Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:51:17 UTC No. 965237

>>965213
get good at sculpting fabric

Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:31:27 UTC No. 965240

>>965237
i hear that it's better to sew

Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:12:50 UTC No. 965257

>>965213
Marvelous's foot in the door was being the first modeler to think in flat plane topo first so it could be used to actually design clothing. So far this does not appear to be a priority for other modeling applications.

Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:19:53 UTC No. 965260

>>965213
Do you want to created clothing or do you want the whole creation, animation/simulation pipeline.
If its the former Marvelous is probably more advantageous, if its the latter - Houdini.
Marvelous is easy to learn due to its singular focus on clothing, Houdini is not really easy but overall more useful in general (outside of clothing).

Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 20:47:08 UTC No. 965264

>>965213
>Houdini 20
>for clothing
what?

Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 22:03:09 UTC No. 965273

>>965264
It might be more challenging to do in Houdini than Marvelous Designer, but if you look around you'll find various videos showing that you can create and simulate clothing in Houdini quite well too. Not sure if Houdini 20 introduces anything new in that area though.

Anonymous at Sat, 25 Nov 2023 01:01:46 UTC No. 965283

>>965273
I hear that its really hard to design clothes beyond basic stuff in anything other than MD

Anonymous at Sat, 25 Nov 2023 02:05:30 UTC No. 965290

>>965283
>its really hard to design clothes beyond basic stuff in anything other than MD

100%

Clo3D was a program specifically designed for tailors. It's one of those disruptive technologies that turned the whole fashion upside down. At least that's what would have happened but the fashion/clothing industry completely ignored it.

The only ones that took notice was the videogame industry so the devs rebranded and created Marvelous Designer. It was originally intended to design any sort of clothing and that's what the 3D artists used it for exclusively so that's the path MD decided to continue walking. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

If you're looking for something to model clothes in, MD has no competition.

If you're looking animating cloth or something like that MD is very bare-bones. MD can do animation but its physics engine wasn't built for that, even though it's very advanced. The simulation quality is top notch but dealing with something like 300 000 verts expect slowdowns of 3 frames per second or less. And more cores doesn't help as I read somewhere it can't use more that 12...

Anonymous at Sat, 25 Nov 2023 13:27:14 UTC No. 965319

>>965213
remember that in the velum drape you have to select stitch points in the correct order and not just randomly select them in the viewport. I'd still pick MD if money was no object though because it's a joy to use. Vellum drape is fine if you just want a simple t-shirt or something, but it's just messier to use all around when you're trying to get a nice fit and nice folds. MD is actually more procedural with its sim state.

Anonymous at Sat, 25 Nov 2023 14:12:39 UTC No. 965322

>>965319
So is it easy to design in MD over static T-Pose and then simulate in Hou Vellum with animation?

Anonymous at Mon, 27 Nov 2023 12:55:08 UTC No. 965453

>>965322
MD for modelling clothes and then Houdini for animated shots is pretty standard. Usually you'll have incoming version of clothing rigged to character and Vellum sim on top of that. You're gonna be using a lot of deformers, creating watertight convex collision meshes from incoming character animations, creating a render mesh to deform to sim geo and setting up pre-roll or run up animations (i.e. never start sim on first frame of the shot). Marvelous' UVs usually mean it's easy to organise meshes in groups and you can do your quad render mesh in UV space then deform it back to the MD model (ensuring matching point count at seams so it stitches back together).

Anonymous at Tue, 28 Nov 2023 23:31:29 UTC No. 965581

>>965213
Marvelous Designer to Sculpting Platform to Retopology Platform.

The Yakuza Devs do this.

Anonymous at Sat, 9 Dec 2023 02:46:58 UTC No. 966594

>>965213
For clothing like Elsa's here you don't need to sim shit
Just to clarify

Anonymous at Sat, 9 Dec 2023 03:22:24 UTC No. 966601

>>966594
Yes you do. When the character deforms you simulate the clothing in order to generate wrinkles. The goal for this is NOT a turntable for a static mesh, its for a fully animated character with cloth that has wrinkles

Anonymous at Sat, 9 Dec 2023 11:16:00 UTC No. 966641

>>966601
When deforming yes, which case nullifies the question because the answer is Houdini

When building no, which is what I'm talking about

Anonymous at Sat, 9 Dec 2023 14:34:17 UTC No. 966656

>>966641
the cloth simulation depends on the topology, so yes you do need to sim. Are you brand new?

Anonymous at Sun, 10 Dec 2023 03:10:01 UTC No. 966701

>>966656
English is not your first language, it's ok

Anonymous at Sun, 10 Dec 2023 04:30:19 UTC No. 966703

>>966701
L2coldread properly, dumbass

Anonymous at Mon, 11 Dec 2023 10:43:31 UTC No. 966833

>>966703
>When the character deforms you simulate the clothing to get wrinkles
>When deforming yes, when building no, which is what I'm talking about
>Cloth simulation depends on topology, so yes you do need to sim

This board should do itself a favour and find a different hobby/career-path, 3D might be to complex for you to wrangle the technical and artistic side at the same time.

Try 2D instead, it's far simpler. It's just art.