Recruiting for Makehumans Future!

[RAS_MH]

Fixed.

Good work! Checked it out, it's all starting up now. Thanks for the quick fix.

[WojackOWL]

This work is incredible! I just made a Github Issue asking what was going to be different between this and the current MakeHuman version. I am so excited of what's going on. Is there going to be custom shader and tone mapping support?

[punkduck]

This work is incredible! I just made a Github Issue asking what was going to be different between this and the current MakeHuman version. I am so excited of what's going on. Is there going to be custom shader and tone mapping support?

That's not an issue ... that is my lack of information maybe

Phew, I struggle hard with that openGL stuff. Especially the idea of using an in-between geometry shader for normals was a rather stupid decision, maybe I can do that on the vertex normals (the normals calculated in the point met from the surrounding faces or I must redo that completely). The problem is, now I got all faces flat but with the correct normals on it

I need to emphasize, that most of our assets are rather "cheap", so no metal-map etc. I added those already for a few of my assets at home to at least test it. For that "wonder-woman character", since normal clothes usually are not made from metal . The exporters now should already use it, inside makehuman it is not as easy. If one combines assets with phong, matcap (litsphere) and pbr shader (the one from the openGL tutorial), then one has a lot of different light situations. For my Ava character I also added light, but in a game they use an overlay to do bloom effects. And until now I have no self-shading. Metal reflects the skybox, that looks okay, shiny skin creates funny effects ... so I still avoid that. One can use colored lamps to get a different tone, but then all assets change the tone. The big shader engines (like the editor in Unreal Engine) I can't realize, the problem would be, like in Blender, that hundreds of effects will look fine in that program, but cannot exported so it will fit into another system.

At the moment I try animation corrections but these do not yet work correctly, I have still problems with the axes. There are other bugs, some I am aware of. And bugs occur here and there, when versions change or with a different OS or maybe graphics card.

[tomcat]

the problem would be, like in Blender, that hundreds of effects will look fine in that program, but cannot exported so it will fit into another system.

These are issues of the project paradigm — goal setting. It is usually formulated before the work begins. What is the purpose of the new MakeHuman:

• It is a self-sufficient program

or

• is intended to create a billet, a dummy that will be finalized in another program (Blender, game engine)?

In the first case, it should be possible to create an environment. This is already actually something from the analogs of Blender (or similar 3D CCP\game engines).

In the second case, it is important to observe the possibility of transferring the result to the target program.

[punkduck]

Hi

Well I know my own goals after 2 years. Lets start with a very simple example. Without MakeHuman I would never have started Blender or Unreal Engine.

And I know a few people who need an easy approach first. When one starts Blender, then there is a cube. I deleted that crap from disk in the beginning. Years later I tried again. And it took some time. The game-engine? Same. There is that mannekin in Unreal, I do not want to know how many people download it, try with that sad guy and give up after some time and then delete it. So there should be some "out of the box stuff" available. The more sophisticated the hobby becomes, the more applications I need.

I will not go on with that discussion if s.o. considers the program as self-sufficient or just as a character morphing system (which it mostly is). For a morphing system a simple litsphere shader + albedo/diffuse texture would be enough. Also that orthogonal perspective we had in last version. A few poses to test etc maybe. But it would look like crap.

So a few things had been desperately needed, like perspective. Lets start with this: I tried to copy certain real persons. From photos of course. They mostly looked good in Makehuman first, but when in Blender + perspective they all had big round heads.

I know it always looked totally different, when in target-system. Diffuse textures looked blotchy, wet-map produced funny effects (wet on black + a lamp = white) ... In the end I needed a new texture in the target-system. Blender cycles worked fine, because the ray-tracing concept works totally different. But neither Godot nor Unreal Engine created sth similar. So it was interesting to add a shader similar in makehuman (game engines work with GL-Shaders as well). The target-system can correct shaders with additional elements (like filters) of course. But the more elements, the worse the runtime.

So at least a few more featutes of modern shaders shall help. Before I can export stuff to another system, I need to be sure that I do not have to repeat this a dozen times. So, best one can test it before export. Meanwhile some of my assets had the metal-roughness textures and normal-maps needed for glTF and meanwhile I am also able to see them in MakeHuman as well. Animations I did with one character. Now the hands of another character intersect with body, but it can be corrected and now exported as a walk for the other one. One should be able to save it in MakeHuman via glTF for Blender or a game engine (need to do that still, until now without correction),

Especially this took a few weeks to solve that problem, but of course, math is easy, once I understood the principle. All vertical bones (so parallel to bone axes "y") worked without any correction.
Well the bone axes and the "y" axes are the same direction. The rest-matrix explains the orientation of each bone.

When I rotate the hand a bit, I would call that a "correction matrix". So the result was:

Multiply inverse rest matrix of a bone with correction matrix, then multiply with rest matrix of same bone ... this resulting matrix then is used in all frames of the animation like an offset (or overlay).
Until now I checked exports only in blender. This I will do with game engines as well (only glTF).

Here is a test with a some wetness (using a Metal-roughness map) and a normalmap fpr the face:

roughness and normalmap

So a few things to do still, mostly corrections of errors. One of the weird things had been the .rgb order of loaded files of metal-roughness textures. b= metal, roughness should be g ... and I found it on "r" ,,, the reflection of the landscape on metal did the same ... green and red had been swapped.

Greeting punkduck

[tomcat]

Blender cycles worked fine, because the ray-tracing concept works totally different. But neither Godot nor Unreal Engine created sth similar.

CCP and Game Engines are completely different things and occupy different niches. Blender can afford to render (and trace) leisurely. And engines work in real time and don't have such luxury as extra free time. By the way, this is the reason why a game engine on Blender is not possible despite all efforts.

[WojackOWL]

Blender cycles worked fine, because the ray-tracing concept works totally different. But neither Godot nor Unreal Engine created sth similar.

CCP and Game Engines are completely different things and occupy different niches. Blender can afford to render (and trace) leisurely. And engines work in real time and don't have such luxury as extra free time. By the way, this is the reason why a game engine on Blender is not possible despite all efforts.

Yeah, I agree with this as well. Even Unity doesn't really need raytracing for a lot of its use cases. Punkduck, have you ever thought about looking into other character creation software like Adobe Fuse, DAZ3D or Unreal's Metahuman for research to see what elements you want to bring over or improve on for this?