Is this your experience with free models?
lukon100
Posts: 809
Is your experience with free models like my experience?
I love acquiring free models, especially from Blendswap.
But I keep wasting tons of time fixing them up for use in Daz, when I could spare myself precious hours by building the model from scratch.
"Oooo, that looks pretty. I'll just download that and adapt it for Daz so I can rig it and have a nice asset I can use a lot."
Wrong!
In so many cases, it is much faster to start over from scratch, using the free model offered as inspiration only.
Free models are usually made in haste, just to help their maker complete a scene. Their promotional renders look fantastic. But open them up in blender and what you'll find is:
1. Super dense mesh with like 6 times the required verticie count.
2. N-gons with concave contours that require adding tons of extra edges.
3. Things need re-centering and origen adjustments.
4. Lots of assymitries to fix.
5. Parts don't fit together - gaps, misallingments, poke-throughs.
6. Not enough edge loops to withstand Daz's automatic edge-smoothing.
7. Orphaned verticies and edges.
8. Redundant geometry.
Just start over!
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
I have posted free stuff before.
I just don't think, that I am good enough for paid content.
So I don't expect high quality from free content. If it works for me, great. If it doesn't, no regrets.
I have only used Thingiverse and Polyhaven models for non DS/Poser freebies.
Polyhaven: Usually an overwhelmingly un-necessary number of facets, vertices and texture size. Looks amazing, but is a machine killer. I don't often use these.
Thingiverse: These are almost exclusively STL files, many are scans. So about 50% of the work creating your own prop is needed anyway. Conversion of OBJ, tex mapping, zero shift & scaling all has to be done. I don't often resort to this due to the amount of work. However, in the case of scans of real Roman statuary, there are few freebie alternatives. So.. I bite the bullet & take 200k-300k facets & do simple tex mapping and get something like the statue & plinth in the rotunda below:
I have to say more often than not, if I can model something myself, I do it myself. It's usually a little slower, but is exactly what I want rather than someone's interpretation of something a bit like what I really want. In the case of the image above, I wanted a statue, and I cannot model Roman Statues with my software.
Regards,
Richard
It's free, so if it works for you, fine, if not, make it yourself. Criticizing a free model is in bad taste IMO
I am not familiar with blendswap ... but earlier in my Daz Studio work I visited a few other sites for items not in the store. [I have since learned to do my own modeling, etc. which is much better].
My experience was a hodge-podge ... some itmes were poorly done, but others were reasonably well done and quite usable.
By memory, I think some sites were more consistently better than others. So, if blendswap is so much trouble, I would go look for another site.
No, criticising free models is not in bad taste IF the intention of the criticism is to help to make a better, easier & more efficient to use. In short, if the criticism is intended to show how to make it better, more usable & more popular. If the criticism just says how awful it is, I agree it's in bad taste.
Regards,
Richard
Presumably content from a site called Blenderswap is not aimaed at Daz Studio.
There's also plenty of free stuff which is specifically usable with Daz Studio. I don't use many freebies but the ones I did never disappointed.
If you use daz studio you should probably look for free items for daz studio there's a lot. Of course if you get blender items you'll have to fit them. Apart that, what you're arguing about free items is exactly my experience with most commercial daz assets .. super dense mesh, poke through, redundant geometry ..
...yeah freebies may have issues, but I don't pay a penny for them (well maybe for the power to be online which is not much) I don't see it as a bother to make minor corrections (crikey I have to do so with "paid for" content) Being retired and living by myself I don't have to juggle a job and/or family time along with 3D work.
Save for fairly simple items I just can't seem to get the hang of polygon modelling as there is no tactile sense like when physically constructing something with your hands.. I'm sure there are AR gloves & such that offer such feedback (likely very expensive), but Blender hasn't moved in that direction yet.
Kitbashing ia a different process as it for the most part it involves using existing meshes that are combined with others to create something "unique".
I have offered free models. I sometimes make them for my own scene and then think 'why not share?' Therefore, yes, some of mine are made in haste and without fine detail in areas I was not intending to be a focus in my particular usage. However, mine do NOT have (a) stray edges and vertices, or (b) n-gons, or (c) lack of supporting edge loops. But sometimes mine do have other faults not mentioned. Examples include (d) poor texture work that invites the user to swap out surfaces, and (e) no weightmap optimization for dForce-intended items. I make no apologies for my extra faults. If the user remembers it is a freebee, then the user should also be able to remember 'you get what you pay for.'
Shocking that this has to be pointed out.
If the model isn't made for Studio, it's going to take work. Sometimes, it works with minimal effort, sometimes, as you say, it's more trouble than it's worth. But if it's designed for use in Blender, it could have n-gons or booleans, or any number of other things that Blender likes and DS doesn't.
My own freebies are made for Studio in the first place. As for quality - some were made to compliment a paid set, in which case the quality is the same as the paid sets; some were made because someone asked me to help make a background prop or a simple prop and those were made with that in mind (fit for purpose but maybe not close-up 4K renders); and I'm slowly releasing some sets that were for sale in my (now retired) Rendo store as freebies (but maybe not the older ones as the quality on those isn't up to spec anymore).
I have an aversion to "criticizing" free models too. Perhaps we differ on what is meant by "critisizing".
I pointed out some things about some free models that frustrate me. So it certainly sounds like I'm critisizing such models, as if I expected them to suit my desires. That would be arrogant of me. But I have no such expectations. I'm not really disrespecting these models. My complaint is mostly with myself, for making the wrong decision between adapting their model's mesh or starting from scratch. I'm frustrated at how often I decide to adapt their model when it would be easier to start from scratch.
I like these Blandswap models 'cause so many of them are CC-0 and I can include them in a freebie model that I may release for others to use. I hope some day to release a free house model. I want to include some furnishings. So I like to acquire and adapt Blendswap furnishings models.
Yes, as Richard points out, Blendswap models are not rigged for use in Daz. I fully understand this going in. I expect to have to re-rig models for Daz, using a SicklYield toturial.
A lot of this adapting is fun for me. But not if I must spend too much time upgrading the mesh. I'm finding that building my own mesh from scratch is often much faster.
Ya. I'm just dismayed that I often pick the wrong option.
FYI, here's the freebie models I made so far: https://sharecg.com/Lukon100
Not all free stuff, like commercial stuff, is create equal. Sometimes you get lucky. Sometimes you get what you pay for ;).
My sharecg account has gone inactive it says. And they don't have an option to reactivate it aparently. Make a new account I think to myself, then? Nope, 'email address already in use'.
I guess the disatisfaction about free products can extend to the 'customer support' on free websites too it seems! :D
oh I hate it when that happens
(not happened on ShareCG yet but have had that a few sites paid even)
I have a few freebies. I found some useable assets on DevArt but the majority of free clothing I have installed is so inferior to the store-bought items that they usually disappoint greatly. However, I have downloaded and then sculpted my own morphs for some clothes and am using them regularly. So it is worth a try and a little effort to add your own features.
What really disappoints is that I seem to be watching a trend developing to fill the store with clothes that have no morphs at all. They rely on dForce entirely. Which means that I am spending a lot of time modifying paid-for assets which I wouldn't mind if they were all selling at $1.99 each. I don't count all those FBMs as adjustment morphs because I don't have a collection of DAZ characters for which the FBMs are made.
I wish for a few talented artists to start selling clothes that open and close, have zippers that work, buttons that undo and various movement morphs.
My experience with freebies wary, and I've found some really good freebies but on the other hand some 500k vertices faucets or toilets. I don't mind "fixing" free models, except if it's UV mapping. That is not my favourite part of modelling, so those I usually skip unless the model is really good... but that's not really my biggest gripe, What really irks me with freebies is, that so many archviz environments are .max files, and I have no way to open them. So many great looking models out of reach. Why oh why they can't export .obj or .fbx or something also? I don't mind if the scene doesn't look great on Blender or something. It was not made for Blender so it's understandable. It just feels cruel to see endless rows full of gorgeous .max scenes and no way to use them...
Oh, and I'm with @marble with more movement morphs for clothes.
I feel that way about a lot of free Sketchup models. Blender does have plugins to convert them to raster models, but the result is still disaterous in terms of 4 times the needed geometry and all edges being split.
I have not seen this teasing collection of .max archvis models you mention. Perhaps it is better that I not know.
In years past I did convert several .max models because I had a free student copy of Max that lasted several years before expiring. I could load up the .max model in Max and get an .obj (or was that .fbx) export. Those were the days.
All the free models I have, made by YOU, are certainly well made.
the ones I converted with the 30 day MAX trial looked considerably less impressive in D|S
This is how I lost my LinkedIn account. I guess either it had been idle to long or hackers were trying to get in, so it said I needed to verify something through email. It was a Yahoo email address. And Yahoo decided I had been idle so long that it just deleted my account. So I can't reactivate LinkedIn because that depends on an email account that no longer exists.
I have a number of free models which are excellent, some of which have become indispensable to me. I have others that are meh. I don't think I ever got one that sucked so badly that I uninstalled it. (Conversely, I have uninstalled and even occasionally gotten a refund on a couple of things I got from the Daz store!)
Since I absolutely refuse to do any modelling myself--my attitude is that it took me long enough to get semi-competent with Studio, I don't have enough hours to learn a CAD/modeling program too--I am always pleased to find something that is useful to my peculiar needs, and some of those things are--how shall I put this tactfully?--things I am unlikely to find in the Daz store.
I do wish that model makers were a little clearer about what I'm getting, especially in places like DeviantArt where it's fairly common to see demo images of a fully surfaced object, but the download turns out to contain just the OBJ without materials files. These days I tend to play it safe and assume that modelmakers do NOT include mats in their freebies, because most of them use mats they didn't make themselves and which they are not allowed to redistribute.
Yes, when I offer a freebie that is merely the offshoot of something I modeled for my own use, but think others might enjoy as well, I try to make sure I don't share any shaders inappropriately. For my own use, I may have applied a realistic metal texture acquired in the Daz store, complete with grunge and scratches. I can't share that. Therefore, someone who downloads the model should not be surprised if I include only very simple procedural textures. If there are too many surfaces, I don't share the model. If you download a mesh, such as a space vehicle model direct from NASA, the ability to adjust shaders is a must. Again, you get what you pay for.
Example - NASA's free 3D model pages. https://nasa3d.arc.nasa.gov/models
...same here, particularly when it comes to one dealing with assistance for social programmes Had a couple logins go south on me like that, ending up in a catch-22. Even using the "forgot password" button doesn't work because after changing the password to a new one I then get the dreaded "username/password mismatch" error. Emailing or even calling the agency in question to have the account deleted so I can open a new one doesn't work either. They tell me it's been done but when I try to I get the "username (usually my email addy) already exists" error again.
Yes, "peculiar needs". That's a good way to describe what some of us use DAZ for.
I kind of think if the maker of the free item can't include the textures then the pictures they include of the item should be done without the textures. That would make it easy for people to see what they're getting.
Well, I don't see any harm in texturing the promo image of a model that has no textures as long as this is clearly stated.
When I make a freebie, I often make one version for Daz, and one set of .obj's for other programs to use. And because I often use Daz's default resource shaders for the Daz version, I state that the obj's for other programs have no corresponding textures. If I have used any image maps, I include them and tell the user where to find them.
Maybe I am just too 'undemanding', but I have already found real gems among the many freebies I have downloaded over the years. By the way, this also applies to the freebies of those present here - and those of the OP. I, for one, am grateful that good freebies exist.
To claim that they are all useless and that it is best to do everything yourself is a bit arrogant towards those who put a lot of good work into their models and then give them away. Probably the OP feels a strong need to demonstrate that he/she is only satisfied with the best - and, unlike others, he/she is able to produce it. Whoa, yo! I am deeply impressed.