PLEASE READ... Announcing the launch of our new Support System



  • We are announcing our new Support System will roll out beginning March 2-3rd, 2019
    The URL you use to contact us will not change
    https://support.smithmico.com
    You will need to confirm or create a new account.
    All closed/resolved cases will be archived
    All open and pending cases will be ported over to the new system.
    Please pass the word.



  • Thanks for letting us know. Have a nice day.



  • @ratscloset said in PLEASE READ... Announcing the launch of our new Support System:

    https://support.smithmico.com

    Actually, probably to keep support calls to a minimum, the address provided is incorrect it should be https://support.smithmicro.com



  • @ratscloset & @h-elwood-gilliland I hate to be a pain (despite proven proficiency at such), but does "archived" in reference to closed/resolved cases actually mean "hidden forever from view" due to erasure, or just inaccessible to everyone who used to use the old fault reporting systems?

    I still see references (amongst the old-time Poser users) to Mantis, which I think dates from Poser's eFrontier days, if not before. That system's database also appears to have been purged.

    Apart from one's own email correspondence records, is there any way to access old fault reports?


  • Poser Team

    @anomalaus We still use Mantis for report intake and detailed reporting from beta users (and any user, really). It does not always mean activity will result from your report. I started last year by processing 4000 active reports in Mantis. Sometimes I closed items that were from 2009 and before because, let's face it, it was irrelevant to Poser 11. I also tried to process the bug reports into "nexus" tickets, that combined/connected multiple reports around a single feature. This processing of bug reports was abandoned when there was some internal attrition, however, and I returned to working primarily on new features and high priority items. New reports are examined and escalated when Support and Product deem it relevant enough to warrant attention from development.

    I'm not sure what "archived" means in the context of the Support network. Email support for more information on what that means.



  • @h-elwood-gilliland thanks. I'm just struggling with a concept that I'd already reported to support, in that Poser likes to cluster deformer channels together at the beginning of an actor's channel evaluation order. But parameter evaluation orders can be manipulated within Poser to the extent that I can have a deformer apply after all of the morphs (with the zone falloff evaluation applied to a morphed mesh). That works fine within a figure itself. Saving and reloading the figure leaves the parameters as they are in the loaded scene. The caveat is when such deformers are also applied to a conformed figure. When the scene gets reloaded, the deformer channels from the base figure all get clustered at the start of the evaluation order on the conformed figures (driven, I suspect, by parsing the affected actors list in the base figure's deformerProp actors). This changes the effect which the deformers have on the conformed figures, when the scene is reloaded.

    Such a situation has led me to abandoning the use of saved scene files, without the necessary tedium of re-ordering the deformer channel evaluation on multiple conformed figures to match the appearance of a scene when it was last saved. This act can take tens of minutes before I can resume working, since there is no exposure to Python of parameter evaluation order (apart from the afterBend flag which doesn't yet apply to deformer channels, and is still insufficient to replicate the exact evaluation order required), and drag-scrolling through hundreds of parameters to move deformer channels to their pre-scene-save-and-reload positions is a very slow process.

    Instead, I've resorted to massive python scripts which parse folders of meta-poses that call readScript to cycle through the figures in the scene and apply the relevant fitting poses at each frame. Essentially automating the scene creation process I went through in the first place.

    I really don't feel I should have to do this!

    I may be pushing the envelope of what the developers intended to be possible with Poser, but just being able to load a saved scene and have it appear exactly the way it did when I saved it would not normally be an unrealistic expectation. Would it?