In Alley's sample, she had to edit the opacity map on the right character.   That is not Texture dropping!    To attain the clothing shape, the artist HAD to work in the opacity map texture!

So there is a contradiction.   With C4G3 to get the same "simple garment" if you want to, user does not need to work on ANY map, he just drops the Opacity texture in.  That' is it!

With the same importance I would have to add:   The C4G3 equivalent for the design presented in Alley's example would count a LOT OF POLYGONS LESS, while in the one used for the example, the polygons are HIDDEN but counting any way!

See the difference?

Mike Aparicio Reallusion Certified Content DeveloperReally Certified

Mike Aparicio Reallusion Certified Content DeveloperReally Certified

Let's talks about the real thing: 

You have chosen to precut the meshes here and there and remove polygons here and there to avoid some skinning rework because you had popping polygons all over the place. By doing so, you removed the flexibility from the user to actually make different cuts through the usage of opacity maps. I am sorry but precut Meshes are the easy ones ! It is so easy to remove polygons while it is a lot harder to keep them and make sure that they work across all motion files.

Furthermore, on texture dropping, I believe that the superb texturing done  by Shygirl was really done the conventional way thus proving the texture dropping is nothing spectacular. I hope you don't pretend you invented that also?!! Again, I have chosen another path by design with Skintight because I think it provides a greater flexibility to the end user.

Skintight although very easy to use, really targets the professional marketplace of the best of bread Artists out there and this is why I have made no compromise on texture mapping and inner layer polygons. The overall polygon count remains reasonable and yet, I have a complete MESH. The limitations in C4G3 are not present in Skintight by design.

I believe you keep on beating on Skintight because you are so frustrated that you have no clue as to how I have overcome this popping polygon issue. While designing Skintight, I have chosen by design NOT to remove any polygons from the inner or outer skin to provide this flexibility to the artist. 

In fact, you are completely on the wrong track. On my 100th package sold, I will tell you how I do it and I can guaranty that you will then kick yourself in the butt 50 times for not having though about it yourself.

Let us bet a spicy beer on this one !

The problem, is that you are blinded by EGO and you cannot think outside the box.

 

 Join the community of iClone users at www.coolclones.com forum with a wide range of offerings; Hundreds of iCloneFreebies, Tips and Tricks, Tutorials and cordial interaction. The Ultimate mecca for iClone enthusiasts

I wonder where I was "beating" against any particular product...  It is MY PRODUCT, C4G3 who is being beaten all the way.  I don't think any comment I made, deserved such strong attacks, but the quarrel is over, anyway, for the sake of peace and friendship!

Hence, I let days several weeks to pass, so no one would accuse me of reacting in anger. I don't have to, because R.L., all C4G3 users and myself are comfortable with the revolutionary performance of C4G3 technologies.    Some of the posts above have inaccuracies, and for the sake of forum visitor's information I will clear up certain concepts:

ALL C4G3 products include a COMPLETE CLOTH MESH from neck to heels, in both versions: Tight to the skin or loose and naturally flowing.   So those single full mesh elements are exactly what is described in one comment just above as "the professional one".    Any Texture designer Developer can use this particular mesh and do EXACTLY all the "great" things as, placing trimmings, buttons, zippers, doing opacity cuts, etc., etc.

As I believe, the comment author has not had a chance to see what is included in C4G3 kits, therefore is assuming unreal situations and facts.

It is a FALSE statement C4G3 mesh has been "edited" to remove "polygons popping out", as the real good performance C4G3 has, is clearly demonstrated in animated videos along this forum pages.  Hence it is pure misleading speculation to say "mesh in C4G3 has been edited to remove or hide those supposed naughty polygons".  In any case, it should be the inner SKIN polygons the ones to be removed, such as in Trinity and Violet Avatars!

Such statement is a dark misinformation.    The Apparition's Copyrighted Precut Mesh Design used in C4G3 is to allow USERS to quickly produce cloth for their videos, without too much involvement with trimming opacity maps, which requires Paint Programs and Imaging expertise.

Of course it is very logical and easy to understand, except for some minds, the simple fact: 

 If you are going to make some clothing which is brief and short, such as a Bermuda set of blouse and short pants, It is MUCH better to have a reduced mesh to do it, as it will not waste polygons which are going to be hidden anyway.    Also,  The Precut mesh is almost invariably styled as to require very little extra trimming by opacity work.  Except for very extravagant cloth designs, C4G3 templates and mesh, includes almost all possibilities for basic cloth design.    But if the case is to make something really unique, Users can always work on the full length mesh also supplied.

 I would have to say, not all clothing is full of lace, trimmings and decorations. As a matter of fact, elegance lies in simple, well cut designs, with no excessive ornaments.  Ladies know it, for sure!

In any case, if a designer wants to fill up his creations with all kind of "baroque" looking details, he can do it with ANY mesh system.  Such preference has NOTHING to do with the mesh base used.   Someone cannot understand this?

 I accept everybody is entitled to his opinions, and I respect that.  What I deny is incorrect data, or deviated comments from true facts.

Thanks for reading.

Mike Aparicio Reallusion Certified Content DeveloperReally Certified

Coming soon:

I'll second that Zuijlen!!!!!!