You are right on Hornet.
-
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
Dawn 2.0 Underway
- Thread starter Chris
- Start date
You are right on Hornet.
Yes, as someone who customizes my libraries, I'll definitely be suggesting that Paul locate .pmds in a folder inside \Runtime\Libraries\Morphs\
Woohoo! If you do that, you will have made this she-wolf VERY happy! LOL. I was actually playing with dform-created morphs on Sukka for this exact reason. I've not pursued it due to my lack of knowledge for Poser conversions. But having assymmetrical morphs would be awesome!
Also - count me as another one with very customized libraries. I have to actually reference HW product zip files everytime I go to pack up an item for QA because my own libraries are so customized. LOL
So let it be written, so let it be done!
Yay!
I just put mine in the same way I do other resources. My textures are in Runtime>Textures>kobaltkween>project, my meshes are in Runtime>Geometries>kobaltkween>project, and so far my morphs are in Runtime>Morphs>kobaltkween>Meshname (for instance, Dawn). That way my morphs are consistent with other external resources (and therefore predictable even if you're unaware of the debate or history of morph placement), and my Library folder is consistently only library items. That said, I'm sure I'm not the only Poser user with !MyMorph folders in the Library folders of my older runtimes.
Just to let you know, in Poser Pro at least (might be in regular, but I don't have it to check), you can always split a morph into left and right in one (right) click. So even if a morph doesn't have side specific versions, you can add them.
You're welcome! You just right click on the morph in the parameters list, and "Split Morph" is right under "Delete Morph."Oooh? Ooh, nice. I will remember that for sure. Thank you!
Last edited:
Some people can bend their feet at that point, too. I saw it a lot when I was still involved in Synchronised Swimming. So as not to steal someone else's photo, I'll post a link to one I found:
https://static.guim.co.uk/sys-image...f958-bf46-411a-8687-dc1a425a1a83-620x372.jpeg
It would be great to have feet that flexible. I'd love a 'never worn shoes ever' morph too- not just setting the toes side-side, but making the whole ball and toe area wider so the foot is triangle-shaped rather than the kite shape most people seem to think is normal, but is actually the result of a lifetime of shoe wearing.
On the distinctiveness of faces, you could always make the base as generic as possible but include a Dawn2 face morph to give her the look you like? Or include a 'BlandFace' morph with merchant resource rights that merchants can dial in then work from?
Will there be built-in dials to adjust limb proportions? LegsLonger/LegsShorter, TorsoLonger/TorsoShorter and so on?
Lower art/upper arm and thigh/lower leg ratios are essential too. Critical both for age and ethnic (climatic, really) variations.
I don't know Reallusion at all, but I thought Gaming was moving from T-pose to A-pose (which is why I thought G8 had switched). I have read that designing a character in A-pose makes the character more natural looking (not talking about clothing etc), since people don't normally run around as aeroplanes
(since when the arms are up out to the sides it effects the clavicle and such). But I can understand leaving her at T-pose as that's what most people who use poser are used to (and DS uses who haven't adopted G8).
RobZhena
Adventurous
This will be great! I offer two comments. A T pose is much better for converting clothing than an A pose. Ali’s Bella beta initially had an A pose, and rigging sleeves was a pain in the neck. Of course, I never use dynamics, so I can’t speak to that. Second, good support for Superfly is a must, but I think that many users prefer Firefly, so I hope she has that covered, too. Cheers.
I really hate the A pose. That's how the included Avatar's set up for earlier versions of Marvelous Designer (not sure about the current version), and I really don't like it. That may be simply because I'm so used to using the T pose, but trying to create anything with sleeves is a nightmare, and I'm not just talking about rigging,
M
Male-M3dia
Guest
As far as A-pose goes, it does work better for characters as it works better to reduce the "boulder shoulder" and issues when a figure's arms are bent down. When I made my figure morph from dusk, bending the arms down had major issues, with the inflated shoulder and the gap in the armpits that I had to fix with JCMs.
Yeah, we're planning on a T pose for just that reason with clothing.
We'll support Superfly and Firefly for sure.
Thanks for your thoughts. Keep them coming.
Weird, thought the JCMs we created would have fixed your dilemma and saved you time.
Yeah, we'll have JCMs to reduce any anomalies that happen due to the T pose, so not worried about our default position.
I actually modeled a lot of clothes for myself in A pose, and to the point of making an A pose initial pose for them. It was _so_ much easier to make good shoulders that behave properly. You basically can't make proper jacket or anything structured with arms in a T, because that's not how they're sewn (well, at least most modern, European diasporic clothing). Arms up in T means wrinkled at top and tense on the bottom. So I get why MD would use it as their default.
But I also haven't had much of a problem modeling sleeves in general (easiest part of any clothes I've made), and I _have_ had a problem using MD in general (unlike everyone else). And I probably won't ever learn MD because they strongly warned me against violating their license when I asked for clarification on their licensing rather than helping me understand the specific boundaries of their different licenses. So as much as I admire MD from afar, I can't really comment on how it works either way. Still, there's a new Blender plugin which duplicates some core MD functionality. Hmmm. But now that I think of it, the creator demo'ed it on a figure in A pose.
JCM can do absolute wonders about distortion. I'd still prefer (personally) for shoulders to look perfectly natural in a more relaxed position rather than perfectly natural in the much more uncommon position of straight out, but conversion is definitely a bigger issue for the community. That said, I think the market may push clothes with at least some dynamics. One because they are so much easier to convert, and two because most DS clothing includes it now, and DS content is setting the standards now.