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
It's tiny and on the far right of the morph name next to the 0.0%.
Oh you mean those guys? : ) There is one for every option and there are many options in the parameters, which one should I click on?
Edit: I´m gonna go to bed now so thanks very much and have a wonderful day! I´ll figure this out tomorrow. : )
Click on the one for Victoria 6 Body.
So I selected the figure because the swimwear didnt have the v6 body option anywhere and I clicked on the gear and went to parameter settings and I can see the name - FBMVictoria6Body which is the body morph that i am working with on g2f body so when I´m exporting the edited swimwear from blender should I name it FBMVictoria6Body.obj?
Yes, you should.
The Morph Loader Pro is saying that - Warning: "Geometry did not match, failed to create morph."
When I was exporting the Swimwear from Daz Studio I definitely had the resolution of the item set to Base so the problem should not be there, and while exporting the edited object from Blender I had it selected and was exporting it with the option "Selection Only" on so I think the problem might be with other settings while exporting from Blender, anything I should definitely check/uncheck while exporting the edited item to fit the V6 body?
These are my export settings. On import just make sure keep vertex order is checked.
I did have like 3 of these unchecked so tried to export again and still getting the same message. Im sure I imported it the right way though. I have the swimsuit selected in daz studio while loading the morph and the figure hidden. I might as well try all over again and only make like a tiny little change and see if I still get this message.
Sometimes that's all you can do. For test purposes I wouldn't make it a small change, though, I'd grab a vertex and pull it waaay out so it's unmistakable if it worked.
Okay I´m gonna make a mountain right in the middle of the chest and see what results I can get : D
Hmm Interesting, worked this time. Could the problem be that I smoothed the previous item in Blender before exporting it? Because other than that I did everything the same and it worked this time.
It's easy to accidentally duplicate a vertex and thus ruin the face order. Maybe it was something like that.
Must have been something like that. So this type of morph is useful for fitting other body shapes and then the custom morph can be used for creating different styles for the clothing maybe? Like if i want more options for a dress - longer/shorter skirt for example, would I create it this way or create another obj and put it into the library instead?
Nope, this is how you do it, just make sure you put it under Actor/Custom Morphs or another such heading (it has to be under Actor). The only difference is that the FBMs will take care of heading themselves, and have to have an exact name to overwrite the generated one.
I see, I will get into this again when I finish the dress Im making now, Im very curious how its going to look when its finished although I am afraid that the screen might get laggy because it is going ot have over 500 details on it which adds up the geometry pretty quickly. And the worst part is that there is no trick to it so every one of these pieces needs to be placed, rotated and scaled individually. Im almost done though : D I just hope there wont be some ugly stretching on the details in Daz Studio later.
Five hundred?? Are you placing literal sequins?
What exactly are literal sequins? : ) : D
I was just trying to figure out what you would put 500 of on a dress. Sequins are these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequin
Usually one does them with displacement and spec maps, since putting them all in mesh WOULD be very high poly.
Oh hell no : D for that I´d use a map but the detail I had in mind when I was starting the dress I thought would not look good with maps so I decided to go for geometry and see if its doable or not. But it is a detail similar to this kind of decoration! I´ll show you when it´s done! : )
So I thought I´d test the unifished object in Daz Studio just to see what it does and dammit that thing is laggy, when I un-subdivide an item using the Decimate modifier I will need to create new UV maps as well because it changes the geometry right?
Yes, but no, because you should never, ever use Decimate on anything you want to be able to rig in DS. That's why we start with a low-poly version and work up, never the reverse.
The details on the outfit dont need to be rigged so I hope I can use the decimate on these. They are like a bit more complex sequin so hopefully wont need any rigging : D
Okay Im about to give up on this, found out that even after the object lost weight of over 1mil polygons it is still hard to work with in Daz and too much decimating is causing trouble when it comes to UVs and texture mapping so I´m about to simplify this as much as I can and hope it still looks decent. And the thing I was placing on the dress were flowers : D 830 of them : D :D
Do it with transparency? Take them off and re-add as four-point individual polygons transmapped with a picture of a flower on it. That's only 830 additional faces, and if you UV map, say, two at the start you'll never have to do it again and can use the same two textures for all of them. Subdivide those two starter polys and you end up with 3320 more polygons, much more manageable, and since each has four faces/ nine verts, you can pull the corner verts away from the center to add more dimensionality and make them look more like real mesh.
Still a lot of trouble and probably not the result you want, but it's a workable solution.
Hey Sickle! Now I have completely different version of the dress because I had triangle faces and I also found out how a bad UV map can ruin all the hopes and plans so I had to remove both sleeves and it was just a big big struggle : D So many nice looking versions of the dress wont be usable because of the terrible geometry : / And I started modeling shoes for the dress and it is probably the most difficult thing I have tried to model so far : D
Right now I am trying to make the dress look somehow decent even without the long sleeves and trying to find a place for the one ornament that doesnt really fit this version of the dress. I imported the version with which I was satisfied into Daz and tried to create a shader for it but when I loaded a texture on it I was like Oh dammit not the UV mapping again......Uv maps and displacement maps, big big struggle. On this version though, I am modeling the folds so I wont have to use displacement, hopefully.
Shoes are challenging! That's why you see a limited number of outfits with them and a lot of shoes sold separately.
UV mapping is also something that takes a lot of practice. Don't forget that if you're painting the texture in 3d you can put seams absolutely anywhere and use more of them to get a no-stretching result - this is why a lot of us do this even though it makes 2D-only texturing almost impossible.
I was doing some testing today running renders in Daz Studio and I wonder, when I render the item in Blender with Cycles the details (flowers and some lining) of the dress are casting shadows on the dress but when I place a light in Daz studio to a position where the light in Blender was and run a render, they dont seem to be casting any shadows like they do in Blender, I think I do have the shadows on on the item so what could be the problem? Could it be that in Blender its several seperate objects (the dress, flower number 1, flower number 2 and so on) thus they cast shadows but in Daz its just one object so it doesnt cast shadow on itself? I have no idea why the details wont cast shadow on the dress. The render in Blender looks much better with the shadows.
Also I have wondered, Blender isn´t very good at generating UV maps is it? I have been looking at some items in my library and they always seem to have very neat symmetrical UV maps, is a very neat Uv map a must or is it okay to have it kinda messy as long as the item works?
The important thing with the UV map is that you can texture it well. Whether other people can isn't as important. In general you want it to be as neat as you can, and in Blender that means you're going to have to learn how to use its tools at their best: UV map at low resolution, map duplicated elements before you ever start duplicating, and use not just seams, but the rotation, movement and scale tools in the UV window. Ideally you want a similar scale across the item, where if you put a grid on it, the grid looks the same size on everything in the 3d window.
In DAZ Studio you need to have good lights on to get good shadowcasting. What are your lights?
The other thing I noticed about the UV map is that lets say I have a simple dress without any folds, I place seams and unwrap the item, then I go and model some folds or just adjust the dress without adding any new geometry working only with the geometry that has already been unwrapped, the simple UV map is still working with the edited dress right? But, if I didnt unwrap the simple version of the dress before further modeling and modeled in the folds and then unwrapped it, the UV map would get much more messy, you know what I mean?
So I guess it is better to UV unwrap an item after I am sure Im not adding any geometry and before I make additional modeling that would make a messy UV map if it was unwrapped after that, right?
Here are two pictures of the lighting thing
1. Rendered in Blender using Cycles Render - one light source coming from the left. (Default Point light setup).
2. Rendered in Daz Studio using 3Delight - one light source coming from the left (Default Distant light setup).
I know they are different render engines, I just wonder if there is a way to make it work as it looks way better in Cycles default setup than in Daz.
Cycles is an unbiased render engine, and 3Delight (Studio's engine) is biased. That means you have to put a lot more work into getting good lighting. Usually that means you need to use either UberEnvironment or Advanced Ambient lights to get a more realistic global look.
What I do is, I unwrap before I start sculpting. Then I pin the major areas that I know will remain mostly the same. Then, when I've sculpted, I grab a pin and let it update with live unwrap for minimizing distortion.