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
As a PA, it would really be a vanity product as sales usually don't support revisiting previous generation or even products from over a year old. The sales would not justify my time unless I just don't have anything else to make or have lots of free time... and I'm already backed up with items in the queue, ready to be packaged up or released that I know will sell a lot more. Making HD items is extra work and considering how my last two G1 item sales were far below any other products of that generation and had far more work involved then the G2 items selling far above my G1s, I can't justify making anything unless it's filling a serious need and I see far more things needing filled in in G2 than G1.
I wish G2M and G2F were separate figures like Mike and Vicky were. It seems that the hurdle with the GF figures was breasts and UV stretching. Now I think the G2M figures are hampered by breasts. The ladies are what sells, so I understand the reasoning. Just my opinion.
As a PA, it would really be a vanity product as sales usually don't support revisiting previous generation or even products from over a year old. The sales would not justify my time unless I just don't have anything else to make or have lots of free time... and I'm already backed up with items in the queue, ready to be packaged up or released that I know will sell a lot more. Making HD items is extra work and considering how my last two G1 item sales were far below any other products of that generation and had far more work involved then the G2 items selling far above my G1s, I can't justify making anything unless it's filling a serious need and I see far more things needing filled in in G2 than G1.
Which kind of makes the point for making HD open to the community...
And for that matter, since there is no real technical reason that it can't be used on ANY subdividable mesh (there are other, programming restrictions that prevent it from being used on non-DSON meshes), an 'open' form could be restricted to props and/or Genesis 1...it's not black magic or anything. The closest thing I can think of to what it actually is...Blender's multi-res modifier.
But right now it looks like we are back to a split level Content Creation Toolkit...how sad.
I would guess since it's new tech, they're recouping their investment on it, so if you want access you would have to have it sold here.... which you can't do if you just give it away. Also since it is new, it doesn't need to be out in the wild. DAZ is a business foremost, and they do have to make money to keep the store open.
I would guess since it's new tech, they're recouping their investment on it, so if you want access you would have to have it sold here.... which you can't do if you just give it away. Also since it is new, it doesn't need to be out in the wild. DAZ is a business foremost, and they do have to make money to keep the store open.
Nevermind...had a long post typed out that probably would have ended up on the cutting room floor.
HD also improves the look of figures in the hard raking light I like for a lot of applications. Any time light is within a few degrees of parallel to a surface, the HD figures really show their worth. It also is a quick way to see "bad" HD.
That said, I'm not really getting the whole "HD thing".
I have several HD figures, and several others detailed with displacement maps, and frankly, I'm having trouble seeing the difference, either in closeups or with raking light. And displacement maps seem so much easier to create and so much easier to use.
* No "secret" tools, beyond a decent 3D paint program, and most of us have several.
* They're cross platform. Poser, Max, Carrara, Blender, etc. use them.
* Displacement maps work (to varying degrees of success, granted) with any figure having compatible UVs, you don't have to have identical meshes.
* Less resource intensive.
* Three words: Layered Image Editor.
* Three more words: Animated Textures Script.
HD also improves the look of figures in the hard raking light I like for a lot of applications. Any time light is within a few degrees of parallel to a surface, the HD figures really show their worth. It also is a quick way to see "bad" HD.
That said, I'm not really getting the whole "HD thing".
I have several HD figures, and several others detailed with displacement maps, and frankly, I'm having trouble seeing the difference, either in closeups or with raking light. And displacement maps seem so much easier to create and so much easier to use.
* No "secret" tools, beyond a decent 3D paint program, and most of us have several.
* They're cross platform. Poser, Max, Carrara, Blender, etc. use them.
* Displacement maps work (to varying degrees of success, granted) with any figure having compatible UVs, you don't have to have identical meshes.
* Less resource intensive.
* Three words: Layered Image Editor.
* Three more words: Animated Textures Script.
But can you mix displacement maps? Also displacement only works with a particular UV; you see with Genesis, there's multiple UVs so displacement get more restrictive. LIE doesn't blend particularly well with some textures.
As far as I can tell...no 'secret tools' needed to MAKE them...just some sort of 'members only' way of getting DS to recognise them...
Michael 4 was a direct morph of Victoria 4. The Kids 4 also fall into this category, being a direct descendent of the previous mesh. The have the same number of polygons, they have the same topology, and it's possible to make an M4 morph for Victoria 4 just by using exporting Michael and using him as a morph target. If you want further evidence, then look between the legs in wireframe mode. All the Gen4 figures have dozens of extra polygons presumably intended for genital morphs. Given the arrangement, it's clear those polys weren't intended for male genitals either.
Genesis 2 differs somewhat in that they're using weight maps which helps with bending, and because they each have different weight mapping, each one bends more naturally. Genesis 1 on the other hand had 1 set of weight maps for both male and female figures, which is why there were a lot of behind-the-scenes morphs to remedy the androgynous nature.
Michael 4 was a direct morph of Victoria 4. The Kids 4 also fall into this category, being a direct descendent of the previous mesh. The have the same number of polygons, they have the same topology, and it's possible to make an M4 morph for Victoria 4 just by using exporting Michael and using him as a morph target. If you want further evidence, then look between the legs in wireframe mode. All the Gen4 figures have dozens of extra polygons presumably intended for genital morphs. Given the arrangement, it's clear those polys weren't intended for male genitals either.
Genesis 2 differs somewhat in that they're using weight maps which helps with bending, and because they each have different weight mapping, each one bends more naturally. Genesis 1 on the other hand had 1 set of weight maps for both male and female figures, which is why there were a lot of behind-the-scenes morphs to remedy the androgynous nature.
Michaels 4 & 5 didn't have moobs, though
I think all the G2M figures have very ample pecs in their default state, where the rest of their musculature isn't as pronounced.
I just realized that yes, in an advanced piece of software like say Modo I could do it without any problem. I could combine any set of dislacement maps in any mode with any desired value. Moreover, I'd have no restrictions on UV sets. The mesh can have as much UV maps as needed and thus any displacement map can be used with corresponding UV coordinates. So, it is not some sort of technological impossibility, it's the DAZ's decision not to implement that technological solution in DS.
I just realized that yes, in an advanced piece of software like say Modo I could do it without any problem. I could combine any set of dislacement maps in any mode with any desired value. Moreover, I'd have no restrictions on UV sets. The mesh can have as much UV maps as needed and thus any displacement map can be used with corresponding UV coordinates. So, it is not some sort of technological impossibility, it's the DAZ's decision not to implement that technological solution in DS.
I have modo as well, and no you can't mix UVs in the manner I'm speaking.
As a PA, it would really be a vanity product as sales usually don't support revisiting previous generation or even products from over a year old. The sales would not justify my time unless I just don't have anything else to make or have lots of free time... and I'm already backed up with items in the queue, ready to be packaged up or released that I know will sell a lot more. Making HD items is extra work and considering how my last two G1 item sales were far below any other products of that generation and had far more work involved then the G2 items selling far above my G1s, I can't justify making anything unless it's filling a serious need and I see far more things needing filled in in G2 than G1.
Sounds like you are busy. No need to bother yourself with it, then.
Bye. :)
Anyone else want my money? :)
Anyone else interested in this option for Genesis 1?
Please remember to address the topic of the thread without getting into yet another war of the figures. The thread is not about which figure is better, it is asking a specific question about the HD morphs. Thankyou.
I have modo as well, and no you can't mix UVs in the manner I'm speaking.
On the face of it, modo can do that - each image locator specifies which UV map it uses (or that it uses a projection mode instead of UVs) so yes, you could layer a displacement map using one set of UVs with another using a different set. I wish DS had made the UV set an image and not a surface setting, but people complain about the complexity of the modo system so it's not a simple case of one system being better than the other.
Here's a pretty simple way of looking at it...HD morphs ARE the higher resolution MESH that displacement maps can be baked FROM. So they are a geometry feature, not a surface feature. That said...you can still add UV dependent displacement to an HD morphed figure for even more detail/surface features/etc.
HD morphs do offer things that displacement doesn't, such as undercuts (vector displacement can do that, but not standard normal displacement which is what DS does natively - though you could use a custom shader, or Shader Mixer, to get a similar result).
edited and removed by user
It's saying you can DIY - just use Shader Mixer, say, to split the colour into RGB values and use them (with a scale factor, perhaps) to offset the P value from the Variable brick and feed it into the P input of a Bump/Displacement root brick as I recall.
In ShaderMixer or ShaderBuilder...probably, but I'm not sure everything needed is in the available bricks.
3DL does support vector displacement.
There is a pretty simple one on the 3DL forums that may be fairly easy to implement, but it does have limitations...it tends to develop cracks with the raytrace hider, but with usual hider it works. So a custom one, from straight sl code would probably be easier...
You can go up to sub-D level 9, but that is just overkill at this stage. We were advised to stay at lvl 3 for now based on overall current system specs. If we go higher at this stage, there will be lots of people who's systems won't be able to handle it, so as time goes on, we will up the levels. My Zbrush dies at sub-D level 6 lol, so imagine in the future the amount of detail that can be achieved.
Holy smokes... Sub-D level 9 puts Genesis 2 at a CPU crunching 5.5 billion polygons. I think I just killed Daz to test that one out...
ZBrush 5 is going to have 64 bit version so those limitations will be gone if you have a good system with allot of RAM.
ZBrush 5 is going to have 64 bit version so those limitations will be gone if you have a good system with allot of RAM.
Egads! I cannot wait!
... will that be a free upgrade or will I have to buy it again?
I have modo as well, and no you can't mix UVs in the manner I'm speaking.
I do not get what manner of mixing UVs you are speaking. Research the materiel. Obtaining the modo license doesn't mean you learned it.
Here is an example of mixed uv mapping displacement usage that I meant (would be nice to have this in DS, too):
PS: I think adding UV mix mode with output scene or mesh displacement backing function would bring to DS additional advantage to mean it for more advanced using in CG in general.
I have modo as well, and no you can't mix UVs in the manner I'm speaking.
I do not get what manner of mixing UVs you are speaking. Research the materiel. Obtaining the modo license doesn't mean you learned it.
Here is an example of mixed uv mapping displacement usage that I meant (would be nice to have this in DS, too):
PS: I think adding UV mix mode with output scene or mesh displacement backing function would bring to DS additional advantage to mean it for more advanced using in CG in general.
I was speaking of displacement and easy of use, which those images you posted do not show. That's what I was speaking of.