DAZ Studio too buggy, still? Or, is it just me?
ttnn
Posts: 99
Dear Gurus: thank you for sharing your expertise!
This weekend, I revisited my Genesis and G2F,
with the modest goal of replacing their off-the-shelf
Zero Pose by a more customized version.
I was disappointed by how buggy DAZ Studio 4 still is,
and surprised to not find gripes about it on the DAZ forums.
I’m talking basic stuff, like
Exhibit A: Symmetrize
Remember the tapered-fingers effect, among the morphs of Aiko3?
I wanted to achieve that, just by scaling.
Scaling has the advantage that the bones scale, too
(and thus, the pivot points: important, especially, for legs and feet).
So, after fussing for a while with milady’s right hand,
I invoked the Symmetry menu command,
and found that it wasn’t working as it ought to!
It copied the overall Scale parameter correctly, but, invariably,
it would then proceed to “compensate” by altering the individual X,Y,Z scales!
Does that happen to you, too?
The menu command seems to invoke a script
(or, you can merge the script, explicitly) called Symmetrize.
I have a .dsb from 2010, a .dse from 2011, and my latest says March 05, 2015
(came with the DS4.8 Public Beta).
They all “overcompensate”, even if I tell them to not touch the X,Y,Z scales.
Exhibit B: Triax conversion glitch.
Since before Victoria 4 I’ve been customizing characters;
e.g. “Nattie” Iknee.
I asked DS4.7, and 4.8, to convert her to Triax rigging.
Fine. Except, she ends up cross-eyed!
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
I asked DS4.7, and 4.8, to convert her to Triax rigging.
Fine. Except, she ends up cross-eyed!
Exhibit C: Inconsistent / unresponsive internal state.
Starting from Genesis as given, and ditto G2F,
—no morphs: only scaling!—
I end up in a situation where, for example, the ankle is too thick.
That look carries over to rendering, and also to Collada export.
However!
DAZ Studio, deep inside, knows that this is not what it should look like.
Proof of what I’m saying is that, if I move any of the Parameter sliders,
ever so slightly, the view corrects itself as long as I don’t release the mouse!
The instant I release the mouse button,
the viewport goes back to the ankle thick version.
The cockeyed condition of Nathan/Nattie/Natalia is one
that I can not correct by translating the eyeballs [sic!].
With DS4.8 (Public Beta), translation attempts cause back and forth snapping;
with DS4.7, the selection marquee moves, but not the eyeballs.
So, Question: Is this just me?
On Mac OS X, with a case-sensitive Unix-partitioned file system?
Or, am I trying to do things so esoteric that DAZ clients
don’t wanna touch the stuff, unless they’re wizardly enough
that they can always find a workaround and move on??
P.S. Is there a way to place images where you want them,
as opposed to, necessarily, at the end of your post?
I'll answer the easy one...nope, the pictures go at the end. That's the way the forum software is setup...
Exhibit A: what are your options in the Symmetry dialog? If I'm understanding what you're doing (using scaling to get long, tapered fingers) the symmetry function is working correctly for me.
Exhibit B: are you just using the automatically-generated weight maps? did your original figure include an eyefix morph, and was that transferred?
Exhibit C: If you go to Window > Panes > Draw Settings, Subdivision Draw Style has a default value of "Delayed (Off)" -- subdivision is turned off during posing and is only recalculated when you release the mouse button. This prevents the subD calculations from causing the viewport to drag on less powerful systems -- most people prefer setting it to "Persistent (On)". The thick ankle is the effect of subD smoothing what would otherwise be an unrealistic artifact of the base mesh being too low-poly. If that's the look you want, you may need to change the Mesh Resolution parameters -- turn off subD, or try a different algorithm or edge interpolation setting.
And I'm afraid the current forum software doesn't allow in-line images, unfortunately.
Actually DS is pretty stable in terms of handling morphs. Just glossing over your issues, I would research into learning what ERC Freeze, and adjust rigging to shape does in making characters.
Exhibit C is basically the subdivision working in interactive mode. You would need an actual morph to make the ankles smaller and that would require an external modelling tool.
Thank you for your reply! But I do have SubD Level at 0.
Playing with all the options of the Subdivision Draw Style,
the one and only option that gives me a different behavior is
Unfortunately SubD level 0 is not the same as Without SubD.
Level 0 doesn't divide the polys but it still applies the subD smoothing algorithm that you're seeing.
Set Mesh Resolution to Base, not High.
Mesh Resolution High is slightly more pleasing to the eye.
What I would like is to make the thin ankle stay thin;
Mesh Resolution Base does not achieve that. But, thank you.
Minimalist example: Select only Right Pinky 3; Scale 80 106 100 88; apply Symmetry.
Result, Left Pinky 3: Scale 80 126 120 108
I see this too - please use a technical Support ticket to file a bug report. http://www.daz3d.com/help/help-contact-us
Amen: https://helpdaz.zendesk.com/requests/188770
Thank you!
Setting Mesh resolution to Base works on everything else but Genesis is not designed to be without SubD, it can't be turned off.
The symmetry function is for posing not shaping, you have always had to un-check Scale in symmetry otherwise the scaling is multiplied, for example 105% becomes 105% x 105% = 110%. Translation should also be un-checked.
In the Symmetry dialog, either select all the bones you want and turn off recursive, or use Root bone and turn on recursive.
I am able to turn it off - it would be impossible to export Genesis for morph creation otherwise.
but the eyeballs are both in default position, and, I cannot translate either of them:
not with Translate X, not with the eye width morphs.
Correction: the operation works, as long as I'm pressing the mouse button,
but snaps back to default position as soon as I let go.
Converting from legacy to TriAx isn't going to give you a finished figure, unfortunately - it's a starting point for refinement in most cases.
and I must congratulate Whisenant et al. for a Herculean job
in producing these high-level specialized tools. :coolsmile:
As for refinement, well--
not being able to move the eyeballs is, of course, frustrating.
As Male-M3dia remarked, it has something to do with ERC,
and Whisenant could probably tell us, right away.
I am able to turn it off - it would be impossible to export Genesis for morph creation otherwise.
I have the same fat ankles that ttnn has. :-)
both Genesis and G2f are still being smoothed at Base; mesh resolution.
What you're calling a thick ankle is more accurate than the thin one you're showing. While this is G2F (I don't have V4 anymore), the principle should be the same: the mass of the ankle shouldn't thin when the foot points.
*Sigh*
Converting Poser content to TriAx doesn't give you a finished figure, hell it doesn't even come close, I've fully converted Aiko 3 and half converted Victoria 3 to TriAx, and the huge undertaking to do that is nothing compared to what you have to do to the mess that V4 gets left in.
Most have no idea that Poser rigging has never been compatible with DS, it gets dragged through a converter when you import it into DS, with DS4 it gets converted into a general WM with "helpers" that make it look like it's still Poser rigging, however once you use the convert to TriAx those "helpers" are deleted and your left with just a poor quality WM that bends worse after conversion than it did before.
I'm actually wondering how Richard managed to turn subD off, but I can't.
I'm actually wondering how Richard managed to turn subD off, but I can't.
Well, there's also, if you are looking at during posing/after posing, the difference between Full and Optimised for the Manipulation binding (Tool settings in 4.7, Draw Settings in 4.8)..
But in my case, I was hoping to achieve a thin ankle effect,
after scaling the shin and foot nodes in a way such,
that my right-hand image is more reflective of what the result should be.
What I find remarkable, is that DAZ Studio knows this, at some level,
which raises the question:
how might I convince it to believe what it already knows?
Really?? :ohh:
Maybe I haven't delved deeply enough into this to notice.
I just marvel at how much alike the converted figure is to the original;
the fact that all the morph dials are still there, and still work;
marvel at how well the textures show (therefore, the UVs get translated);
I'm grateful for the fact that DS4.7 and 4.8 really translate to Collada
(as opposed to poor DS3, that simply crashed),
and grateful to see that vertex groups and vertex weights carry over.
Thus far, I've been able to correct ugly bends (not many, thus far)
by retouching those vertex weights.
I may be surprised to find glitches that seem to me like they should have been ironed out
long ago; but, overall, I am in awe of the huge amount of work that, over the years,
has gone into facilitating the humanoid for the wannabe artist/illustrator
--as opposed to Blender, which is a powerhouse these days,
but lacks the specialized high-level tools that DAZ offers.
But in my case, I was hoping to achieve a thin ankle effect,
after scaling the shin and foot nodes in a way such,
that my right-hand image is more reflective of what the result should be.
What I find remarkable, is that DAZ Studio knows this, at some level,
which raises the question:
how might I convince it to believe what it already knows?
You won't convince it as that's the subdivision calculation. The image on the left is the anatomically correct one, not the right. (Which you can test by bending your own ankle). Aside from using a external tool or deformers to try to bend it and make a JCM for that morph only, you won't get the bend to change.
Eh, yes.
For Homo sapiens sapiens, and as far back, perhaps, as Homo erectus.
But that's not where I'm heading (as you might guess, from my little avatar).
My most basic question is: what can we rely on?
That thick ankles is what Collada export will export, necessarily?
If I could get the thin-ankled version, it would save me time.
Otherwise, I shall adjust, accordingly.
I'll be redoing the foot, anyway, hoping to eventually achieve
an alternate geometry, or a GeoGraft.
Ditto the fixed eyeballs problem.
[Whisenant? Hello?]
The Collada armature that I pick up from the Blender side [yes, I confess]
is translated vertically, but otherwise seems to be ok.
So I have to reposition it, manually, and in that verve, I might as well adjust the eyeballs.
It's all a matter of trying to be efficient:
the less corrective fiddling, the better, don't you think? 8-/
Partial Solution to Symmetrize Problem:
At Richard Haseltine's behest, we now have this bug report: https://helpdaz.zendesk.com/requests/188770
Meantime, I scaled arms, hands, fingers, on a Genesis figure,
and achieved symmetry with patience.
Having come thus far, I wondered if one might possibly transfer
the "pose" (i.e. the node transforms) of such a figure
over to a Genesis 2 Female, even though G2F has more nodes than Genesis!?
With another tip o' the hat,
I marvel at the tender loving care of DAZ developers: it worked!
Here, on the viewer's left, is Genesis; on the right is G2F, looking better than the original!
A way to get her eyes unstuck.
Thank you, Bejaymac, for that insight!
Thanks to you, and starting with a wide-eyed V4.2,
I found a way to get what looks just like her, and can move her eyeballs,
but Triax-mapped, or Triax + General "blend"-mapped(!):
1.- Ask for conversion to Triax.
Result: cockeyed; eyeballs stuck.
2.- Ask to have Triax converted to General Weight, or to Triax/General Blend.
Result: Eyeballs straight, can move; respond to EyeWidth morph.
3.- From there, you can convert to pure Triax, without messing up the eyeballs!
O wise Bejaymac! Do you have an opinion on that "blend" mode? :coolsmile: