Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?



  • I do know about blender but I was wondering if there are any others? I am testing out the free trial of MD and it seems to be a good software but I can't afford it and most likely won't be able to for a while. I like the simulation of the cloth in MD and have been trying to find another software like it to make 3D fashion.



  • @tsanders
    If you are talking about other software where you can draw a pattern and sew it together, like Marvelous Designer does, unfortunately most of the other similar options are either available in more expensive software, or as plugins for more expensive software (like Cinema 4D, Max, Maya, etc).

    The other alternative is to use Blender or another 3D modeling program to model the clothing the "old fashioned way", and then use cloth simulation in Poser.

    FWIW, it appears as though DAZ Studio will also have new dynamic clothing features in the release coming out later this month (it's in beta now, I've seen it posted on the DAZ forums and on Facebook). However, it will be similar to Poser in that you will have to model it externally and then simulate in DAZ Studio.



  • @tsanders said in Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?:

    I do know about blender but I was wondering if there are any others? I am testing out the free trial of MD and it seems to be a good software but I can't afford it and most likely won't be able to for a while. I like the simulation of the cloth in MD and have been trying to find another software like it to make 3D fashion.

    It's a pity, because MD2 was the best $600 I ever spent in many, many, many years. I never upgraded, as version 2 filled my needs fully for several years now.

    Now, when I bought it I thought it was really expensive; but I've been using for maybe 10 years now, so it actually cost me $60 per year, which is like 3 trips to the movies per year.

    So you should consider that; if you're into CGI, then chances are you'll spread that cost over years, so if you can avoid 3 movie tickets per year then you may consider the investment.

    As far as alternatives, there are really none that I know of. The option is to design the cloth with a mesh editor, which is a royal pain in the honky and a lot of time to do it...



  • @Deecey For the record, and admittedly it is very new, but Blender does allow the "sewing" of clothes now somewhat similar to MD. There are video tutorials available on youtube that shows how it works.



  • @eclark1849
    That's cool ... have to admit I did try Blender a couple times since so many use it, but it's not my cup of tea.



  • @eclark1849 said in Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?:

    @Deecey For the record, and admittedly it is very new, but Blender does allow the "sewing" of clothes now somewhat similar to MD. There are video tutorials available on youtube that shows how it works.

    Oh, that's nice! I may come back to Blender for that feature alone.



  • I found one of the tutorials for it.



  • @tsanders Thanks for the link. I downloaded 2.79, but haven't upgraded to it yet, so will definitely have to do so and try this out, as I didn't have the success I would've liked when I played with the trial of MD3.



  • @fbs7 said in Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?:

    Now, when I bought it I thought it was really expensive; but I've been using for maybe 10 years now, so it actually cost me $60 per year, which is like 3 trips to the movies per year.

    So you should consider that; if you're into CGI, then chances are you'll spread that cost over years, so if you can avoid 3 movie tickets per year then you may consider the investment.

    If you purchase clothing items for Poser people that can add up quickly. $60 don't go very far buying content, especially when you have many figures to outfit. I don't like to use the same ones in too many renders either. I got MD on sale for $300 about a year ago, and I agree it was a wise decision. The Blender cloth looks like a viable alternative though. That's another reason to buckle down and learn Blender I suppose.



  • I was jut finishing this outfit for Roxie when I noticed this thread. I probably spent about a half hour making this with MD 6. Just a preview render, nothing fancy.0_1507701053030_Roxie-Summer.png



  • I've tried the blender tutorial posted. It does work, but there isn't a good settings explanation. It seems to be a bit hit or miss. I have gotten the thing to work, but the clothing ended up needing a lot of work after the sim. That's not to say the function is bad. I think I need a different tutorial.

    And note, if you are using it on poser figures, you'll want to scale up the figure a bunch and then scale it down for export.



  • @redphantom The other alternative is to scale Blender to work at Poser scale.



  • @redphantom said in Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?:

    And note, if you are using it on poser figures, you'll want to scale up the figure a bunch and then scale it down for export.

    That is very important. One thing I learned from working wit MD is that size really matters when you are working with simulations of physics. Once you start to fiddle with scale and say use a length unit 10 times larger (cm instead of mm) you need to modify everything else also. See it like making clothing for a Barbie doll (1:6 scale from human, roughly). You need very thin fabrics, much thinner than used for your own clothing and then still they will behave and look like thick blankets.

    So, use the scale your simulation settings and fabric properties dictate.



  • @F_Verbaas It kind of depends on what you're making. As I said, Blender allows you to adjust the scale of the world in Blend to suit what ever you're making. Sometimes, simply making the Figure bigger or smaller won't take into account the scale at which Blender's Physics engines work, so if something is ten centimeters long in the real world, you need to adjust the Blender world to accommodate that.



  • @F_Verbaas said in Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?:

    @redphantom said in Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?:

    And note, if you are using it on poser figures, you'll want to scale up the figure a bunch and then scale it down for export.

    That is very important. One thing I learned from working wit MD is that size really matters when you are working with simulations of physics. Once you start to fiddle with scale and say use a length unit 10 times larger (cm instead of mm) you need to modify everything else also. See it like making clothing for a Barbie doll (1:6 scale from human, roughly). You need very thin fabrics, much thinner than used for your own clothing and then still they will behave and look like thick blankets.

    So, use the scale your simulation settings and fabric properties dictate.

    OK that raises a good question in my mind.

    I guess I assumed that if you import Poser objects "at Poser scale" into Marvelous Designer, that it would automatically convert to cm or mm or whatever scale MD needs. And then, when you export back out, you export at Poser scale to get it back into Poser. Is that correct?

    Now, thus far I've only created content for Poser figures. But say you want to also create for DS figures such as Genesis and the like, and refit the Poser clothing you made in MD to one of the DAZ figures. I'm assuming you export from DAZ Studio at "Poser scale", and then import into MD at "Poser scale."



  • @Deecey Actually, I believe that DAZ scale and orientation is pretty close to what Blender's is. I'm pretty certain it's closer than Poser's.



  • @Deecey said in Alternatives to Marvelous Designer?:

    I guess I assumed that if you import Poser objects "at Poser scale" into Marvelous Designer, that it would automatically convert to cm or mm or whatever scale MD needs. And then, when you export back out, you export at Poser scale to get it back into Poser. Is that correct?

    Now, thus far I've only created content for Poser figures. But say you want to also create for DS figures such as Genesis and the like, and refit the Poser clothing you made in MD to one of the DAZ figures. I'm assuming you export from DAZ Studio at "Poser scale", and then import into MD at "Poser scale."

    If you export from Poser in collada format, the scale is given in the file:
    0_1507745822319_Knipsel.JPG
    I use as a standard cm units for my collada exports.
    For the prefitter I used the 'raw' .obj's and imported in MD using Poser scale.

    Poser scale of course is confusing (8' or 8.6'?). The Poser export assumes 8.6'per PNU while figures are developed for 8' per PNU. I use therefore an import scale of 93% to get figures realistic size and matching the real life patterns I use most often. Export at 8.6'/PNU then gives good fit in Poser.

    MD itself works in mm units, so the (x,y,z) used inside MD will be 10 times as large as read from this file.
    On export to .obj for use in Poser I tell MD to export in Poser units. If I would export for use in DS I would export in cm units because that is what DS uses.

    All apps use right-handed axis system with y-axis vertical and z-axis towards the default camera position.
    (I stand corrected here.)

    That answers your question?



  • @F_Verbaas Blender's z axis is vertical, I believe, but I'd have to check to be sure. Yep, just checked. z axis is up in Blender.



  • I export my Collada file using Poser Native Units from Poser, import (Avatar) into MD in mm (Default). I export the clothing .obj at Poser 8.6' and they usually fit perfect. Not saying this is the best way to do it though, but after exporting some very huge clothes when I first started out I found these settings to work. If I export the Collada file at Poser Native Units and import them into MD at Poser scale it don't work for me, or if I export the clothes model at something other than 8.6' either.
    The question I would ask experienced users of Marvelous Designer is do you use the triangle mesh in the cloth room or the quad mesh? I was kind of disappointed with the quad mesh quality, as far as making conforming clothes from it anyway. I waited to get MD until the quad mesh was implemented because I wanted to make conforming clothing. Now I think MD is only suited for dynamic clothing, which it does very well. I would as soon just model clothing from scratch instead of re-meshing. I have been using the triangle mesh with the point density set to 10 - 15 in Poser myself, but I was wondering what others do.


  • Poser Ambassadors

    @ribroast - re. tris vs. quads - it helps me to visualise what's going to happen by keeping in mind that a mesh will only bend at the edges. If you bend a mesh with a regular grid-like flow of edges against that up/down flow (i.e. diagonally) you'll get obvious jagged artefacts (this is true for any deformation). Polygon faces don't bend, vertices don't bend, just the edges - this is why edge flow in a mesh built for animation is so important. With dynamic clothing a piece of cloth must be able to bend in any direction, so the ideal edge flow is as random as possible. Artefacts will still occur but as there is no regular edge flow they will not be anything like as noticeable.

    Therefore for making dynamic cloth items I would say triangles are best.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Graphics Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.