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
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Decided to try doing same image as PWToon B&W thing... and I was happy with the results! (also renders way faster, heh)
I installed this with Daz Connect and can't even open the script. I get an error, and this is what is in the log file:
2016-39-06 22:39:49.896 Loading script: D:/DAZ 3D/Studio/Daz Connect Data/data/cloud/1_33477/scripts/ultrascatter/ultrascatter.dse
2016-39-06 22:39:49.896 WARNING: general\dzcontentmgr.cpp(4338): Content directory index out of range in DzContentMgr::getContentDirectory()
2016-39-06 22:39:49.896 WARNING: Script Error: Line 262
2016-39-06 22:39:49.896 WARNING: Error: Invalid arguments passed to Pixmap()
2016-39-06 22:39:49.896 WARNING: Stack Trace:
<anonymous>()@D:/DAZ 3D/Studio/Daz Connect Data/data/cloud/1_33477/scripts/ultrascatter/ultrascatter.dse:262
2016-39-06 22:39:49.896 Error in script execution: D:/DAZ 3D/Studio/Daz Connect Data/data/cloud/1_33477/scripts/ultrascatter/ultrascatter.dse
Sounds like the plate of spaghetti that is a typical Connect install path might not be compatible with the script.
Looks like most everyone is having fun with this....I also cant get the dropdown menu to open by double clicking the script or right clicking to "create custom action". Did the manual install work barbult?
From log:
2016-45-07 00:45:01.471 Loading script: /Users/marshian/Documents/DAZ 3D/Studio/My Daz Connect Library/data/cloud/1_33477/scripts/ultrascatter/ultrascatter.dse
2016-45-07 00:45:01.482 WARNING: /src/sdksource/general/dzcontentmgr.cpp(4336): Content directory index out of range in DzContentMgr::getContentDirectory()
2016-45-07 00:45:01.487 WARNING: Script Error: Line 262
2016-45-07 00:45:01.487 WARNING: Error: Invalid arguments passed to Pixmap()
2016-45-07 00:45:01.487 WARNING: Stack Trace:
<anonymous>()@/Users/marshian/Documents/DAZ 3D/Studio/My Daz Connect Library/data/cloud/1_33477/scripts/ultrascatter/ultrascatter.dse:262
2016-45-07 00:45:01.488 Error in script execution: /Users/marshian/Documents/DAZ 3D/Studio/My Daz Connect Library/data/cloud/1_33477/scripts/ultrascatter/ultrascatter.dse
@Marshian, I uninstalled with Daz Connect and installed with DIM. Now it works. I am quite unhappy that the product does not work with Daz Connect installation. I hate having to manage two installation methods and manually keep track of what has to be installed with DIM instead of Daz Connect.
In the settings it mentions maps. Can you explain exactly what maps I'm supposed to use? Are they terrain maps? Bump maps? And where would I find them?
You need to create your own maps for your particular requirements, they can control where instances are placed, and optionally their scale and rotation.
Work like a charm, thank for the help
Please make a bug report for this, and for other items that allow a Connect isntall but don't work.
I did, Richard.
6 Months ago I wrote Request #212515 about the PDF Manual for Sickle Rigging and Morphing System not getting installed by Daz Connect..
4 Months ago I wrote Request #217275 about V4 Skins Auto Converter for Genesis 2 Female(s) not working when installed with Daz Connect.
Yesterday I wrote Request #224365 about UltraScatter script not working when installed with Daz Connect.
They are all still open, and as far as I know, all three products are still available with Daz Connect and no warning on the produce page or readme about the problem.
I understand the purpose of a map...I just don't have a clue what you mean by "create your own maps". Are we referring to terrain bump maps or what?
@timmins.william
Wil, you definitely have the lens flare down. The scatter looks great.
Distribution maps. Take a top-down view of the surface you want to populate. Paint white where you want things to go; black where you don't. Shades of grey will be proportional - lighter means more things; darker, fewer. Also scale maps and rotation maps work on the same principle.
Hello,
A new render and my method :
1) Create a geometry shell of the terrain.
2) Use the geometry Editor inside DS to create the different surface where the instances will be set. In this case 2 surfaces, Right and left side of the steps.
3) Unfortunatly the selection / surface limitation is not working using ultra scatter and condition (slope falloff...) so :
4) Send the geometry shell to Hexagon
5) Delete the group (surface) except the left and right side.
6) Export as a OBJ
7) Import the new terrain inside DS scale 1000%
8) Delete the geometry shell
9) Use ultra scatter with the new terrain.
10) Hide the new terrain
Et voilà...
Grass so often is, so more believeable; looks good. Well patchy is what I see when I look at my lawn (lawn being a generous term for the area where grass and various weeds grow).
I think there is something fishy using Material Zones as scatter destinations on large objects where the UVs are stacked (like FlipMode's Terrains). Anyone got that to work using Material zone scattering ( Was playing with Outback, wanted grovel on the road and grassy stuff on the side. I understand if that is a problem when the UVs are stacked though...
I've had a similar problem. One work around is to go to the geometry editor, create a selection set, from the top drop down boxes choose "Selection Sets" as your "Target Group" and your selection set name for "Choose Group". Select the material zone and click on the + sign, then click on the "Assign to Target Group" button at the bottom. Then in the Ultrscatter script, pick the selection set name. That worked for me.
Do you mean a screenshot or render?
Those at the right are the distribution maps for that terrain at left, ScotsPrincess
I'd probably just use a screenshot - so long as there's enough detail to see the features you want to cover or avoid. Crop it to the right aspect ratio and paint your map in a new layer over the top.
Woohoo! Great one, Howie.
This thread reinforces my conviction that many here at DAZ would profit from having an "area" or place where people could upload tutorials in .pdf form, vids or whatever (according to subject) so that those who are so inclined can provide us (the less knowledgeable like myself) with (in one, centrally located place) clear, step-by-step, graphic instructions of how to work through a problem.
More precisely: most of the things explained above are hazy (like where in the menu things are located, the buttons you need to click to do what you are supposed to do, etc.) without having a visual idea of what things look like throughout the process. Unless somebody asks explicitly what is meant, things are usually explained merely by way of "insider", short-hand explanations that can't be replicated (not at all, or only with additional help) by the uninitiated.
What makes sense to me is that the creator of a (cool, but steep learning curve) product like this one sits down and makes several Youtube vids so that the subject matter becomes more accessible and understandable. To release something like this with only a minimalistic .pdf doesn't do the product justice. Step by step explanations would not only help those learning (and swing those on the fence about buying a technically demanding product add-on, etc.), but would also boost sales for the creator. A win/win for all. Empowering people to use this product is what is needed, not frustrating them with "instructions" that are merely indicative of what this product can do, or how to accomplish those things. /rant
I agree with you in principle - that something more tutorial-like would be welcome, especially for more complicated products (though it would take a lot of time to make for product creators). However, not everybody likes video instruction; I for one find it a very frustrating format. I learn better from a document with text and screenshots, and I'm sure others have still other learning styles.
I prefer the screenshots thing too, but if well done, I'll settle for a vid too.
As a maker of video tutorials myself (for Carrara), I am very sympathetic to your view. But I think you are overstating how difficult this particular product is. I haven't really used it yet but it looks well laid out and pretty straightforward for basic use, but still has added bells and whistles as and when you need them. Maybe its because I have been using Carrara's replicators for years (and Vue's Ecosystems before that) that the concept is not new for me as it may seem to Daz Studio users. I think it will soon be readily understood, at least for the basics, once you start having a play with it.
You "haven't really used it yet ??? Are you serious? Why are you bothering to respond to my post?
As I said, people have had to ask for very clear instructions (in this thread, as in others) to understand how to do some really basic things (regarding this product, how to--for example--turn objects etc.). That speaks for itself and settles the matter.
And sorry to say this, but none of this really has anything of importance or consequence to do with using Ecosystems in Vue. It's a different tool and is implemented in a different manner. And even if it were the same, it doesn't help those who have never used it.
Maybe you'll understand after y o u "actually" buy the product and have a chance to "actually" try it. Even if that's not necessary for you because you know things thru osmosis, that's of absolutely NO help to those who are--as I said--less knowledgeable, or part of "the uninitiated" ones.
I stand by my original comment: the documentation is not sufficient and more visual, step-by-step instructions regarding basic things would be helpful.
I have already bought it but am deeply involved in another project at the moment and don't want to get too sidelined from that. I am sorry you did not find my comments helpful.
Most of us don't get paid for anything we do here. We do it for fun.
Documentation isn't very fun.
It's particularly not fun when many folks aren't very grateful for the time people take to help them.
I, for one, greatly (do) appreciate all the help given by those more knowledgeable. Without people like you, we'd be lost. So, thank you, thank you, thank you!! =)
That having been said, it's the creator of (learning-curves-involved) products that should be the one who documents basic (and not just rudimentary, but at least rudimentary) things more explicitly. That shouldn't fall on the shoulders of users. Why, for example, weren't the explanations in this thread proactively included in the documentation? They don't involve frivolous questions, but things that go to the core of how to do some relatively basic things that one must understand in order to make use of this cool product. For example, upload a zip file with a few distribution maps and make a .duf scene with pertinent resources available.
Cases in point:
(1) For a computationally intense product like this, an explanation regarding "Iray section planes" should have been mentioned by the creator--it should have been mentioned, the word and concept explained, and step-by-step pictures included so that those without behemoth machines can make use of this product.
(2) Ms. Conway had to expend hours of her life figuring out what a "rotation map" is and how to create one. Why?
(3) TangoAlpha, JPiat, William and others (like Ms. Conway) have graciously explained many things that should have been in the documentation.
Of course, people putting out add-ons can't document every possible thing that can be done with their product, but that's not my beef. I am saying that giving sufficient examples and resources so that others can pick up the ball and run with it is what is critical. I continue to maintain that this didn't happen here.