T pose to A pose change
RobotHeadArt
Posts: 917
So what is the story behind changing from the T pose to A pose for the default pose? The marketingspeak says "Improved default pose to allow for new content types". What new content types are not possible to make with a T pose but are possible with the A pose? Why would they change from a default that has existed for many years in the Poser-verse and DAZ-verse? I do not recall any PAs ever saying the T pose causing a problem with content creation. The only place I have seen anyone advocate the use of the A pose is in Marvelous Designer.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
No clue but I know several other programs that have gone to an 'A' pose so it seems to be a trend in the market. My husband seems to think there are engineers in some chat rooms who discuss this stuff with heated debates. :) I wouldn't be surprised if 'A' pose versus 'T' pose is a heated debate among those who create this stuff.
If you're designing clothing to imitate how it's done in the real world (like in Optitex or Marvellous Dress Designer), supposedly the A-pose on the arms is better. (Think about it...when we try on new clothes IRL, we raise and stretch our arms a little to make sure the clothes fit, but our "default" pose has arms hanging down at sides).The wider thigh angle seems like it might help with some of the mesh distortion we see on converted clothing on the lower torso/upper leg areas, but I haven't tested G8F enough to be sure on that.
Here is one very general overview of some of the pros and cons of default mesh pose. You can find more detailed discussions if you search for mesh design threads.
This is a citation to FourtyNights at Polycounter
Feb 2015
Reviving this quite important thread, since I've had some problems with choosing the most optimal t-pose.
These things concern me:
- the importance of the anatomy on the armpit
- polygonal angle on the armpit for normal map baking
- humeroscapular rhythm (the movement of clavicles, scapulas and muscles related to the shoulder area)
- rigging the shoulders
Okay, I know that 90 degrees is a bit unnatural positon and 45 degrees is a somewhat good compromise. But I'll list pros and cons from my point of view.
90 degrees:
Pros:
- good anatomical definition on the axilla
- a lot smaller polygonal angle/crease for the normal map baking
- good for characters showing their upper body skin (tank top or completely shirtless for example)
- characters which are climbing and hanging from a ledge a lot (Tomb Raider and Uncharted series for example)
- or for a character who changes different type of clothes during the game a lot (Beyond: Two Souls for example)
Cons:
- harder to rig shoulders right
- clavicle, scapula and deltoid (and a couple of other muscles too, but a bit less though) are in an unnatural pose/tension
45 degrees:
Pros:
- more natural position in abovesaid anatomical areas
- easier to rig the shoulder area
- good for characters clothed with things that cover the shoulder/axilla area completely (such as blouse, t-shirt etc.)
Cons:
- not so great axilla anatomy for characters showing skin on the shoulder area
- a harder edge/crease under the armpit for normal map baking
- even with clothed characters the angle under the armpit is still too tight
- not for characters which raise their arms from a close up view.
0 degrees:
Pros:
- a completely natural rest position
- good for sculptures only
Cons:
- the axilla clips itself
- and pretty much everything else
Greetings,
I vaguely recall @Sickleyield had some comments a LONG time ago, about how the shoulders are a huge pain point when making clothes because the default model is in T pose, which causes these...lumps in the arms, but most posing is done with the arms down, which means you need to either add JCM's to adapt or the shoulder portion of clothes look bulky when the arms are down. Since then I started noticing vendors often have 'bare shoulders' or holes up there as part of their clothes, because it makes that whole area simpler to handle. Same thing with pauldrons; if you put them on as prop-ish things, it hides the weird bending that happens around the shoulder when the character is moved from the T pose.
I wish I knew the thread or journal post that she talked about it so I could link it, I remember it being one (of many!) of the eye-opening casual comments by her. I'm not 100% sure that's the reason for the change, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was a contributing factor.
-- Morgan
p.s. The shoulders are also the place to look for skin texture smearing in characters; I almost always find it there. Not sure if G8F makes that better, but I hope it does...
So why not convert T to A, model cloth and convert both back to T pose? Sounds like the most natural thing to do for me, thinking about how many users actually do model clothes and how many users don't? I have very mixed feelings about that A pose, don't think it was really needed. Even less with the arguments provided.
I understand how it could improve fitting clothes but we already have shirts and armor in the store. The marketing page says "new content types". What could these be?
A T pose is the most unnatural starting point for animation, even though Poser and DAZ Studio have always used it. If you really wanted to make the software useful as a starting point for more professional animation tools, and teach users how it's done in big studios, wouldn't you want it to work just like those groups would expect incoming people to know how to do that?
I have just started on a full body suit for G8
and I can tell you the new default pose is much better
for clothing modeling, particularly the wider leg stance
will help avoid the "pulled taffy crotch" that us content devs have had to deal with
in the previous generations.
Hmmm... "Engineers"... "T" to "A"... sounds like the Ford automotive company 90 years ago. Old engineer: "Model T has been serving well for a long time, why change? New engineer: "Changing to Model A is good and supports future evolution". He then dreamily muses: "Just think. Someday all cars will look alike, little pastel colored teardrops making a pastel rainbow stalled on a million miles of pavement around the world".
The more things change the more they stay the same.
DAZ content is all about T & A.
That's how real clothes are made. Just lay out a pair of jeans on your bed, or look at the sleeves in your shirt, and they all have A-shape angles in the legs and arms.
Is ther a picture of the "A" pose I can look at?
Older character's default pose was a "T" because that was the shape of their mesh. The "T" pose was simply the pose with all joints zero'd except for a slight bias so they would bend the right direction if you were using Inverse Kinematics.
I suspect the new pose means that the mesh shape has changed.
Two words, folks. "Gimbal" and "Lock"
T poses are prone to such things. Frankly, any pose working on Euler rotation has potential zones for gimbal lock, but the T pose has fairly wide ones (And quaterions make people sad because 4D rotation is hard to grasp). The A pose, less. Moreover, they are less likely to be in areas of "natural posing."
Previous versions of Genesis relied on morphs for expressions. G3 switched to bones. Why? Because that's the industry "standard." It's a standard because it's easier to work with.
The A pose is an industry standard, in a sense, because it's more forgiving to pose and animate. As noted above, it has drawbacks, and proabbaly someone in camp Daz was on Team T pose over A pose. For them to switch now suggests less of a whim and more of an acceptance of writing on the wall. A pose is more common than T, and Daz wants their products to have the widest possible adoption.
And honestly, if you aren't creating content, I'm not really clear on why it matters to the end use what pose you start from. Thre are more than few free scripts for adjusting G3 poses to G8, and at least one paid script option that goes both ways.
From an end user perspective it does matter to a degree because changing the default pose from the previous generation with the current iteration of autofit mucks up some clothing, specifically shoes.
What? Birds and donkeys?
LOL!!
Autofitting shoes was never really a great thing from the beginning. It's never worked well. I've converted shoes from V4 to G3, and the best way to do it is to just make new shoes.
I just don't see how that should be a major factor. It's like mandating the speed limit on all roads be no greater than 15 mph because the Amish still use horse and buggy. If you know how to get good results fitting shoes, this is a non issue. If you don't, it's still no much of a thing, because you we'ren't getting good results before.
And, of course, Autofiting IS content creation. Them things weren't meant to go together. Technically you are trying to make a new thing to go on the thing.
Look up SickleYield's tut on how to fit V4 shoes to later generations. ALl of the same principles apply.
Or, to put in short terms, Shoe trouble is nothing new and there are ways aroound it. Still not seeing the point of getting bent out of shape over it.
Get it? Bent out of shape?
Is that the symbol for two hands missing each other?
Birds, but only one donkey