Why does no one talk about Marvelous on this forum? I really really need to make clothes.
>>936282Cuz we all specifically hate you and only you.
You now remember when Daniel had 50+ videos
I made a few threads, didn't check but they might still be alive.Yeah it's the least talked of all the "famous softwares". I learned it but came to hate it cause of shitty computer so now I'm studying drapery and folds to make my clothes in Zbrush.I also hate the fact that the documentation/available resources are so hidden or non-existent. Like is there even a guide somewhere on the fabric presets and what cloth they're supposed to represent. Except from the obvious one, how am I supposed to know what a "Dynamic Hard 5.2" fabric is supposed to look like IRL...
>>936282I really wish they had a Linux version.
>>936282because the basics can be learned in an afternoon and most of the things beyond that are trial-and-error and experience.
>>936348The devil is in the details. As evidenced by Daniel's many many deleted videos there are a huge number of pitfalls for every garment
>>936398none of what you said contradicts my post, so why not just stay silent?
>>936433because what you said was ridiculous. You can learn the basics of _almost anything_ in an afternoon, but that wont make you into a professional, especially when you are competing against other people in a field where the final result goes up onto a 100 foot plus screen where every detail screams out.Why dont you just stay silent, puto?
>>936443>You can learn the basics of _almost anything_ in an afternoon,no you can't. when it comes to 3dcg, marvelous is pretty much the fastest to learn. stop posting, retard.
>>936463yes you can, cabron. nobody and i mean nobody cares about the bare basics of a thing in this thread. You sound like you have mental problems
>>936282Remeshing those things can be a royal pain in the ass.
>>936443>>936466This guy >>936463 is completely right.Marvelous is an incredibly simple software to use. It has to be, since it's also just a renamed version of Clo3D, which is the exact same software (I'm talking 1 to 1 exact) but marketed to fashion designers and students (you know, people who aren't known for being adept 3d modellers).Because of that, MD/Clo has to be downright SIMPLE to use; and it is. You can pick up 80% of what you need to know about using the software in the first day of using it. The remaining 20% is just quirks of the program, which you'd learn in the first week or so.Once you pick the basics up of how to use the program though, you're still up shit's creek if you know fuck all about how clothes are ACTUALLY made. Someone who's been making clothes all their life could make something technically superior in their first day of using the software compared to someone who knows it inside and out but knows little about garment design.The best course/class/tutorial you could ever take for MD is an actual sewing class where you physically make garments. There's significant overlap between the two and they go hand in hand.Barring that, just try searching for things with "Clo3D" instead of Marvelous and you're likely to find more information. It might not be extremely technical shit about the software, but it'd definitely be by people who know a thing or two about making actual clothes.
>>936824making clothes in marvelous is very hard, and to prove this you only have to look at daniels (deleted) toots. Anyone can make a t-shirt in it, but almost no one can make real good shit. What you are saying is that you can learn the basics in a day. Well, I can learn the basics of football in one day as well, but that doesnt make me Messi
Daniel this daniel that. Just fuckin leak em already.
>>936890Making clothes in MD is "very hard" because you don't know how to make clothes. At all.The reason you can't make "real good shit", is because, guess what, you don't know how "real good shit" is made in real life.There's nothing to MD but the tools presented, which are the basics. Just like cutting fabric and sewing them together is the basics of garment design. If you don't know what the fuck you're doing, you don't know what the fuck you're doing. No amount of technical knowledge or tricks will get around not knowing how to make a garment.The reason you can grab actual fucking sewing patterns for actual clothes and have them work just fine in MD, is because MD is as close to doing it irl as it possibly could be. It's specialized for exactly that.
>>936912Daniels tuts have hundreds of steps per video. Making clothes is difficult. People have to go to school literally for years to learn how to sew properly and then they often join guilds. The knowledge is so coveted that daniel, gets paid big bucks to do only this and has to take down his best videos. In short, you dont know what you are talking about and are just trying to make others keep quiet - and failing
Can someone confirm you can infinitely use the free 30-day trial with just an email each month on the same PC? Without credit card, phone numbers, etc.
>>936893I swear. I'm still waiting for a hero to just upload all the Daniel's shit if it's even one someone's HDD somewhere.But at least stop complaining about something everyone is aware of
>>936824Very much agreed. Technical knowledge only gets you so far in Marvelous. That's exactly why its such powerful software - you actually need to be knowledgeable in how clothes are made to use it.I think many technical minded people approach this software in the wrong way and end up at a disadvantage, funnily enough.
>>936915>People have to go to school literally for years to learn how to sew properly and then they often join guilds.Exactly my point. I'm glad you finally fucking got it.The program is extremely easy to pick up, and you can wrap your head around all the functions in a day, but to actually make good shit you have to know how to make clothes. I've been saying this the whole time.In short, you're a fucking retard with zero reading comprehension.
Lowest value on the avatar's skin still gives a noticeable offset even on high poly patternsAny tricks besides editing the mesh?
Yeah yeah whatever, wake me up when someone post a link to Daniel's old videos. Still can't believe it's still not out there...
>>937008Since it's based on real life units, scale the model x10 (and lower particle density by 10)You're going to get some different wrinkling patterns, but imo they look even better and a few pro marvelous users always work at x10 scale or so because of the more naturalistic wrinkling that you getbtw daniel's videos were grossly overratedhis fundamentals series were great but then again it's just the same as learning the basics of traditional sewing
Time to vent, I had to pick it up for my current job and it's a brutally annoying program. I have garment design experience so that part isn't an issue but on the software side it's infuriatingly clunky to use in terms of things like collisions and folds, crashes incessantly when simulating entire outfits with a low particle distance and the worst part is clo nuked their entire user forum so besides the minimal documentation there's few ways to diagnose and rectify obscure issues that often come up. Unfortunately there's no comparable alternative so I'm stuck with it
>>936824>>936971>>936982Damn, this is depressing...I'm a programmer and I was planning on using MD eventually to make clothes for my hobby gamedev game.I'm never going to make it.
>>940132check out udraper for unreal engine, seems like it could be a decent alternative if you're doing simpler stuff
I've got a question about marvelous designer, why doesn't anything I sew onto internal lines sew tight? It always "hangs by the threads"
At $280 / year, is it worth it
>>940132If it's simple clothes like shirts and suits and shit, MD has a built in designer that lets you piece together those things from premade patterns that come with the program. I'd look into that.Nobody really needs to reinvent the wheel every time they're making a simple t-shirt. >>941390Really depends on how much you're going to use it.1 or 2 projects without income? Nah, pirate that shit.1 or 2 projects, with income? Make the client pay for it, assuming they're not cheapos. If not, pirate.All the time, but you're not making money from it? I'd still pirate.All the time, but you're getting paid? Make the client pay for it.
>>941399>1 or 2 projects without income? Nah, pirate that shit.I wont pirate.
>>936286Is anyone going to post an archive or what?
>>941400Then no, it's obviously not worth it. There's better things to spend $300 on.
>GPU simulation doesn't give a shit about layers>CPU simulation doesn't give a shit about pressureAnd here I thought after all the outfits i made making a bed comforter would be a piece of cakeAny tutorial including official ones work somehow, i do the same shit and it doesn't
>>936282MD doesn't seem to be that good since the outputs are shit for dynamics outside MD, aka anything more complex than a catwalk, artists always complain when asked for water tight geo or single sided clean proxies not that densely triangulated mess. Respect to you if you're actually optimizing your own work, but MD artists needs to fuck off from studio pipelines they have no liability and always try to get a modeler monkey to do the dirty job for them.
>>940132do box model + sculpt, there's not reason at all to use MD it's an expensive glorified CAD toy
>>936568I still don't understand why they have not addressed this, it's used enough in CG studios to merit a proper remesher and proxy creation without doing bullshit in an external software
>>936282Usually game devs use it
>>946891You've bumped a thread with its last reply over a month ago and added nothing of value. The discussion was already over and OP has left the building.
>>946923>>946923I'm still here but yeah this guys has been bumping the two threads I made about clothing in CG...I won't complain, I still need help with that shit.
>>946985You shouldn't take the ngmis in this thread too seriously just because they've been filtered by Marvelous. Yes, you need some basic insight into how real clothes are made but you don't need to be an expert. One of the things Daniel would often point out is that it actually doesn't translate 1-to-1 to real world sewing, especially things like darts. There's lots of cosplay blogs and stuff with irl sewing patterns that you can reference (or even straight up trace) but you still need to know the software and good practice and what you want the finished result for e.g. whether to not to bother with full thickness or if just rims will do, and whether to do that stuff in Marvelous or your modelling/ animation software.
>>946993Yeah but what I hate about the software (or maybe it comes from the company or the community), it's how simple and straight forward MD/Clo3d is but it's lacking resources when you're beyond the basics.I watched a video of Daniel where he said exactly what you're saying and he illustrated his example with a particular garment. But what about the others, how does it translate to a blouse, a long coat or whatever?Software is cool and quick to learn. But I (personally find it to be anightmare to work with (when you want to make actual nice looking clothes).For example, I've been trying to make a gakuran (male student uniform in Japan). No matter what I try, I never managed to make it look good enough) and I have no idea why. And i got tired of it, so now I'm making my whole clothes direclty in Zbrush. Didn't gave up on MD cause I gueninely enjoy using it but I hate the die/retry methodology it's making me use.
>>946995I think the main thing is to just up res the cloth beyond what a lot of the introduction vids suggest and worry about poly count later. Your pic looks low poly. The material presets are also very important. I found inflation very useful too because volume preservation is everything and it can reset wrinkles. Pockets and how they do or don't bend is a whole minefield and personally I wouldn't worry about them until main shapes are in the ballpark. Try to get seams, collars, cuffs etc.. cut in to the model too and this will help up the poly resolution.
>>947009>>947009Yeah something, I didn't say is that my toaster computer prevents me from adding more patterns and simulating properly. Will try again when I upgrade but I tried with simpler garnments and I don't know, it never looks how I imagined it.
>>947010Unless your hardware is 10+ years old you shouldn't need to worry about adding a few more tris even if it runs a bit slow. This is a good workflow, notice the tricount on the model coming out of Marvelous:>https://www.artstation.com/blogs/emilie_boisvert/RDKR/marvelous-designer-to-maya-part-1-retopology-domo-arigato-auto-retopo
>>947012I swear that my laptop couldn't follow anymore when I had mutliple layers of clothes on top of each others. Very nice tuts tho, thanks.