3D Models
3D Print Models
3D Scans
Animation & MoCap
Textures
Materials
Skin Textures
2D Game Assets
Sound Effects
Brushes & Tools
Reference Photos
Stock Images
HDR Images
3ds Max
Maya
Blender
Unreal Engine
Unity
ZBrush
Cinema 4D
LightWave
Marmoset
SketchUp
FBX
DAE
DXF
GLBFor CC's: DAZ clothes and dForce - approaches, ideas, and more
353Thread Activity
Pushee-RiFri, Sep 05
Pushee-RiThu, Sep 04
giant dwarfThu, Sep 04
Pushee-RiThu, Sep 04
Pushee-RiThu, Sep 04
giant dwarfThu, Sep 04
Pushee-RiThu, Sep 04
giant dwarfWed, Sep 03
I would like to use this thread to discuss approaches, ideas, and questions with you when it comes to DAZ clothing, dForce, and other obstacles that DAZ puts in the way of us producers/content creators.
Below, I describe (in separate sections) a few of my previous approaches and ideas. I also include a few questions, etc.
If you want to share your own approaches and ideas, feel free to do so
Below, I describe (in separate sections) a few of my previous approaches and ideas. I also include a few questions, etc.
If you want to share your own approaches and ideas, feel free to do so
! REPORT
APPROACH: DAZ HEMS and dFORCE (1)
Many users want realistic 3D clothing. This includes the hems. And that's where the dForce problem begins...
A 3D hem is formed either as a complete or half-tube. Even for the half-tube, you need at least 3 edge loops with closely spaced vertices... and closely spaced vertices not only cause DAZ dForce to take an endless amount of time to start the actual simulation... but also often cause it to explode.
Another unfortunate effect of real 3D hems and dForce is that even if the whole thing doesn't explode, the vertices that are too close together are often not moved correctly during the simulation... and the wonderful hem becomes a squashed and sometimes even displaced something that no longer resembles the magnificent appearance it had before the simulation.
Therefore, my approach for dForce clothing that is not only shifted by 0.02 inches but can slide along the (entire) body is as follows: I paint the hems
This means I create a bump map for the areas where hems are to be visually generated. This works even better with a combination of bump and displacement maps. However, I still need to practice and learn a little more about the latter.
With the painted hems, it is then also possible, for example, to simulate clothing thrown on the floor, where not only the outside but also the inside is visible.
I have used this approach for all my SLIPABLES projects
Does this mean you have to give up on 3D hems forever?
Not at all - that's coming up in the second info block
Many users want realistic 3D clothing. This includes the hems. And that's where the dForce problem begins...
A 3D hem is formed either as a complete or half-tube. Even for the half-tube, you need at least 3 edge loops with closely spaced vertices... and closely spaced vertices not only cause DAZ dForce to take an endless amount of time to start the actual simulation... but also often cause it to explode.
Another unfortunate effect of real 3D hems and dForce is that even if the whole thing doesn't explode, the vertices that are too close together are often not moved correctly during the simulation... and the wonderful hem becomes a squashed and sometimes even displaced something that no longer resembles the magnificent appearance it had before the simulation.
Therefore, my approach for dForce clothing that is not only shifted by 0.02 inches but can slide along the (entire) body is as follows: I paint the hems
This means I create a bump map for the areas where hems are to be visually generated. This works even better with a combination of bump and displacement maps. However, I still need to practice and learn a little more about the latter.
With the painted hems, it is then also possible, for example, to simulate clothing thrown on the floor, where not only the outside but also the inside is visible.
I have used this approach for all my SLIPABLES projects
Does this mean you have to give up on 3D hems forever?
Not at all - that's coming up in the second info block
REPLY
! REPORT
APPROACH: DAZ HEMS and dFORCE (2)
If 3D hems or details are required in certain areas, this approach can be helpful. I have considered it before and used it once or twice, but only within the limits of my very simple clothing.
There are two ways to keep areas of a 3D garment out of the clutches of dForce simulation: dForce Weight Maps and Material Groups. Both allow you to control the behavior of specific areas during the simulation.
As a simple example, I would like to mention my CULOTTE project. Here, I used a simple dForce weight map in the upper part of the pants to ensure that this area is not simulated. Of course, I could have taken it much further... but I wasn't there yet at the time, as I was still thinking in terms of SLIPABLES. Well... not everyone can be as smart as you
So what could you do with this approach (removing parts from the simulation process)? Quite a lot, if not everything!
Imagine, for example, that my CULOTTE didn't just have NOTHING at the top, but buttons, a belt, the things that hold the belt on trousers, a zipper, and so on and so forth...
Since not everything would belong to a single object, but each individual part would have its own material group, I would have been able to keep everything that should not/must not be simulated out of dForce by using a mix of dForce Weight Map and assigning different dForce settings to individual material groups.
The different material groups are quite simple: first, you have a single object for DAZ (the CULOTTE), to which you assign a dForce Dynamic Surface. In the next step, you go through the individual material groups (button, belt, etc.) and set the Dynamic Strength to zero in each of them. That's it
This means that with this approach, you can at least start working with complex meshes of 3D clothing in some areas without the garments exploding during simulation
If 3D hems or details are required in certain areas, this approach can be helpful. I have considered it before and used it once or twice, but only within the limits of my very simple clothing.
There are two ways to keep areas of a 3D garment out of the clutches of dForce simulation: dForce Weight Maps and Material Groups. Both allow you to control the behavior of specific areas during the simulation.
As a simple example, I would like to mention my CULOTTE project. Here, I used a simple dForce weight map in the upper part of the pants to ensure that this area is not simulated. Of course, I could have taken it much further... but I wasn't there yet at the time, as I was still thinking in terms of SLIPABLES. Well... not everyone can be as smart as you
So what could you do with this approach (removing parts from the simulation process)? Quite a lot, if not everything!
Imagine, for example, that my CULOTTE didn't just have NOTHING at the top, but buttons, a belt, the things that hold the belt on trousers, a zipper, and so on and so forth...
Since not everything would belong to a single object, but each individual part would have its own material group, I would have been able to keep everything that should not/must not be simulated out of dForce by using a mix of dForce Weight Map and assigning different dForce settings to individual material groups.
The different material groups are quite simple: first, you have a single object for DAZ (the CULOTTE), to which you assign a dForce Dynamic Surface. In the next step, you go through the individual material groups (button, belt, etc.) and set the Dynamic Strength to zero in each of them. That's it
This means that with this approach, you can at least start working with complex meshes of 3D clothing in some areas without the garments exploding during simulation
REPLY
! REPORT
I must admit, I am just a user when it comes to clothing. I tried long ago to make some, and they came out pretty fine for the time (2017-18), but they were simple things, non-DForce. However, I fight with DForce daily, or almost daily, and I have lost most of the battles (venting itch off).
I have seen some vendors add push modifiers to their products, but I am not sure why that does not work unless I add the push modifier manually. But they do help prevent not just poke-throughs but explosions. So, I am not sure if this could be done, but a script that adds the push modifier upon loading the clothing figure with a tiny percent could do the trick? I must admit I do not know if this is possible with the embedded script loads, but if it is, it would solve the issue I have seen, where the push modifier saved with the figure never works (it does not push the clothing at all).
Regarding hems, I am not sure why additional geometry is needed, at least not for less complex clothing such as shirts, shorts, jeans, and so on. You can achieve a great-looking hem with just bump and normal maps, or displacement maps. I prefer the latter, which actually creates geometry at render time.
I have seen some vendors add push modifiers to their products, but I am not sure why that does not work unless I add the push modifier manually. But they do help prevent not just poke-throughs but explosions. So, I am not sure if this could be done, but a script that adds the push modifier upon loading the clothing figure with a tiny percent could do the trick? I must admit I do not know if this is possible with the embedded script loads, but if it is, it would solve the issue I have seen, where the push modifier saved with the figure never works (it does not push the clothing at all).
Regarding hems, I am not sure why additional geometry is needed, at least not for less complex clothing such as shirts, shorts, jeans, and so on. You can achieve a great-looking hem with just bump and normal maps, or displacement maps. I prefer the latter, which actually creates geometry at render time.
REPLY
! REPORT
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Fri, Aug 15Thank you very much for your contribution
Regarding the Push Modifier:
I sometimes work with it myself and have never noticed that it has disappeared from saved and shared projects. But I'll check right away. Unfortunately, I don't know if there is a way to add a Push Modifier to an object retrospectively using an On-Load script... I don't even know if On-Load is possible at all But maybe others know more about this ...
" Regarding hems, I am not sure why additional geometry is needed ... "
Some/many users want that. Honestly! I've been told several times that I don't know how to make 3D hems. Well...
And to be honest, sometimes 3D hems aren't a bad thing (see my second info block), because bump map hems unfortunately still cast a strange/hard shadow.
Regarding the Push Modifier:
I sometimes work with it myself and have never noticed that it has disappeared from saved and shared projects. But I'll check right away. Unfortunately, I don't know if there is a way to add a Push Modifier to an object retrospectively using an On-Load script... I don't even know if On-Load is possible at all
But maybe others know more about this ..." Regarding hems, I am not sure why additional geometry is needed ... "
Some/many users want that. Honestly! I've been told several times that I don't know how to make 3D hems. Well...
And to be honest, sometimes 3D hems aren't a bad thing (see my second info block), because bump map hems unfortunately still cast a strange/hard shadow.
Luxe Muse
Karma: 4,089
Fri, Aug 15Sorry, I did not mean that it disappeared regarding the push modifier. It is there, but when you dial it up and down, it does not work. I am also not sure if it was an issue with a particular piece of clothing I remember, or if it happens to every cloth that is saved with the modifier embedded, as a Figure/Prop asset.
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Fri, Aug 15I tested several of my 3D clothes (G8 and G9): if a Push Modifier was installed, the value was maintained and I could inflate the garments with the slider. Maybe you were just unlucky?
Nevertheless, the Push Modifier is a good tip when it comes to poke throughs. Thank you for mentioning it
Nevertheless, the Push Modifier is a good tip when it comes to poke throughs. Thank you for mentioning it
Luxe Muse
Karma: 4,089
Fri, Aug 15Yeah that is possible, and it was my experience with that one piece of clothing that sticked in my head. However, when QA-ing, I would advice that once you have a product that uses that on (I actually do this myself too), to remove the folder you work with, and then install from your zip file as a customer would, and see if it works for her.
Elor
Karma: 102
Fri, Aug 15On clothes, pre-installed push-modifiers are usually controlled by a weight map: if you have recent / semi-recent dForce clothes by Mada, she usually add one on them, and provides a PDF giving some pointers on how to use it.
By default, the weight-map is painted to apply 0% of the push modifier everywhere: once the simulation has ended, if they are poke-thru, you can switch to the 'Node Weight Map Brush' tool, select 'Push Modifier Weight Node' (it's the default name but PA will likely have renamed it) and simply paint over each poke-thru until the result is satisfying.
By default, the weight-map is painted to apply 0% of the push modifier everywhere: once the simulation has ended, if they are poke-thru, you can switch to the 'Node Weight Map Brush' tool, select 'Push Modifier Weight Node' (it's the default name but PA will likely have renamed it) and simply paint over each poke-thru until the result is satisfying.
Luxe Muse
Karma: 4,089
Fri, Aug 15I'll look her up. My original impression came from an item of male clothing meant for the Genesis 8 male from back in the day. None of the latest clothing items I have bought come with the push modifier, but that one stuck in my head because I love using push modifiers after simulation to fix poke through.
TIP: DON'T TRUST THE DAZ DFORCE PRESETS
When you activate dForce for a garment, DAZ immediately applies a few standard settings to the object's surface options. So far, so good...
... but if you want to simulate something other than a flat plane using these settings, you and your customers will be surprised by exploding garments.
Depending on the nature of your product, you will therefore have no choice but to familiarize yourself with the options for controlling the simulation behavior and adapt them to your products.
You can find an overview of the settings in one of my older tutorials:
https://www.renderhub.com/forum/5398/daz-control-of-the-simulation-behavior
When you activate dForce for a garment, DAZ immediately applies a few standard settings to the object's surface options. So far, so good...
... but if you want to simulate something other than a flat plane using these settings, you and your customers will be surprised by exploding garments.
Depending on the nature of your product, you will therefore have no choice but to familiarize yourself with the options for controlling the simulation behavior and adapt them to your products.
You can find an overview of the settings in one of my older tutorials:
https://www.renderhub.com/forum/5398/daz-control-of-the-simulation-behavior
REPLY
! REPORT
OK. I have a good one for you. I've been pondering the best way to tackle this for months.
Ever seen paintings of Queen Elizabeth I (not the Queen Elizabeth of our time, but from the 16th century?) I've got her character already done, but I'm trying to think of the best way to tackle her dress. Reason? It, shall we say, makes the hips um .... prominent. 8-)
If you want an idea of some of the various layers that go beneath that, this is a fascinating youtube video:
Getting Dressed as Elizabeth I
So now the question. That hip thingy. Should I go the authentic route and make what is actually underneath that skirt? Or do the more subtle size as shown in the video? Otherwise, if I just do what you see on the outside, how would I get the skirt to retain that shape? What's the best way to go about it?
The clothing from that era is calling me. I LOVED the movies about Elizabeth I starring Cate Blanchett and I lost count of how many times I watched it!
Ever seen paintings of Queen Elizabeth I (not the Queen Elizabeth of our time, but from the 16th century?) I've got her character already done, but I'm trying to think of the best way to tackle her dress. Reason? It, shall we say, makes the hips um .... prominent. 8-)
If you want an idea of some of the various layers that go beneath that, this is a fascinating youtube video:
Getting Dressed as Elizabeth I
So now the question. That hip thingy. Should I go the authentic route and make what is actually underneath that skirt? Or do the more subtle size as shown in the video? Otherwise, if I just do what you see on the outside, how would I get the skirt to retain that shape? What's the best way to go about it?
The clothing from that era is calling me. I LOVED the movies about Elizabeth I starring Cate Blanchett and I lost count of how many times I watched it!
REPLY
! REPORT
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Fri, Aug 15Wow - you've taken on quite a big challenge/problem. Kudos to you!
On the other hand, if we all only made tight-fitting 3D clothing, there would never be a challenge... and therefore never any progress
Since I have never dealt with this type of 3D clothing before, my comments below may not be entirely accurate (or may be completely wrong ... but perhaps there are others here who are more knowledgeable about this topic.
If I were to challenge myself with such a problem, my first approach would be to try body morphs. In the video, you can see a kind of hip-widening roll at 1:56. You can see how morphs work here: the skull is elongated and flattened at the top using a morph, and the veil is a simple plane draped using dForce:
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/68558/funky-abbess
If you don't want to use dForce, it's a bit easier because you just need to sculpt and rig the clothes and then fine-tune them later with weight map painting.
Since this type of (3D) clothing can hardly be used in any other poses than standing ones, this might work. And if you do want to use sitting poses, for example, you might want to consider designing not just one 3D object, but two: one for standing poses and one for sitting poses.
Good luck - I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you
On the other hand, if we all only made tight-fitting 3D clothing, there would never be a challenge... and therefore never any progress
Since I have never dealt with this type of 3D clothing before, my comments below may not be entirely accurate (or may be completely wrong
... but perhaps there are others here who are more knowledgeable about this topic.If I were to challenge myself with such a problem, my first approach would be to try body morphs. In the video, you can see a kind of hip-widening roll at 1:56. You can see how morphs work here: the skull is elongated and flattened at the top using a morph, and the veil is a simple plane draped using dForce:
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/68558/funky-abbess
If you don't want to use dForce, it's a bit easier because you just need to sculpt and rig the clothes and then fine-tune them later with weight map painting.
Since this type of (3D) clothing can hardly be used in any other poses than standing ones, this might work. And if you do want to use sitting poses, for example, you might want to consider designing not just one 3D object, but two: one for standing poses and one for sitting poses.
Good luck - I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Sat, Aug 16Addendum: KuraiKya offers a wide flared skirt as a freebie here on Renderhub. It's dForce, but you don't have to (and shouldn't) use it in Simulations. However, it would be a great template for how your own product could look, right?
https://www.renderhub.com/kuraikya/a-purple-dress
https://www.renderhub.com/kuraikya/a-purple-dress
Luxe Muse
Karma: 4,089
Sat, Aug 16Just a thought I was having: most of this dress should not actually be dForce driven. These women wore a farthingale under the dress. That thing was made out of metal, wood, or other hard materials, so perhaps only the bottom of the dress flares a little?.
Deecey
Karma: 172
Sat, Aug 16Thanks for the feedback, Pushee-Ri and Luxe Muse. You're probably right that it's better just to do it as a conforming outfit. I can't imagine how she sat down in that thing though! LOL
I've never been one to work on "simple" things. This is yet another challenge. 8-)
I've never been one to work on "simple" things. This is yet another challenge. 8-)
QUESTION: IS IT POSSIBLE TO SAVE ZERO MORPHS FOR ALL POSSIBLE CHARACTERS?
OK - I couldn't think of a proper title (unfortunately, I'm not a native English speaker), so here are a few explanations:
It annoys me that - with tight-fitting 3D clothing - parts of the clothing disappear under the sometimes phenomenally large breasts of female characters, simulating a kind of fabric-eating boobs. It looks like it's been painted on and - unless the ladies are deliberately pushing their T-shirts up under their bosoms - it's not very realistic either. In real life, clothing actually compresses/lifts/presses the breasts somewhat, doesn't it?
My idea would be to create one (or more) body morphs that - even if you think I'm stupid - don't enlarge the breasts, but rather reduce/adjust them... and do so for all possible models with every conceivable bust size.
However, my first attempts failed completely because it wasn't universally applicable. In other words, what worked with GF Base only works halfway (depending on the size of the target objects) ... or even less with other characters. I feel like I've tried every possible combination of morph import options... but feelings can sometimes be deceiving, and I may have overlooked the setting that delivers the desired result.
What do you think: is there such a setting when importing morphs... or would the morphs need to be structured differently?
OK - I couldn't think of a proper title (unfortunately, I'm not a native English speaker), so here are a few explanations:
It annoys me that - with tight-fitting 3D clothing - parts of the clothing disappear under the sometimes phenomenally large breasts of female characters, simulating a kind of fabric-eating boobs. It looks like it's been painted on and - unless the ladies are deliberately pushing their T-shirts up under their bosoms - it's not very realistic either. In real life, clothing actually compresses/lifts/presses the breasts somewhat, doesn't it?
My idea would be to create one (or more) body morphs that - even if you think I'm stupid - don't enlarge the breasts, but rather reduce/adjust them... and do so for all possible models with every conceivable bust size.
However, my first attempts failed completely because it wasn't universally applicable. In other words, what worked with GF Base only works halfway (depending on the size of the target objects) ... or even less with other characters. I feel like I've tried every possible combination of morph import options... but feelings can sometimes be deceiving, and I may have overlooked the setting that delivers the desired result.
What do you think: is there such a setting when importing morphs... or would the morphs need to be structured differently?
REPLY
! REPORT
Masterstroke
Karma: 3,501
Sat, Aug 16This might not be the most satisfying answer, but this is the way I adressed this problem.
Almost al character morphs get projected on the clothes, but this is temporary.
What I usually do is to go to zbrush and tweek and fix issues with the clothes.
Once back in DS with GoZ, I replace and overwright the projected character morph on the clothes and save them as morph assets at it's place in the hirachy. Now this projected character morph is fixed and permanent.
Almost al character morphs get projected on the clothes, but this is temporary.
What I usually do is to go to zbrush and tweek and fix issues with the clothes.
Once back in DS with GoZ, I replace and overwright the projected character morph on the clothes and save them as morph assets at it's place in the hirachy. Now this projected character morph is fixed and permanent.
Masterstroke
Karma: 3,501
Sat, Aug 16Another option for having "pressed" bust sizes for all characters is to create a dForm set of magnets and store those in the library.
You could aplly them to all characters and create morphs from them.
In order to have that bust shape on clothes, just do the same as I described with the projected character morphs above.
You could aplly them to all characters and create morphs from them.
In order to have that bust shape on clothes, just do the same as I described with the projected character morphs above.
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Sat, Aug 16Hi - thanks for your reply
But I assume you're talking about 3D clothing that is specially adapted to the respective garment, right? However, I'm looking for a more universal solution where what lies beneath the clothing (i.e., the model) is altered in such a way that a more realistic overall impression is created.
Overall, it's also about finding a universal, marketable solution. I assume that it won't work with morphs... but who knows, maybe my assumption is wrong and I'm just missing that crucial piece of knowledge
But I assume you're talking about 3D clothing that is specially adapted to the respective garment, right? However, I'm looking for a more universal solution where what lies beneath the clothing (i.e., the model) is altered in such a way that a more realistic overall impression is created.
Overall, it's also about finding a universal, marketable solution. I assume that it won't work with morphs... but who knows, maybe my assumption is wrong and I'm just missing that crucial piece of knowledge
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Sat, Aug 16@Masterstroke:
Oops - I was too quick there, as your second post only appeared after I had written my reply to you....
I have never worked with dForm(er) and magnets before, but I will definitely follow up on your suggestion soon and read up on the subject. Thank you very much
Oops - I was too quick there, as your second post only appeared after I had written my reply to you....
I have never worked with dForm(er) and magnets before, but I will definitely follow up on your suggestion soon and read up on the subject. Thank you very much
Masterstroke
Karma: 3,501
Sat, Aug 16Don't feel bad. I wrote my part too quickly, before I realised completely your problem. Still I think, it is relevant for making sure, that character's and clothes morph match nicely in the end.
Most of the times when you reduce the breasts, you'll get the middle section at the clothes poking out, which will need a fix.
Most of the times when you reduce the breasts, you'll get the middle section at the clothes poking out, which will need a fix.
SnarlTheWerewolf
Karma: 2,166
Sat, Aug 16I think I get what you're saying. I have my own personal solution for G8M that I use for this type of issue. Most of my personal renders are really massively muscular men so underwear and speedos were a huge problem for me originally. Throw in the gens and it gets worse. I have to polish it up for selling, but you can see the results of using it on a simulation here: https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/73633/coming-soon-dforce-helper
Bobb
Karma: 582
Sat, Aug 16Isn't it possible to use the mesh-grabber and push or pull the boobs and other offending parts into shape?
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Sat, Aug 16@Masterstroke:
Phew... your comments gave me quite a scare. I thought I would have to trash my idea because reducing the breasts would cause problems with the 3D clothing. But that's not always the case
I'm going to build another block right away because I want to upload a screenshot.
-------------
@Snarl:
Different gender, different body part... and the same " giant " problem
Your solution looks very good. Congrats
I built something similar for futas a long time ago. It produced nice results... but users had to fiddle with both the little Willie and the 3D clothing to make sure Willie was under the briefs after the simulation.
-------------------
@Bobb:
Yes—that and other things such as exporting/sculpting/importing are definitely possible, no question about it. But I'm interested in a marketable product (or at least a freebie) that allows users to achieve good results with as little experience and as few clicks as possible.
Phew... your comments gave me quite a scare. I thought I would have to trash my idea because reducing the breasts would cause problems with the 3D clothing. But that's not always the case
I'm going to build another block right away because I want to upload a screenshot.
-------------
@Snarl:
Different gender, different body part... and the same " giant " problem
Your solution looks very good. Congrats
I built something similar for futas a long time ago. It produced nice results... but users had to fiddle with both the little Willie and the 3D clothing to make sure Willie was under the briefs after the simulation.
-------------------
@Bobb:
Yes—that and other things such as exporting/sculpting/importing are definitely possible, no question about it. But I'm interested in a marketable product (or at least a freebie) that allows users to achieve good results with as little experience and as few clicks as possible.
SnarlTheWerewolf
Karma: 2,166
Sun, Aug 17Actually, it's for the thigh region. It's designed to help fit undergarments, shirt bottoms and other areas from getting tangled up in the body. It interacts with the simulation in place of the g8m figure in certain regions to get you a better fit
ONGOING QUESTION: IS IT POSSIBLE TO SAVE ZERO MORPHS FOR ALL POSSIBLE CHARACTERS?
This is the continuation of my question block above with (almost) the same title.
Some of the answers above made me fear that reducing morphs for the breasts would lead to glitches/poke throughs in the 3D clothing.
I was about to trash my idea...
Fortunately, however, the errors are kept within narrow limits (I would say that at least 90% of the clothing still looks good) ... if a smoothing modifier is enabled for the 3D clothing (2 iterations, as usual). Then, after using a morph, the 3D clothing is recalculated and wraps around the new shapes.
I did a quick test with the built-in DAZ Standard Morphs, my Longsleeve Turtleneck (WIP), and the fabulous Cici from rdaughterdaz.
https://www.renderhub.com/rdaughterdaz/cici-for-genesis-9
It's not quite what I want yet, but I think it looks good, doesn't it? Now I just need to figure out how to build my own morphs like my customized DAZ standard morphs (I had to use some of them beyond their limits).
This is the continuation of my question block above with (almost) the same title.
Some of the answers above made me fear that reducing morphs for the breasts would lead to glitches/poke throughs in the 3D clothing.
I was about to trash my idea...
Fortunately, however, the errors are kept within narrow limits (I would say that at least 90% of the clothing still looks good) ... if a smoothing modifier is enabled for the 3D clothing (2 iterations, as usual). Then, after using a morph, the 3D clothing is recalculated and wraps around the new shapes.
I did a quick test with the built-in DAZ Standard Morphs, my Longsleeve Turtleneck (WIP), and the fabulous Cici from rdaughterdaz.
https://www.renderhub.com/rdaughterdaz/cici-for-genesis-9
It's not quite what I want yet, but I think it looks good, doesn't it? Now I just need to figure out how to build my own morphs like my customized DAZ standard morphs (I had to use some of them beyond their limits).
REPLY
! REPORT
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Sun, Aug 17Update: It's not quite what I had initially imagined... but at least the worst " collisions " between ladies with large bust sizes and (tight) clothing can be reduced
The problem is the behavior of the vertices of the target models. Depending on the sculpting (and size) of the breasts, the morphs (which have to be created based on the G9 Female Base) work sometimes better, sometimes worse, or cause deformations rather than reductions.
But at least a first step has been taken, and with a little care and 3D clothing with smoothing modifiers, you can already achieve more realistic renderings
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/73660/cici-takes-up-the-challenge
The problem is the behavior of the vertices of the target models. Depending on the sculpting (and size) of the breasts, the morphs (which have to be created based on the G9 Female Base) work sometimes better, sometimes worse, or cause deformations rather than reductions.
But at least a first step has been taken, and with a little care and 3D clothing with smoothing modifiers, you can already achieve more realistic renderings
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/73660/cici-takes-up-the-challenge
guy91600
Karma: 11,799
Tue, Aug 19In "real life" no clothing behaves like the image on the left. Naively I thought that dForce's role was to resolve this kind of detail. Currently I have a troubleshooting PC (it dates from 2010 and 4GB of RAM) in short I can't test or do anything with Daz, just surf 
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Tue, Aug 19" Naively I thought that dForce's role was to resolve this kind of detail. "
With a little help, dForce could definitely contribute to solving this problem... at least, that's what I believe, as I'm currently preparing something like this for testing purposes. Unfortunately, it will take a little while...
Sorry to hear about the problems with your PC. I'll keep my fingers crossed that it gets fixed quickly
With a little help, dForce could definitely contribute to solving this problem... at least, that's what I believe, as I'm currently preparing something like this for testing purposes. Unfortunately, it will take a little while...
Sorry to hear about the problems with your PC. I'll keep my fingers crossed that it gets fixed quickly
TRASH CAN ALERT: GRAFTS
Earlier, I addressed the question of whether it is possible to use morphs to enable women with large bust sizes to wear tighter 3D clothing.
This works (within limits).
However, what does NOT work at all is to use GRAFTS to achieve this. Here, I had a misconception and a gap in my knowledge of DAZ reality. Well ...
My theory: a graft that transforms every model into a flat-chested figure, which then (through graft morphs) regains a little more volume beneath clothing.
The DAZ reality: a graft is also adapted to the upper body shape of the respective model, even if the mesh of the graft does not fit at all. So not only does it look totally stupid, it also makes no sense, since you end up with the same bust shape as without the graft.
And into the trash can with that idea (which already contains at least 2.5 tons of stupid ideas).
Well, it's a good thing I have another idea on the subject... otherwise this experience/result would have frustrated me a bit this morning
Earlier, I addressed the question of whether it is possible to use morphs to enable women with large bust sizes to wear tighter 3D clothing.
This works (within limits).
However, what does NOT work at all is to use GRAFTS to achieve this. Here, I had a misconception and a gap in my knowledge of DAZ reality. Well ...
My theory: a graft that transforms every model into a flat-chested figure, which then (through graft morphs) regains a little more volume beneath clothing.
The DAZ reality: a graft is also adapted to the upper body shape of the respective model, even if the mesh of the graft does not fit at all. So not only does it look totally stupid, it also makes no sense, since you end up with the same bust shape as without the graft.
And into the trash can with that idea (which already contains at least 2.5 tons of stupid ideas).
Well, it's a good thing I have another idea on the subject... otherwise this experience/result would have frustrated me a bit this morning
REPLY
! REPORT
Luxe Muse
Karma: 4,089
Tue, Aug 19You shouldn't totally scratch that idea. In theory, you could still use a graft to hide the breast or any geometry you want hidden; replace it with the shape you want (while keeping the same base figure subd), and your clothing on top would then be adjusted to the graft (by you since you made the graft morph). Just brainstorming aloud with you.
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Tue, Aug 19Hmm... but I just had a different experience: I built a graft with a flat chest, rigged it for G9 base, saved it, and then assigned it to a lady with a large bust size. The result: the same bust size as before... " spruced up " by my disorderly graft mesh. The underlying mesh of the model is hidden in the graft area—but by assigning it to a model, all of the model's vertex data appears to be transferred to the graft.
DAZ – always a pleasure to work with
PS: I have to leave soon, so don't be surprised if you don't hear back from me for the next few hours
DAZ – always a pleasure to work with
PS: I have to leave soon, so don't be surprised if you don't hear back from me for the next few hours
Luxe Muse
Karma: 4,089
Tue, Aug 19It's okay, is a slow forum, and I love that hi, hi, hi (Unless we are getting attacked by bots)
So, that means the resulting new geometry from the graft is not used during projection? I think I know the answer based on your experience.
So, that means the resulting new geometry from the graft is not used during projection? I think I know the answer based on your experience.
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Tue, Aug 19Nope, unfortunately not
The graft takes on the shape of the model it is assigned to instead of keeping the original graft shape. That's been my experience so far. But I'll try it again tomorrow to be absolutely sure.
The graft takes on the shape of the model it is assigned to instead of keeping the original graft shape. That's been my experience so far. But I'll try it again tomorrow to be absolutely sure.
Luxe Muse
Karma: 4,089
Tue, Aug 19This video from Sickle (sorry I might have butcher her nickname), helped me a lot, I still have it bookmarked:
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Tue, Aug 19Thank you very much!
Yeah - SickleYield is the bomb. Lots of information and tutorials
------------------------
I'm about to create a new info block on grafts so I can post a screenshot.
In short: grafts can do a lot ... but unfortunately not everything.
Yeah - SickleYield is the bomb. Lots of information and tutorials
------------------------
I'm about to create a new info block on grafts so I can post a screenshot.
In short: grafts can do a lot ... but unfortunately not everything.
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Fri, Sep 05Something good can come from every cow pat (even if it's just psylos
My failed experiment with grafts (see above) led to a whole series of ideas for GeoGrafts, which - once again - are slightly off
the beaten track
There is a truly incredible variety of possible uses besides the 321st genital and the 7532nd tail (haha... for German readers, this sentence contains a crude double entendre
My tip to all CCs (and those who want to become one): let your minds spin and smoke to generate ideas ...
before I snatch them all away from you
My failed experiment with grafts (see above) led to a whole series of ideas for GeoGrafts, which - once again - are slightly off
the beaten track
There is a truly incredible variety of possible uses besides the 321st genital and the 7532nd tail (haha... for German readers, this sentence contains a crude double entendre
My tip to all CCs (and those who want to become one): let your minds spin and smoke to generate ideas ...
before I snatch them all away from you
TRASH CAN ALERT: GRAFTS (Conclusion)
Grafts are a wonderful thing for horns, tails, minor modifications to a model, or whatever else you can think of. Unfortunately, however, they are not suitable for replacing larger body regions - and that's actually what I wanted:
To replace parts of the upper body on GF9 and then use the graft, including morphs, to allow 3D models with large bust sizes to wear tight-fitting 3D clothing.
Unfortunately, however, in this case, when assigning a rigged graft, the model's body or breast shape is transferred to the graft instead of - as I had intended - keeping the graft in its original shape. This means that the graft behaves (in this case) like a 3D garment that adapts to the model's body shape.
Idea dead ... but not yet buried
Now that I know how grafts are done (and what not to do), I'm sure I'll wake up with a few new ideas sooner or later
Grafts are a wonderful thing for horns, tails, minor modifications to a model, or whatever else you can think of. Unfortunately, however, they are not suitable for replacing larger body regions - and that's actually what I wanted:
To replace parts of the upper body on GF9 and then use the graft, including morphs, to allow 3D models with large bust sizes to wear tight-fitting 3D clothing.
Unfortunately, however, in this case, when assigning a rigged graft, the model's body or breast shape is transferred to the graft instead of - as I had intended - keeping the graft in its original shape. This means that the graft behaves (in this case) like a 3D garment that adapts to the model's body shape.
Idea dead ... but not yet buried
Now that I know how grafts are done (and what not to do), I'm sure I'll wake up with a few new ideas sooner or later
REPLY
! REPORT
Masterstroke
Karma: 3,501
Thu, Aug 21I hope, this helps
It is not quite the same though, for my character's breasts are much smaller and I've already done some fixes, but I think this is the procedure to adress your problem, and it comes without creating geografts.
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/73894/clothes-off-breasts
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/73892/clothes-on-breasts
Let me know if it helped, for I will delete thos two gallery submissions once they've fullfilled their purpose.
It is not quite the same though, for my character's breasts are much smaller and I've already done some fixes, but I think this is the procedure to adress your problem, and it comes without creating geografts.
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/73894/clothes-off-breasts
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/73892/clothes-on-breasts
Let me know if it helped, for I will delete thos two gallery submissions once they've fullfilled their purpose.
Masterstroke
Karma: 3,501
Thu, Aug 21Here is how I'd do it.
I use zbrush, not Blender, because I don't see rhime or Reason in Blender at all.
Send your character and the shirt in question to zbrush.
Hide the shirt their and shape the breasts.
Nowunhide the shirt and shape it as you like it over the breasts
Send both back to DS and give both morphs identical names and place them at the exact same place in the parameter hirachy tree.
Save your morph assets.
I use zbrush, not Blender, because I don't see rhime or Reason in Blender at all.
Send your character and the shirt in question to zbrush.
Hide the shirt their and shape the breasts.
Nowunhide the shirt and shape it as you like it over the breasts
Send both back to DS and give both morphs identical names and place them at the exact same place in the parameter hirachy tree.
Save your morph assets.
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Thu, Aug 21@Masterstroke:
Thank you very much for this contribution and all the effort you put into it
Unfortunately, I have a few problems imagining the entire process as a commercial product (which is what I'm interested in). However, I believe this tip is very helpful and important for others, for example, when creating scenes with a specific model and a specific 3D garment.
Thank you very much for this contribution and all the effort you put into it
Unfortunately, I have a few problems imagining the entire process as a commercial product (which is what I'm interested in). However, I believe this tip is very helpful and important for others, for example, when creating scenes with a specific model and a specific 3D garment.
UNIVERSAL MORPHS, INDIVIDUAL BREASTS - AND 1.5 IDEAS
Over the past few days, I have been thinking about (and experimenting with) the commercially viable possibility of dressing 3D models with large (and even larger) bust sizes in tight-fitting 3D clothing without the dressed model appearing more irritating than inspiring. Well, in short: it doesn't work.
Reason 1: Instead of a single morph, the customer would have had to carefully combine up to 8 morphs (depending on the model, clothing, and possibly also the camera angle). Of course, the " 1 click and I'm done " generation doesn't do that (no, dear reader - I don't mean you).
Reason 2: Universal morphs distort individual breast shapes and sizes. This is because a morph does not store the absolute offset of the vertices, but rather the relative offset. This means that the larger the breast, the smaller the effect of a single morph. And the more complex the breast shape, the more distortions are caused by universal morphs. And honestly, I don't feel like writing a whole novel as a product description explaining why it doesn't work the way the miracle-expecting user imagines it will (no, dear reader: I'm still not talking about you).
So this project is finally dead and buried... but the escaping nutrients hold an idea for model producers or interested third parties:
As a producer of plus-size models, wouldn't it be a good idea to equip your individual model with a few morphs that allow users to use (almost) any 3D clothing? It's not that difficultand since you're already sculpting your model, 2-3 extra morphs are quickly done. This idea could therefore increase the usefulness (and possibly also the sales) of your model.
The same applies to interested third parties with experience in 3D sculpting. Why not offer add-ons with a few regulatory morphs for a specific model, in consultation with the model's producer?
So long, take care ... my next experiment is already on its way
Over the past few days, I have been thinking about (and experimenting with) the commercially viable possibility of dressing 3D models with large (and even larger) bust sizes in tight-fitting 3D clothing without the dressed model appearing more irritating than inspiring. Well, in short: it doesn't work.
Reason 1: Instead of a single morph, the customer would have had to carefully combine up to 8 morphs (depending on the model, clothing, and possibly also the camera angle). Of course, the " 1 click and I'm done " generation doesn't do that (no, dear reader - I don't mean you).
Reason 2: Universal morphs distort individual breast shapes and sizes. This is because a morph does not store the absolute offset of the vertices, but rather the relative offset. This means that the larger the breast, the smaller the effect of a single morph. And the more complex the breast shape, the more distortions are caused by universal morphs. And honestly, I don't feel like writing a whole novel as a product description explaining why it doesn't work the way the miracle-expecting user imagines it will (no, dear reader: I'm still not talking about you).
So this project is finally dead and buried... but the escaping nutrients hold an idea for model producers or interested third parties:
As a producer of plus-size models, wouldn't it be a good idea to equip your individual model with a few morphs that allow users to use (almost) any 3D clothing? It's not that difficultand since you're already sculpting your model, 2-3 extra morphs are quickly done. This idea could therefore increase the usefulness (and possibly also the sales) of your model.
The same applies to interested third parties with experience in 3D sculpting. Why not offer add-ons with a few regulatory morphs for a specific model, in consultation with the model's producer?
So long, take care ... my next experiment is already on its way
REPLY
! REPORT
FINAL SUMMARY: BUSTY LADIES AND TIGHT CLOTHING
To make a long story short: a commercial, distributable product is not possible using the usual methods (universal morphs, grafts, or customized (morphable) clothing) ... at least not if it's supposed to be reasonably good.
The only option is to create individual morphs for individual models. And even then, there are still a number of problems.
Yesterday, I published a freebie that interested producers or third parties (keyword: add-ons) can take a look at. Based on this thread and the freebie, you may be interested in pursuing and refining this idea further. I won't be doing anything else in this area (including adjustments to GF8, etc.). So if you want, you can really get started.
Have fun
https://www.renderhub.com/pushee-ri/psr-pom-character-morph-for-genesis-9
To make a long story short: a commercial, distributable product is not possible using the usual methods (universal morphs, grafts, or customized (morphable) clothing) ... at least not if it's supposed to be reasonably good.
The only option is to create individual morphs for individual models. And even then, there are still a number of problems.
Yesterday, I published a freebie that interested producers or third parties (keyword: add-ons) can take a look at. Based on this thread and the freebie, you may be interested in pursuing and refining this idea further. I won't be doing anything else in this area (including adjustments to GF8, etc.). So if you want, you can really get started.
Have fun
https://www.renderhub.com/pushee-ri/psr-pom-character-morph-for-genesis-9
REPLY
! REPORT
QUESTION: RIGGING A NECKLACE (DAZ)
I have posted this question in a separate thread, as I hope that a new thread will attract more attention and feedback:
https://www.renderhub.com/forum/13633/question-rigging-a-necklace
I have posted this question in a separate thread, as I hope that a new thread will attract more attention and feedback:
https://www.renderhub.com/forum/13633/question-rigging-a-necklace
REPLY
! REPORT
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Tue, Aug 26And again, I botched it...
Based on the comments in the thread above, I decided not to use bones (far too much work for the planned price) and tried using separate objects instead. For example, necklace in normal position, necklace shifted to the left, shifted to the right, etc.
There are a total of 7 different rigid objects, which I then adapted to G9 using transfer. It looks good ... but only in the A pose or really very simple poses. However, since I'm using slightly more dynamic poses for the DAZ UI icons, I just realized: I totally goofed up!!!! ARRRGGGHHHH!!!!
As we all know, transfer/rigging means that all kinds of bones are transferred to the object... and in this case, that means: gruesome distortions of the necklace in more extreme poses. SHIT!
Honestly - sometimes I hate DAZ.
Based on the comments in the thread above, I decided not to use bones (far too much work for the planned price) and tried using separate objects instead. For example, necklace in normal position, necklace shifted to the left, shifted to the right, etc.
There are a total of 7 different rigid objects, which I then adapted to G9 using transfer. It looks good ... but only in the A pose or really very simple poses. However, since I'm using slightly more dynamic poses for the DAZ UI icons, I just realized: I totally goofed up!!!! ARRRGGGHHHH!!!!
As we all know, transfer/rigging means that all kinds of bones are transferred to the object... and in this case, that means: gruesome distortions of the necklace in more extreme poses. SHIT!
Honestly - sometimes I hate DAZ.
IDEA: DROPLACE INSTEAD OF NECKLACE
OK, maybe you've been following the necklace issue: Rigging (with own bones) is too complex, rigging as an object (transfer tool) only works for silly poses that aren't very different from the A pose (see above), RFN (Rigid Follow Node) wouldn't work (just imagine what would happen to the necklace if the model bent her head/neck back while the necklace is ankered at the neck) ... what else is there left? Maybe dForce after all?
I started a super simple and super quick test. It doesn't look as bad as I thought it would (in my opinion). OKyou can't make pearl necklaces with big beads and lots of bling bling... but it could be an idea for simple, delicate, and narrow necklaces.
And with texture maps (cutout, bump, normals, displacement, etc.), you could (hopefully) give the whole 2D thing shape and volume.
What do you think?
OK, maybe you've been following the necklace issue: Rigging (with own bones) is too complex, rigging as an object (transfer tool) only works for silly poses that aren't very different from the A pose (see above), RFN (Rigid Follow Node) wouldn't work (just imagine what would happen to the necklace if the model bent her head/neck back while the necklace is ankered at the neck) ... what else is there left? Maybe dForce after all?
I started a super simple and super quick test. It doesn't look as bad as I thought it would (in my opinion). OKyou can't make pearl necklaces with big beads and lots of bling bling... but it could be an idea for simple, delicate, and narrow necklaces.
And with texture maps (cutout, bump, normals, displacement, etc.), you could (hopefully) give the whole 2D thing shape and volume.
What do you think?
REPLY
! REPORT
Bobb
Karma: 582
Wed, Aug 27It does drape nicely. What does it do if she bends down or tilts sideways?
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Wed, Aug 27I've already checked sideways: it looks good (or at least usable). I didn't have time for " Leaning Forward " this morning. But I'll definitely test (and report on) that too before I start on the texture maps.
A noob question, can dforce replace weight painting?
REPLY
! REPORT
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Thu, Sep 04Hmm - it may be too early in the morning ... but I don't quite understand the question. When I think about my own weight painting in connection with dForce, I would answer the question with a resounding YES.
Dforce flattens or stretches pretty much everything - unless the object contains a dForce weight map or various surface groups with their own material/dForce settings.
Dforce flattens or stretches pretty much everything - unless the object contains a dForce weight map or various surface groups with their own material/dForce settings.
giant dwarf
Karma: 3,363
Thu, Sep 04first thank you for the reply, want I wanted to say after a make a peace of clothing let say in blender, and after imported it to daz and rigged it with "Transfer Utility", in this case it is enough to apply dforce on the clothing or I need to do the weight painting too?
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Thu, Sep 04Ah, I see
In this case, you should definitely use weight mapping (at least if necessary). Weight mapping initially ensures that the influence of the model's bones is adjusted to the fabric.
In this case, you should definitely use weight mapping (at least if necessary). Weight mapping initially ensures that the influence of the model's bones is adjusted to the fabric.
IDEA: KEY COLOR WiTHOUT POST PROC
OK, this isn't about dForce - but the following question/intention is still interesting, isn't it?
By key color, I mean black and white images in which only one part is highlighted in color. Like this, for example:
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/57539/2nd-attempt-thank-you-again
My question is whether something like this (or at least something similar) can be done without Photoshop, multiple layers, and transparent .png images.
The first thing that comes to mind is the DAZ White Mode. When this is enabled, individual (clothing) objects can be excluded from being displayed gray. Sounds good ...
.. but White Mode has its (tight) limitations, which (in my opinion) are not suitable for interesting images.
The only thing left to do (again, in my opinion) is to turn the whole thing upside down and think backwards, so to speak.
While any object (clothing, etc.) can easily be recolored to achieve a black-and-white look, the situation is somewhat more difficult with models. My first approach was to work with Geo Shells, which I used to overlay the model's actual body color. But that wasn't really convincing ...
My current approach is to replace the G9 skin material (while retaining the bump/normal maps). Simply assigning the new Skin preset would at least eliminate the hassle of fiddling with the various surface groups.
Interested in further developments on this topic? Then stay tuned
OK, this isn't about dForce - but the following question/intention is still interesting, isn't it?
By key color, I mean black and white images in which only one part is highlighted in color. Like this, for example:
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/57539/2nd-attempt-thank-you-again
My question is whether something like this (or at least something similar) can be done without Photoshop, multiple layers, and transparent .png images.
The first thing that comes to mind is the DAZ White Mode. When this is enabled, individual (clothing) objects can be excluded from being displayed gray. Sounds good ...
.. but White Mode has its (tight) limitations, which (in my opinion) are not suitable for interesting images.
The only thing left to do (again, in my opinion) is to turn the whole thing upside down and think backwards, so to speak.
While any object (clothing, etc.) can easily be recolored to achieve a black-and-white look, the situation is somewhat more difficult with models. My first approach was to work with Geo Shells, which I used to overlay the model's actual body color. But that wasn't really convincing ...
My current approach is to replace the G9 skin material (while retaining the bump/normal maps). Simply assigning the new Skin preset would at least eliminate the hassle of fiddling with the various surface groups.
Interested in further developments on this topic? Then stay tuned
REPLY
! REPORT
Pushee-Ri
Karma: 33,861
Thu, Sep 04OK, here I am again
I'm not entirely satisfied with the result yet, but it's heading in the right direction, right?
I think if not only the skin but also the oral cavity and the mouth itself (G9 Mouth) could be set to white, this could be an interesting project for some people.
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/74922/key-color-without-post-proc
I'm not entirely satisfied with the result yet, but it's heading in the right direction, right?
I think if not only the skin but also the oral cavity and the mouth itself (G9 Mouth) could be set to white, this could be an interesting project for some people.
https://www.renderhub.com/gallery/74922/key-color-without-post-proc
