Customers buy the same thing over and over again thinking they got something all new :) Does Bondware really know Poser?:)) It seems to be simple " Chinese marketing strategy " they also make loads of products that actually are the same, even upgrades the only thing they change is the Package and slightly change the naming of the product but the inner does not change, then they say it is all new. "With Poser 13, you can now set up your own start-up scene, complete with your favorite figures, props, and settings."Ĭan someone explain why this is listed as a new feature? We've had this ability for years. So when you activate that morph it will behave accordingly in relation to the morph that was initially present without applying that reference morph again. You can also do it manually by dialing the baked in morph's original dial to -1, the new morph (that was created with the original baked in) to 1, export the result as a morph target, apply that morph target and the baked in morph will be subtracted from the resulting morph. It's the difference derived through subtraction. But if you subtract the custom face from the expression morph, which was built in relation to that custom face, and apply the result you are left with just the expression. The custom face is doubled and surely won't look right when you dial in the expression. If you create the expression over top the custom face and apply it as a morph target and dial it to 1, the custom face is baked into the expression morph and applied again. How might you subtract a value of 1 state added to a value of 2 state? By subtracting 1 and producing only a result of 1 state.Ī good example would be an expression morph designed to work with a custom face morph. If you morph over a morph as a default state, return it to Poser, subtract it, and are left with only the new result (the difference) the new difference morph will behave as if it was created over the subtracted morph but will not double the baked in reference (telescoping) because it has been subtracted. It would be useless as, say, an adjustment morph to modify the specific state of another morph. Where you absolutely would get in trouble is that the baked in morph state would be applied again, doubling its effect. Nevertrumper posted at 11:45 PM Sun, 26 February 2023 - #4457046Īs I understand this, it would be easy to create morphs from a base geometry *.obj, but when you want to create new morphs on top of already existing morphs, you will might get into trouble, because you will have to deal with splitting up body part seams.Not if the body parts are never split up, say through the use of a script or plugin, or export method to handle this.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |