Submit Your Poser Suggestions to Smith Micro

  • @nagra_00_ I haven't upgraded my Mac since OS 7, sooo....... I rarely even keep up with what Apple is doing these days. They seem more interested in $1000 dollar phones these days. Can't say I blme them, but I'm not spending $1000 on a phone for anyone.

  • @eclark1849 OS 7 thats one of the old Apple OSes without a real memory management. I had never been interested in those. I switched some years ago to what was called Mac OS X mainly because it is based on a UNIX kernel (i am a UNIX nerd). But with the lack of support for Nvidia cards with the latest OSes the Apple story found with High Sierra its natural end for me…

  • @estherau This is why I won’t upgrade to Catalina. Heck, according to SM, Poser is not even Mojave compatible.

  • @nagra_00_ Yeah, I misspoke. It was OSX something. I'll look it up later, if you want to know, but it was around Lion or Snow Leopard. One of the big cats.

  • I will most likely have to upgrade. so i am hoping poser will still work. it's worrying though.

  • It was Mac OSX 7.6 I never made it to OSX 8 Mountain Lion.

  • @eclark1849 Ah ok you mean OS X 10.7 Lion. At that time i was a Linux user still hoping it would become the new mainstream OS.

    @estherau i checked Catalina and it will still have OpenGL. In case you use the DSON importer from time to time, that one is AFAIK 32 bit and will not work anymore.

  • I have a suggestion regarding the Morphing Tool.

    Many times I have wanted to fit a piece of clothing to a heavily morphed figure, and found that copying the morphs from the figure doesn't quite give me what I need. Even in the days before that functionality was available in Poser, it was always a tedious process to try and make conforming clothing fit. Simulation also doesn't quite do the job in the case where a piece of clothing has modeled details like hems and stitching, or buttons that aren't directly attached to the cloth mesh.

    What occurred to me, was that the push and pull options of the Morph tool can preserve details relatively well, if they are applying a translation uniformly. However, as soon as I use the smoothing or flattening tools, they will smooth the details out of the mesh.

    What if, instead of the smoothing or flattening function applying to the current mesh vertex positions, there were an alternative version of these tools which only applied to the deltas in the current morph. I.e. just smooth or flatten the deltas you've already modified, as though the deltas comprised a mesh themselves, rather than the actual vertices. That way, details that are built into the mesh cannot be smoothed away or flattened to nothing. Only the deltas will get relatively smoothed or flattened.

    It seems to me that this would not require a great deal of reprogramming or development, merely the application of existing algorithms to an alternative data set, i.e. deltas instead of vertex positions.

  • @anomalaus additionally, the tighten and loosen tools will iron out mesh details when in proximity to the target figure. The details could be simply restored (apart from the extent by which the original mesh has been stretched) by applying delta smoothing, as opposed to vertex smoothing.

  • @anomalaus omg, yes yes yes! For things I made myself, I make mat zones so that I can control the smooth and flatten.

    Another way might be an "on the fly" selection of facets/vertices to operate on using grouping. Also, saving that group to use later would be nice. Doesn't have to be a full-on mat zone. Just a named selection of facets/vertices to be used, however.

    Different shape brushes would be nice, too. Like, really nice. At least elliptical.