• Welcome to the Community Forums at HiveWire 3D! Please note that the user name you choose for our forum will be displayed to the public. Our store was closed as January 4, 2021. You can find HiveWire 3D and Lisa's Botanicals products, as well as many of our Contributing Artists, at Renderosity. This thread lists where many are now selling their products. Renderosity is generously putting products which were purchased at HiveWire 3D and are now sold at their store into customer accounts by gifting them. This is not an overnight process so please be patient, if you have already emailed them about this. If you have NOT emailed them, please see the 2nd post in this thread for instructions on what you need to do

Copy Morphs with Python?

Glitterati3D

Dances with Bees
Thanks, but this is not about looking for a generic tool. This is about creating a script that adds my specific JCMs to clothing in the scene. People who own Poser pro can do it themselves by using "Copy Morphs From", but everybody else would have no way to do it from within Poser. I just wanted to make their lives easier by providing a preset that does that.

You know, Ken, you can make a morph injection for clothing for those who do not have the Pro version.

I did it for all of my Dusk clothing as new clothing products were released and posted the morph injection in the freebie section.

I would definitely, add your morphs to YOUR clothing products at a minimum, as freebies.

It actually takes longer to create the pngs and package it all up than it does to create the INJ file using Poser Export>Morph Injection.
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
@kobaltkween There were times I came to believe the guys at SMS didn't actually use Poser, based on some of the things you have mentioned. But over time I came to know they did use Poser, but apparently not like most of their user base. This became more evident during the released of P11, where I was struggling to understand some of the reasons behind the way Pauline was built. If I am a content creator, and I cannot justify it, imagine the regular user. SMS was always explaining their reasons based on how content was being used in OTHER software, to include game engines, which have nothing to do with Poser. The very same has happened with DAZ to justify dual quaternions (simplified single map game engine rigging) in their Genesis 3 and 8 designs. In what planet single map rigging is better than TriAx? Why downgrading the rigging quality instead of upgrading it? The answer was the same as with SMS: because simplified single map rigging works better in game engines, making figures more compatible with them. This again, has NOTHING to do with DS and how their community uses figures.

So yeah, let's sacrifice rigging quality to make figures work better in other software than at home. Let's optimize content for every other platform but its own. That seems to be the trend nowadays: sacrifice the Poser and DS communities to please a market where these figures are NOT used. On the Poser side, this was the explanation I was given to explain why Pauline didn't have iris and pupil specific MAT zones, or even one for the lips. I was told it was much better to use texture masks instead of MAT zones because.... that's how things are done in game engines. Go figure.
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
You know, Ken, you can make a morph injection for clothing for those who do not have the Pro version.
It actually takes longer to create the pngs and package it all up than it does to create the INJ file using Poser Export>Morph Injection.

I know the idea sounds great on paper. I would love to include support for ALL my characters and body sculpts, but that would multiply the development time, since those morphs affect many other Dawn morphs. They don't sit alone on their own. I would have to go fixing ALL other morphs mine affect on the clothing, or it won't pass QAV. Poser in particular introduces a LOT of noise and distortion to projected morphs, so the mesh clean-up is also a burden. People tend to think of it lightly for personal use, but things are different when we have bullet-proof commercial products.

This is why I prefer to provide people a preset that transfers the correction morphs to whatever clothing they are using. As we discussed before, many are using clothing converted from other figures, so even if I added support for all my morphs to my clothing, the rest of the people using converted contents would still be left in the cold. I think my solution would benefit MORE people, and at the same time allow me to create more contents in a timely manner. If you look into my queue, I have a lot in my hands to deliver. :)
 

Glitterati3D

Dances with Bees
I know the idea sounds great on paper. I would love to include support for ALL my characters and body sculpts, but that would multiply the development time, since those morphs affect many other Dawn morphs. They don't sit alone on their own. I would have to go fixing ALL other morphs mine affect on the clothing, or it won't pass QAV. Poser in particular introduces a LOT of noise and distortion to projected morphs, so the mesh clean-up is also a burden. People tend to think of it lightly for personal use, but things are different when we have bullet-proof commercial products.

This is why I prefer to provide people a preset that transfers the correction morphs to whatever clothing they are using. As we discussed before, many are using clothing converted from other figures, so even if I added support for all my morphs to my clothing, the rest of the people using converted contents would still be left in the cold. I think my solution would benefit MORE people, and at the same time allow me to create more contents in a timely manner. If you look into my queue, I have a lot in my hands to deliver. :)

I understand that, and was only offering an interim solution.

At least your customers without Poser Pro are not left out in the cold using your clothing with your morphs.
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
@Glitterati3D I think it's worth asking SMS to allow Python to do this part. Even if I added morphs support to everything in my clothing, all the rest of the clothing would still be left out. I think this issue should be addressed globally, instead of individually, so more people can benefit from it.
 

kobaltkween

Brilliant
Contributing Artist
@kobaltkween There were times I came to believe the guys at SMS didn't actually use Poser, based on some of the things you have mentioned. But over time I came to know they did use Poser, but apparently not like most of their user base. This became more evident during the released of P11, where I was struggling to understand some of the reasons behind the way Pauline was built. If I am a content creator, and I cannot justify it, imagine the regular user. SMS was always explaining their reasons based on how content was being used in OTHER software, to include game engines, which have nothing to do with Poser. The very same has happened with DAZ to justify dual quaternions (simplified single map game engine rigging) in their Genesis 3 and 8 designs. In what planet single map rigging is better than TriAx? Why downgrading the rigging quality instead of upgrading it? The answer was the same as with SMS: because simplified single map rigging works better in game engines, making figures more compatible with them. This again, has NOTHING to do with DS and how their community uses figures.

So yeah, let's sacrifice rigging quality to make figures work better in other software than at home. Let's optimize content for every other platform but its own. That seems to be the trend nowadays: sacrifice the Poser and DS communities to please a market where these figures are NOT used. On the Poser side, this was the explanation I was given to explain why Pauline didn't have iris and pupil specific MAT zones, or even one for the lips. I was told it was much better to use texture masks instead of MAT zones because.... that's how things are done in game engines. Go figure.
That's interesting. I'm for no pupil or lip specific zones, but that's because there's no good way to use them in Poser, either. I've worked with one of the only people I know of in the community who's made complex layered make-up materials, and they used masks. It makes no sense to have zones for areas that shouldn't have hard or fixed edges. The iris trails off into the pupil and even made-up lips only have a razor edge in Photoshop. It's just more effort to keep applying materials to redundant zones when anyone using materials for clothes or makeup uses textures for those regions anyway. Good riddance to bad rubbish, I say!:p Seriously, though, I've been wishing figure creators would get rid of redundant zones that I haven't seen anyone use since V3 came around. V2 was the last figure I saw anyone use material zones for second skins.

On the DAZ end of the rigging issue, I _kind of_ get the logic. They've managed to win over the professional community Poser has been courting by simply adopting gaming aesthetics. For me, that's been a weakness (I haven't even been tempted by DAZ content in ages as a result), but it's been wildly popular. And I remember when they were talking about switching DS to be online, like SecondLife, with renders becoming a kind of secondary artifact to real time interactions. So if they're still moving in that direction, or even just wanting to keep that door open, I can see the benefit. That's not where the community is _now_, but it might where they plan to take it. Or where they're working on it going right now.

That said, this is the same kind of reasoning I used to posit that Poser was sold mostly outside of the content community. The way Poser's economic health seems to correlate to its popularity in the content community seems to contradict that theory. I'm just assuming that DAZ has a good economic reason for making their choice. I could easily be wrong.

But for Poser, this is just a wasted opportunity to have better rigging. I mean, let's try out that logic, even applied to a target market of professionals. If you're making content to be rigged in a game engine, what do you need _Poser_ for? I mean, the name says you don't, right? Poser is only useful to a professional if they're using it as a posing tool. It's inferior at everything else (rendering, hair, physics, etc.) a professional has access to. And if you're ending up rigging and posing in a is a game engine, then why rig in Poser? It makes no sense to stop in Poser along the way from, say, Maya, Max, or whatever you used to model your figure in. Especially when by _far_ most people making game content aren't using Poser and would have to complicate their workflow to add it. Conversely, if you're going from a game engine to Poser, _and_ you're a professional, then wouldn't having better rigging tools be an incentive to go to Poser and render out some cut scene? I mean, with a game engine, you're competing against real time rendering.

Basically, I just don't see how Poser _works_ in this imaginary professional space outside of the content community. Blender is a fairly popular tool among independent game artists, and I see absolutely no use of Poser in the Blender community. I know of content community members who use Blender to create content, but I don't know of any Blender users who go into Poser rather than vice versa. Even outside of the content community, the people I know who've used Poser came to it through the human figures. The only major function Poser has that any 3D studio app doesn't _and_ isn't connected to using content is easy posing and morph dials. Well, if you make your own figures, you don't really need lots of dials. And most professional 3D artists work with other rigging and posing systems just fine.

I'm not even sure Rooster Teeth is using Poser anymore. Checking.... Nope, Maya. Which is where they build their assets.

I still use Poser for three main reasons. One is that it's still easier for me to use Dawn than make my own figure. That said, I'm now making my own morphs, textures, and clothes, and wishing I could bring Blender hair into Poser. Two is that a portion of the content community uses it, and it's the portion that has, or at least shares, more technical knowledge. Three is connected to that: Poser is made to be a tool to make content, not a loss leader to sell us content. It's more open, and has always been more open. The always part is relevant because even though DAZ has opened up DS (for instance, making the SDK free instead of $400+ and opening up dynamic cloth creation), they've already created an environment where people pay for the access to knowledge, if they can access it at all.

If the Poser community dies, I'm just going to go to Blender. Maybe I'll use ManuelBastioni Lab. Maybe I'll eventually make my own figure(s). But that's the thing: it's worth me throwing away nearly 20 years of working with Poser and taking the time to learn human modeling and rigging in Blender if there's no community behind Poser or Poser figures. Because as a simple tool, it's just a _little_ bit more convenient.

Poser was originally made to aid 2D artists in making stills. It was created to augment Painter, and made as a tool to get started working with human figures in minutes rather than take years of expertise it takes to make a fully rigged human figure. And nothing they've done or will do will improve on or replace that advantage. I mean the very best they could ever hope for outside the content community is to somehow be a better 3D studio option than _Blender_. That doesn't seem like a viable path.
 

kobaltkween

Brilliant
Contributing Artist
@Glitterati3D I think it's worth asking SMS to allow Python to do this part. Even if I added morphs support to everything in my clothing, all the rest of the clothing would still be left out. I think this issue should be addressed globally, instead of individually, so more people can benefit from it.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the benefit to adding it to Python and not the interface. It simultaneously undercuts PoserPro _and_ doesn't give regular Poser the benefit of the usability in general. I think it would be more lucrative for them just to add it to the regular Poser interface. IMHO, the most lucrative route the Poser team could go is make it 4 or 5 click easy to rig figures in Poser and transfer morphs into clothing, making Poser as figure agnostic as possible.
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
@kobaltkween The reason I am suggesting adding the capability to Python and not to the Poser menu is to make it an easier decision for SMS in case they refuse to provide this to non Pro users. Nonetheless, I couldn't get an answer from SMS anyway. They have been playing dead for a year now, so I am not going to hold my breath on this. ;p

Basically, I just don't see how Poser _works_ in this imaginary professional space outside of the content community.

The thing is, I don't see SMS deviating Poser from its public as much as DAZ. Poser is still using rigging that makes sense in its own context and usage, and figure topologies haven't been sacrificed to work better elsewhere, like it has happened to the new Genesis figures. Conversely, SMS are not content creators, and their figures don't matter much in the big picture. It is the SMS administration that worries me, because they don't seem to understand what Poser is, and who are the ones using it. It's like Poser is going through an identity crisis. It doesn't know what it is, and where it wants to go. On the other side, DS seems to be moving away from what it has been used until now. DAZ had no issues moving away from the Poser public, so maybe it could be the same with their own DS public. Maybe they would move to another market, where low poly, simplified topology and single map rigging would make sense. After all, Genesis 2 was the last figure to have excellent topology, poly count, and benefit from TriAx rigging. That was years ago.

We already know that DAZ has been flirting with Reallusion for some years, getting them to include a profile to quickly convert Genesis into a game model to use in iClone in real-time. Some of their vendors, like 3D Universe, are already selling real-time iClone contents converted from DS. Now it has become official that HW is doing the same, even though their figures were not downgraded as much as Genesis did. Even though I would be happy to expand my horizons and sell iClone content, I see that as a separate market to expand sales to. I definitely don't want HW figures to become game models when I use them in Poser, but I am OK with making decimated versions of Dawn to use in iClone. I have been doing that for a couple of years now, and it works.

Therefore my explanation of why DAZ has gone through such extends to downgrade figure topology, poly count and rigging must be to enter these other markets. The regular DS user doesn't know what topology or rigging means, so it's all the same to them. I have talked to many, and they don't seem to care if they are using DS figures or game models. So I suppose that means that what DAZ has been trying seems to be working.
 

kobaltkween

Brilliant
Contributing Artist
But adding it to Python _does_ provide it to non-Pro users. I mean, that's your point, right? That you want to give that functionality to people who buy your product, even if they don't have Poser Pro? It just doesn't give people who don't buy (or download? would it be a free addon?) the script an interface. So they would be adding the feature for non-Pro users (potentially pissing off their Pro users), but not taking advantage of the credit or increased usage a UI change would give them.

I'm all for it in general, and I think I understand what you mean. Putting in the interface would be a bolder, more obvious move, so it seems safer. I think it's a good call to ask for it that way. But I also think it's a lose/lose situation, where putting it in the interface at least gives them the win of significantly improving Poser's functionality to content users. If the team has good vision, they'll see that adding it to regular Poser's interface is a good idea and would probably boost sales.

I have to say that I saw this trend _long_ before SMS bought Poser. I saw it back with P5. They added cloth it in a way that only professional animators would find at all usable. Their features haven't focused on standard content community usage since P4/PPP days. Do you remember how people said that P7, with it's 21+ listed new features, had nothing new? That's because almost all of those features were irrelevant to most in the content community. They didn't need lip syncing, and they didn't need Poser's strand hair to render better when they couldn't do anything with it in the first place.

I've been assuming for almost two decades that the Poser creators knew what they were doing as they really obviously kept designing their software for professional animators. But it looks like DAZ was smart to break from them when they did, because at P5 they decided to stop making a program for people to make pictures with and start making a program for professional animators. Even when they finally brought on someone from the community,while Nerd3D is awesome and knows the community inside and out, he's a programmer and animator who uses Poser in ways less than 1% of this community does. The only features they've added since 2001 that have made sense as an appeal to the content community are full injection morph support in the interface (which took several versions, and only completed with the latest version), a raytrace renderer (which took _way_ too long, considering the guy working on the renderer knew that it sucked for realistic animation, let alone stills, and only happened because they used an existing renderer, and again, only with the latest version), GI, SSS, weight mapped rigging, interface support for creating JCMs, the Morphing Tool (though I don't think it's used much, and is in desperate need to of an equivalent to Blender's "Grab" brush), and autofitting. And in my admittedly limited experience, their autofitting doesn't work very well.

They've been treating this community as a kind of incidental customers for years when it comes to their product design. Which is why all of their figures have had major usability flaws. I won't say that's why their figures have failed, because DAZ has fought hard for content domination. But not one generation of figure since Posette has been designed with consideration to content community workflows, and Posette was made by DAZ. That's what, 7 generations? And pretty much the same team of developers? That's not on SMS. That's on the team behind Poser, that SMS acquired with the software like eFrontier did.

Most Poser users only use two rooms: Posing and Material. And most can't use the Material room very well beyond applying materials. Which is fine, because most content creators can use it well enough. But even content creators mostly only add the Setup room to that list. Even the fitting room seems to get minimal usage in the community. That's years of programming prior to the SMS acquisition that's gone to waste because the community either has no use for it (Face Room) or it wasn't designed for normal people making stills to use (Hair Room, Cloth Room, Bullet Physics etc.) and has seen no UI improvements since it was introduced and really obviously failed.

They've been trying to change us into the kind of customers they want instead of designing Poser to do what we need. If that team failed, it's because they haven't respected how their tool is used or the people using it, and spent millions of man hours trying to get respect from people who have never wanted or needed them, and never will.

I mean, literally off the top of my head, here's an the ideal workflow for working with strand hair as someone who just wants to make stills:
  1. Paint where you want a single type of hair (for instance, head hair, eyebrows, lashes, etc.) to go on a figure.
  2. Set the basic hair type (length, curl, thickness, etc.)
  3. Cut/grow and style it.
  4. Paint basic colors on it.
  5. Set color variation by hue, value, saturation, amount, and streak thickness.
  6. Save the hair settings to the library as something that can be applied to the figure like materials.
  7. Pose the figure, and make the hair respond to gravity, the figure, and relevant props _without using the timeline_.
  8. Tweak the hair to fit the shot (so it's not in the eyes too much, or whatever).

That took me literally a few minutes to come up with. Everything on that list could probably have been added in the second iteration of the Hair Room, and definitely by the third. Instead they partially did about a quarter of that list in the very beginning, then spent the next several years making the hair render more realistically. Why worry about how it renders when no one's using it in the first place?

I'm actually a bit more hopeful now that they've got a new team. There's more of a chance that new people won't keep making the same mistakes. That they'll focus on the customers they have. Poser could be an _amazing_ and unique product if it returned to its original purpose of facilitating awesome illustrations. Then proper bending and anatomy would be higher priority, dynamics you could "sculpt" to fit your final image would be an obvious feature, adding standard post-processing effects like glows and lens flares would be another obvious addition... They could put themselves back on the map if they returned to that original goal.

I was actually talking about DAZ making DS into a real time platform, not a outside product. They were vaguely talking about that at one point, IIRC.

Much like Apple (but, amazingly, on a much smaller time scale), DAZ has deliberately molded their customers' community into an informal fan group. They identify themselves as DAZ customers first, not people who have specific artistic goals that DAZ's products happen to support. Every time anyone points out that DAZ is a company that acts like a company, they get attacked by DAZ customers as if someone insulted them personally. Every time DAZ releases a new feature that's so unstable it can barely function, I see people posting about how wonderful it is when it's not crashing. DAZ customers tend, by and large, to follow DAZ first and foremost, and use their products secondarily.

Lowering resolution deviates from their customers if you see their community primarily as people who make pictures that happen to use DAZ content. But if you see their customers primarily as people who buy DAZ products, then there really can't be deviation as long as DAZ is consistent. If they're consistent, it's more like Apple putting most of their energy into computers as appliances and getting rid of their desktops after spending years as the brand to go to for powerhouse media production workstations. Most graphics people still use Macs despite them being _much_ less bang for your buck nowadays. The emotional appeal of the Apple brand and aesthetic were greater than their need for high functioning hardware and money. DAZ has fashioned a very similar customer base, while actually giving them really good functionality. The only ones hurt are people like you or I who make content but aren't blessed by them, which is exactly what they want.

It's not an accident that most of the people still using Poser are either geeks who like to tinker and explore, people who make very individually particular artwork, or both.
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
But adding it to Python _does_ provide it to non-Pro users. I mean, that's your point, right?

Actually, no. I would just make a preset that adds the 10 specific JCMs to the clothing. There is no interface. This would be just a library preset that calls the Python script. It does nothing but adding the specific JCMs and nothing else.

and Posette was made by DAZ.

I thought Posette was made by Chris at Zygote, before DAZ was started.

Even the fitting room seems to get minimal usage in the community.

Not sure about this one. It seems like a lot of people have been using the Fitting Room for clothing conversions. I hear a lot about it. Content creators use it for rigging.

I was actually talking about DAZ making DS into a real time platform, not a outside product.

That might actually happen, who knows? The way their figures are going low poly would serve that purpose.
 
Last edited:

kobaltkween

Brilliant
Contributing Artist
Actually, no. I would just make a preset that adds the 10 specific JCMs to the clothing. There is no interface. This would be just a library preset that calls the Python script. It does nothing but adding the specific JCMs and nothing else.
By interface, I mean you can access it through the UI. So in this case the library preset would be the interface, n'est-ce pas? And while I see what you mean about your script just adding the specfic JCM, the change to the Python API would have to be general. It's just adding the feature to regular Poser and letting the people who write interfaces for it take the credit for the advanced functionality. In my experience, the interface gets all the credit, not the work on the backend, no matter how much more effort goes into the backend.

I thought Posette was made by Chris at Zygote, before DAZ was started.
Maybe I'm completely wrong, but my understanding was that Posette was made by a whole team who then went on to create DAZ, not just Chris. So essentially DAZ before DAZ. And really, the point being that the Poser team didn't make her, and Posette was the only content community friendly Poser native character. Every Poser native figure since has had major problems filling the same role.

Not sure about this one. It seems like a lot of people have been using the Fitting Room for clothing conversions. I hear a lot about it. Content creators use it for rigging.
That's interesting, because the only content creator I've seen mention it is Glitterati3D. And I've very definitely not seen anyone say either, "I don't have to worry about morphs, I have the Fitting Room," or "I don't have to worry about clothing figures, I have the Fitting Room." I _have_ seen people say the former about DS's autofitting. And I _think_ that the last time I saw Renderosity post their Poser survey results that PP11 was the most common version among those polled (though I could easily be wrong about that). I've only seen someone mention they used the fitting room when posting an image once or twice, and one of those was definitely Glitterati3D.

Let me put it this way: the problem that DS autofitting solved for DS users, Poser's autofitting failed to solve for Poser users. Maybe that's because, as you've noted, that feature is only in Poser Pro. But I genuinely don't think that's true. I'd be happy to be wrong, though.

Using it for rigging means that the Setup Room has failed from a UI standpoint. If you build an interface, and people use it to solve a problem you already created a solution for, your UI needs a major overhaul. One where you go back and look at your use cases, tasks, and ethnographies to make sure they're solid, then get representative test users to complete (or simulate completing) some of those tasks with different interfaces so you have some nice hard quantitative data.

That might actually happen, who knows? The way their figures are going low poly would serve that purpose.
I could have _sworn_ they actually announced that's the way they would go at one point. Back when their noded materials were still a somewhat buggy addon, IIRC. I remember them saying that the new version of DS was going to be online, or some such. Nothing so solid as to disturb people, but enough to cause some discussion back when I was still on the DAZ forums.
 

Lissa_xyz

I break polygons.
Actually, no. I would just make a preset that adds the 10 specific JCMs to the clothing. There is no interface. This would be just a library preset that calls the Python script. It does nothing but adding the specific JCMs and nothing else.

I've been in and out randomly reading this (any time I see coding buzzwords I perk up a bit lol), but just chiming in here quick to say that unless you compile your *.py into a *.pyc, it could be openly readable by any text editor, and people who work with python will know how to de-compile the pyc into readable source. So, with that being the case, all someone would have to do is check your code on how you did, alter it a bit, even if they have to manually code different morphs in every time, and voila.
 

Satira Capriccio

Renowned
CV-BEE
Contributing Artist
I also use the Fitting Room for rigging, although I don't use it for transferring morphs. I thought the Fitting Room was a replacement for or less complex option to using the Setup Room. I also use the Cloth Room (I used and created Dynamic Clothing for my own use long before I began providing content for others to use). I wonder if more people use Dynamic Clothing than is assumed?

And ... I also use the Hair Room, though not as much as the Cloth Room.


When DS 4 was being developed, DAZ also planned on an "easy/beginner/simpler" free online version. I don't believe the online version ever saw the light of day.
 

Hornet3d

Wise
I am not a vendor and never plan to be but I do use the fitting room for making clothes made for other figures to fit Dawn, although my use has decreased as the available wardrobe for Dawn has grown. While I am certainly not skilled enough with materials to create anything but the most simple of materials from scratch I spend a lot of time in the material room modifying commercial materials, more so since working with Superfly. For the last two years I have spent a fair amount of time in the cloth room and again that seems to be on the increase. Hair room has always been mystery to me and while I like the idea of the face room I could never get it to work better than I could a set of commercial morphs. Then again I am just a user and not a vendor and maybe not an average user at that. I'm not sure I would describe myself as a geek and certainly not looking at creating any games.

On a basic level I can sort of see the standard and pro version set up if you are looking at the hobbyist as it allows someone on limited funds to access the software without having to pay the higher price for features they would not use. If the target market is professionals it does not make as much sense in my book. My personal view is that the Poser team, whoever they work for, would be better working on new or improved features that spending time on another Poser figure that is likely to be ignored by the majority of users, but I am very well aware that some users hold the opposite view (and quite strongly)

As to where Poser should go in the future, I am not skilled enough to give a valued opinion but I do feel Poser is becoming even more niche in an already niche field.
 

Miss B

Drawing Life 1 Pixel at a Time
CV-BEE
I also use the Fitting Room for rigging, although I don't use it for transferring morphs. I thought the Fitting Room was a replacement for or less complex option to using the Setup Room.
But is the Fitting Room available in the Standard version of Poser 10/11? I know it wasn't available in my Poser 9, so always assumed that was another Pro version goodie when I got PP11.
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
Using it for rigging means that the Setup Room has failed from a UI standpoint.

Not so much. You can imagine the Fitting Room as a simplified version of the Setup Room. You can use it for transferring complete rigging and selective morphs, but you cannot create or position bones with it. It offers some tools to refit clothing to a different figure shape, which is not something you can do in the Setup Room. The major problem with the Setup Room is not the interface, but instead the stability (or lack of it). Once you start rigging with it, you cannot save your work until you are finished, and guess what? It crashes a lot.

But what's cool about the new Fitting Room is its ability to simplify adding bones to your OBJ in a quicker and simplified way. For example, you cannot select what bones you want to transfer to your clothing in the Setup Room. You can only use them ALL, and then go deleting the ones you don't want, one-by-one, hoping Poser will not crash before you are done, or that you will not accidentally delete the wrong bone and have to start over. These are some of the reasons why content creators will prefer the Fitting Room instead.

I could have _sworn_ they actually announced that's the way they would go at one point.

That could very well be the case. At least that would explain what their are doing with their figures, downgrading them in many ways - topology, poly count and rigging quality. Why would you make "lesser" figures if not for a specific purpose like that? I have been wondering why for a while, and this might be it.

I've been in and out randomly reading this (any time I see coding buzzwords I perk up a bit lol), but just chiming in here quick to say that unless you compile your *.py into a *.pyc, it could be openly readable by any text editor, and people who work with python will know how to de-compile the pyc into readable source. So, with that being the case, all someone would have to do is check your code on how you did, alter it a bit, even if they have to manually code different morphs in every time, and voila.

I think people who are programmers wouldn't need to reverse engineer my code to learn how to use Poser Python. The reason is pretty simple: all you need to know about it is contained in the Poser Python PDF manual that ships with Poser. You can access it from the documents folder, or from the Poser main menu -> Help -> Poser Python. I am not saying the manual is very good, but the information is certainly not secret. If the feature is added to Poser Python and you want to use it, just look into the manual. :)

I wonder if more people use Dynamic Clothing than is assumed?

I would assume more people are using it nowadays because computers are faster, and we now have way more dynamic contents than before. There is also the DAZ hype over this as well. I have mentioned before how I wish SMS would make hypes over Poser's features, so people would notice them more. Poser had dynamic cloth since version 5, and DAZ makes it look like adding it to DS has no precedent in human history. A little advertisement wouldn't hurt. I bet some people don't even know Poser has it.

I do feel Poser is becoming even more niche in an already niche field.

If this is about native content, I don't think it's a niche. One of the things I have always liked about Poser is that it has figures from different people, suiting different tastes and preferences. When we talk about "mainstream content", that generally refers to DAZ figures, which are all from the same source. Over time they have convinced many that this is a good thing, but personally, I still prefer many sources to a monopoly. The idea that this means being "out of the mainstream", well, that's what we are all doing here at HW. They want us to believe that all the other figures (especially the HW ones) are not mainstream, and therefore are a "niche" market. The hype around DAZ figures being "mainstream" is purely a marketing stunt. A pretty good one, though, but still a marketing stunt to keep people from looking over the fence. It's business as usual.

Just look at the SMS forums, and see people loving PE, some other loving Dawn, some loving Pauline, some loving Dusk. Look how they are passionate about it. When I look at DAZ figures, it's one-size-fits-all. Maybe it's just me, but I prefer a more diverse ecosystem.
 

Hornet3d

Wise
If this is about native content, I don't think it's a niche. One of the things I have always liked about Poser is that it has figures from different people, suiting different tastes and preferences. When we talk about "mainstream content", that generally refers to DAZ figures, which are all from the same source. Over time they have convinced many that this is a good thing, but personally, I still prefer many sources to a monopoly. The idea that this means being "out of the mainstream", well, that's what we are all doing here at HW. They want us to believe that all the other figures (especially the HW ones) are not mainstream, and therefore are a "niche" market. The hype around DAZ figures being "mainstream" is purely a marketing stunt. A pretty good one, though, but still a marketing stunt to keep people from looking over the fence. It's business as usual.

Just look at the SMS forums, and see people loving PE, some other loving Dawn, some loving Pauline, some loving Dusk. Look how they are passionate about it. When I look at DAZ figures, it's one-size-fits-all. Maybe it's just me, but I prefer a more diverse ecosystem.

Oh I prefer a more diverse ecosystem, one of the reasons I wanted to use a heroine for my story and a small more mature character at that was because I wanted move away from the norm. Hivewire and the vendors here have helped me do that. I don't personally use PE but I love the fact the figure exists. I not only have Dawn and V4 in my runtimes I also have Scarlet, for me the more figures the better whether I use them or not.

Want I meant by niche is that, at the hobby level at least, it comes way down the list of favorite ways to spend your free time. With marketplaces closing and the reduction of Poser content in other market places the trend for Poser content is being guided by a dwindling number of vendors which I suspect is going to limit choice which is why I see the future to be even more niche than a few years ago but I would be very happy to be proved wrong.
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
Want I meant by niche is that, at the hobby level at least, it comes way down the list of favorite ways to spend your free time. With marketplaces closing and the reduction of Poser content in other market places the trend for Poser content is being guided by a dwindling number of vendors which I suspect is going to limit choice which is why I see the future to be even more niche than a few years ago but I would be very happy to be proved wrong.

Oh I see! Well, there is a reason there is a dwindling number of Poser vendors. Personally, I blame SMS for their inability to position Poser in the market. I believe SMS has difficulties identifying who the Poser users and content creators are, and that became more evident with their pricing on the Pro version at $600, which by the time was close to the entry levels of the likes of Cinema4D. And then we had SMS advertising Poser as a "complete" professional character animation tool, when it can't even get IK to work properly, resulting into feet sliding everywhere. They advertised about Rooster Teeth adopting Poser in a commercial animated series, which [I think] was a bad example, because they quickly moved away from Poser after season 1, adopting Maya instead for the subsequent seasons, having to remodel all characters to be able to move on. SMS thinks that is good advertisement, while I believe that plays against Poser because Rooster Teeth has chosen a truly professional tool right after completing season 1, which to many speaks for itself.

But perhaps the biggest blow came from the release of Poser Pro 10 with unusable rigging tools. It was literally broken, and was never fixed. If you need to make a JCM using the in-house tools, good luck with that. If you try to delete a morph, you have no control over how many will actually be deleted - not only on the clothing, but on the base figure as well. I could keep going, but you get the point. That's when some content creators simply gave up on Poser. Lady Little Fox has written a note about this in one of her tutorials, claiming that was the reason she moved on from Poser. SMS has only decided to fix things a few months after Poser Pro 11 was released, because I was pressing them hard, showing them videos of my products getting crippled by Poser broken tools. Poser only got usable again in P11 SR-4 or 5, but how many people have given up since Poser 9?

To summarize, SMS has failed to place Poser in the market, failed to recognize who their customers were, and failed to keep Poser in working conditions for years. They have also failed to recognize DAZ as competitors, and as a result, Poser lost its position in its own market. But ultimately, they have failed to listen to their customers, and continued repeating the same mistakes from the past. As a result, when we look at the official Poser forums, we find as many feature suggestions as we find people infuriated by Poser's inability to reach nowadays expectations. Take, for example, how Reallusion took iClone from mediocrity to state-of-the-art after mere 2 version releases. Where was SMS when all this happened? I rest my case.
 

Lissa_xyz

I break polygons.
I think people who are programmers wouldn't need to reverse engineer my code to learn how to use Poser Python. The reason is pretty simple: all you need to know about it is contained in the Poser Python PDF manual that ships with Poser. You can access it from the documents folder, or from the Poser main menu -> Help -> Poser Python. I am not saying the manual is very good, but the information is certainly not secret. If the feature is added to Poser Python and you want to use it, just look into the manual. :)

Didn't you say this was something you couldn't find in the manual to begin with, hence this thread?
 

Ken1171

Esteemed
Contributing Artist
Didn't you say this was something you couldn't find in the manual to begin with, hence this thread?

Yes, and that's because Poser doesn't allow it, so I can't do it. I have asked SMS to add the feature, but they haven't responded in over a year, so I am not holding my breath for this. It was something I wanted to do, but now I know it's not possible. The reason I have this thread is because I still have hopes somebody could know a way around this. So far, no luck.
 
Top