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
Different PAs have different workflow systems; using dynamesh just about requires using zRemesher to clean it up and reduce polycount to below 10k.
If you're making clothes, zremesher may work. But you don't want to change the arrangement of those polygons with figures, with morph loader pro looks at that, so you don't want to make a head morph that changes the whole figure.
For clarity:
"The low resolution mesh is the base and cage for subdivision, so the mesh doesn't expand" I assume you mean ".. so that mesh doesn't expand", meaning the original low resolution mesh. Sorry to pick on details, but this is a potentially confusing subject as I'm sure you'll agree and details make a big difference.
Following on in your statement you say "Subdivision adds polygons and move the mesh outward with each subsequent level." You are saying that subdivision causes two things to happen; dividing exisiting polygons into smaller polygons plus expanding the mesh in the x,y,z axes. The first of these is exactly what subdivision should do, the second is most definitely NOT what subdivision should do. There is no intrinsic reason why dividing polygons into smaller polygons should change the values of any of the vertices of the original polygons. These polygons are not real physical constructs subject to physical laws such as compression, but rather they are abstract mathematical values. If the x,y,z coordinates of the verticies of polygons in a mesh change when the polygons are subdivided then they do so because the subdivision algorithm causes them to; ipso facto this is an artifact of the algorithm(s).
Do you know if the artifact is caused by Zbrush or DAZ Studio/GoZ? I doubt very much that the Zbrush programmers would make such an obvious error in their algorithms, and indeed I do not see a mesh expand in Zbrush no matter how many levels of subdivision I apply (though I acknowledge that it might not be possible for me to see). I also doubt that the DAZ3d programmers would make such mistakes in their algorithms. Though, logically, I can see that it might be advantageous to deliberately encode an "expansion error" when passing figures from Zbrush to DS in order to limit the usefulness/availabiliy of subdivisions in Zbrush, as it would then be possible to limit the use of HD in DS to specific individuals, eg PAs. I do not know if this is the case but I would be very interested to find out. I imagine that a more likely explanation is that an intrinsic difference between the Zbrush and DS algorithms causes the expansion and DAZ3d have cleverly worked out a way to correct this and that it the basis of their HD technology, to which they control the rights.
In any case the distinction between a technical artifact and artistic skills remains valid.
Nothing expands. Subdividing actually does move vertices as the mesh gets smoothed out. It loses volume in the process. Most extreme case would be subdividing a cube. It gets smoother and smoother and becomes close to a sphere and losing volume in the process.
You can of course subdivide without smoothing, but that doesn't make a lot of sense for organic shapes.
Correct; it's just not noticeable unless you happen to have another subtool loaded that has a similar shape to the base sculpt. I saw it last night when working on a flightsuit for G3F.
Yeah ZBrush is actually kinda notorious in that regard. Beside the volume loss that is just a by-product of the smoothing, in ZBrush the mesh actually gets smaller in terms of dimensions. From a math point of view that's normal I guess, but nothing keeps the developer from countering that effect. If you convert a cube to subdiv in Daz Studio you'll notice the actual mesh dimensions remain the same. Try this with the basic star shape in ZBrush and notice how much smaller it gets.
I use a macro to subdivide in ZBrush that uses morph targets to make sure the dimensions don't change.Here's a tutorial: https://www.linkedin.com/learning/zbrush-tips-tricks/subdividing-a-model-without-losing-volume?autoplay=true
Uh also I guess I have a bit of a terminology problem. By volume I meant the... well, volume, like how much water would fit into a mesh. This gets less as you subdivide the cube, however the mesh dimensions, like the outer bounds, can still stay the same. That's why I made the distinction, but the guy in the video just uses 'volume' to describe the overall size I guess. Just to clarify :)
Double uh... not sure about the water thing actually, thinking about it. I might be talking nonesense? Maybe someone more math-savvy could clarify. In any case, try the macro. It's useful when the star retains its size despite being subdivided.
We are talking in terms of the what the HD tool proess does, so your assertion would be incorrect. There is expansion.
EDIT: You spent two posts talking about how the polys moves. It doesn't matter what you call it, it ultimately still needs to be fixed.
Not sure what we're allowed to say when it comes to the HD tool, but just did some testing and see no expansion or anything out of the ordinary. Of course all you said about needing to sculpt as much as possible on the base level is still true, pretty much for all sculpting not just HD morphs. That's all that matters anyway.
Like I said, it's there.
And as I pointed out, it's only really noticeable with other subtools present; at least that's how I can tell it's happening.
speaking of zBrush her. What became of zBrush4R8? It's been half a year now, since it has been anounced. Never heard of it again, nor any updated anouncements. http://pixologic.com/ ;
I'm trying to think how long it was before we got 4R7 after its announcement at ZSummit. I seem to recall it was quite a while.
It seems there is some agreement that use of sub division in Zbrush followed by transfer to DS causes some distortion to the original mesh and not just a pure subdivision of polygons. No one is saying exactly why/how the distortion occurs, but one possibility might be the fact that Zbrush models are about 10000 times bigger than DS models. This might be a problem if the number of decimal places used to describe the x,y,z coordinates of each vertex is significantly limited. This may well result in rounding errors in the transfer of data between Zbrush and DS resulting in vericies being moved as a result of sub division, which should not happen, of course.
Is there anyone who knows the GoZ system (and is allowed to comment) that could clarify if this is an issue?
On the subject of sculpting meshes, it seems that again there is agreement, "sculpt as much as possible on the base level". Unfortunately, there is little being said about after that has been done, when using Genesis 3 figures. After as much sculpting as is humanly possible has been done at base resolution, how does one sculpt finer details in Genesis 3 without being a PA and without resorting to painting the details in displacement maps; remember we are talking about SCULPTING here not painting!
Doubtless someone will mention that it is possible for Zbrush to export sculpted fine details as maps. I personally have found this to be unreliable and cumbersome (an additional and complicated workflow compared to simply sculpting), but maybe someone knows of a really clear tutorial to decribe this workflow since "cumbersome and complicated" is all we non-PAs are left with, without access to HD technology.
What's cumbersome about it? Having to remember to drop back from the highest level of subdivision before clicking the button to create the map? To me, the process needed to use the HD tool has it beat for cumbersome, and you still need the other texture maps for the morph anyway.
This happens when SMTH is on and you divide in ZBrush - the fixes are a) work at base resolution or b) divide the mesh and create a morph from that, not doing any sculpting at all, then set that when sending your real morph back to DS and set the Reverse Deformations option to subtract out the distortion.
Also, if you're just using zBrush to make morphs, you're barely scratching the surface of what it can do. Search on YouTube for the Fully Realized Character Development video series and watch videos 5 and 6; those will show you some things that will help your workflow greatly, in my opinion.
As been mentioned several times, you take the original mesh then subdivide it and make your details, then generate a normal map. That's how everyone else does it and it works. And that's normal maps, not displacement maps. This would be the same if you had access to the HD Tool, except you would export your maps for non-PAs, or go through the cumbersome process of fixing your mesh to get it to work with HD. Exporting a normal map for a hobbyist is far easier.
@ Richard. Nice trick. Is the "distortion only" morph is specific to the level of subdivisions?
@ Daywalker, DS has more facilities than I use, so has Poser, Blender, Lightwave etc, so no surprise that Zbrush also can do more than I am currently using it for. Lots of programs I use have far more functionality that I will ever use. This is not the issue, I use certain tools for certain purposes. I have a day job and a life, I don't have the time or the desire to master every nook and cranny of every program I use.
@ Male-M3dia, I asked for "...a really clear tutorial to describe this workflow". You replied "..then generate a normal map". Were you by any chance involved in the script writing for "Blackadder III; Ink and Incapability" : Baldrick's definition of a dog is "not a cat". Very useful :)
I can't recall - the main issue is that ZBrush adjusts the base mesh as soon as any division with smoothing is applied so I would expect it to be a single morph needed, but you could always do a test with low level of division and the highest your system supports.
I previously noted that sickleyield's channel on Youtube already has this information for making normal maps. She demostrated it on Genesis 3. There are also lots of videos on youtube as well as pixelogic's site that go through workflow as well. In fact this is the 3rd time I've noted this.
If you're bouncing between tools to do things, you're not getting the most efficient use of your time; this is true whether you're a PA or hobbyist. Focus on one tool to do the job and learn it and you'll be farther ahead. This does mean learning as much about what the tool is capable of as possible for your specific focus.
This is especially true when wanting to use tools that will require you to have more than just basic knowledge of a program.
The topic is ZBrush compatibility and morph creation, not the presumed ability level of other posters. Please end the personal comments.
My comments weren't intended as personal, though they probably could be taken that way. All I was trying to say is that much of what folks want probably is already possible.
@ daywalker. I dream of the day when all of the tools I want are in one package, but guess what... they are not. For example I (and many others) would love the mesh morphing/smoothing capabilities of Zbrush to be directly available in DS on the fly, but they are not, so I use GoZ and Zbrush. Maybe Blender would be a better option? Alternatively, maybe I could do posing and rendering in Zbrush, then I would not need DS... guess what... not gonna happen.
So until my dream, or something like it, comes true I will continue to work with DS, GoZ and Zbrush. Richards suggestion is definitely one I will try out when I get time.
@Male-M3dia, thanks for the heads up on SickleYields Youtube tutorial.