secret recipe that makes people come to their store buy their buckets of chicken. Rather than go through the explanation again, just read this thread as it's already been covered. In the linked post, you see that there isn't that much difference between Normals and the HD tool but for personal use, you'll get your results quicker through normal maps.
They don't seem to want to see that the HD Tool isn't a shortcut to a faster way to do what has been done with normal maps and displacement maps for decades in the CG industry. It's like a sculptor hearing about a mythical sharper chisel that will let them do finer work with less effort, even though most sculptors that have access to it still use the other ones instead.
Male-Mdia. I beg to differ! I think my comparison is correct and your "different brand" analogy is incorrect. I will show you why.
The difference between sculpting in low definition and high definition is a difference of resolution not style. This is not a case of "McSharp's proprietary fine sculpting tools" being better quality than "TrueCut proprietary fine sculpting tools." It's the difference between using fine sculpting tools and a spade. Your other analogy of making fried chicken at home is also incorrect. The difference between low poly sculpting and high poly sculpting is not a difference in recipe it's a difference in work flow and consequent resolution. You can make fried chicken without KFC's secret recipe but you can't make fried chicken if all you have is a candle to cook with. To make fried chicken you need a frying device (which brand is not so important). To make high definition sculpts (using the sculpting method) you need a high definition mesh.
You also suggest " If someone doesn't want to sell then they are better off using the normal maps as that's more efficient."
There is no "better off" here; that suggests a choice! Someone who doesn't want to sell (a non-PA) doesn't have a choice of which method to make HD morphs in Genesis3. There is only one method available to a non-PA (efficient or not) and that is maps.
The difference between sculpting morphs in a mesh and making morphs by making maps is exactly the same as the difference between a sculpter and a painter. To say one method of making art is better, or more efficient is irrelevant if you only prefer one method over the other or only have the skill set necessary for one of those methods.
By all means say (some) HD morphs can be made equally well by sculpting HD meshes or by painting HD maps, but again that is cold comfort to the sculpter who can't paint!
Nor is it particularly comforting to be told.... experts in painting maps have been making HD morphs for years by painting maps. Jolly good for them, I say! But I'm a sculpter not a painter, just give me access to a HD mesh!
False; most tools used to sculpt a mesh can also be used to create the displacement maps and normal maps used, and they do so while the sculpted mesh is loaded in the application. You can also load the meshes into an application like Substance Painter and generate the maps at the same time as you create the texture maps for the item.
Not false; read comments on problems with software trying to make maps from mesh sculpts. Yes, software can make a painting (map) based on your sculpt. Is it as good as a proficient human painter (map maker)? No, not yet! Maybe in a few years.
I don't think you understood how any of this works. Again, the HD tool requires a low poly mesh workflow. You can't get around that. So you're asking for a HD mesh, but you can't get around the low resolution requirement. That's not how this works. The HD tool isn't a workaround from you learning how to sculpt on a low poly mesh. So basically you're asking for something you simply don't know how to use. Learn to sculpt in low poly first, then make your details with the subdivided mesh based on that, then generate your maps. That's how you get towards the tool because you simply don't sculpt on a high poly morph and import it because that's not how the tool works. I've repeated myself several time in this post because this point needs to be driven home. It seems like you are arguing for something not because it's necessary, it's simply because you don't have it and you think it will solve something that it actually doesn't. Again, you need to learn how to use the low poly workflow first. And based on this, I still stand by my brand comment because you haven't disproved that.
Also the "better off" comment is a true statement. You aren't just working on a subdivided mesh and importing it.. there are other steps involved in order for it to work (which i mentioned in that other thread that I linked). By that time you would have been done with the the sculpt and generated the maps before the HD morph would be read to be used, hence the commerical application.