Loading...
> >

Support for 3Delight - Is it Fading? . . . and why?

1…457910…15

Comments

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    Oso3D said:
    Geminii23 said:

    I suppose you are right, but it does seem really slow.  I am still hoping that eGPU support will become viable soon with the new MacOS updates and that it is compatible with Thunderbolt 2 so I can go that route with my 2013 MacPro.  I imagine being able to setup even one good Nvidia eGPU will make a big difference when trying to use iRay. 

    3DL is roughly similar to Iray in CPU mode for comparable renders.

    Will, just to clarify, you mean "3DL" as in "the vanilla DS build with its prepackaged shaders", right?

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 15,009

    Yes plus most of the available basic ways to improve the realism (point occlusion, UE2, etc)

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    Oso3D said:

    Yes plus most of the available basic ways to improve the realism (point occlusion, UE2, etc)

    UE2 is also a shader.

    Then yes this is a slow system because it's so old.

    I compared my stuff to Iray, going full-on SSS etc, and Iray becomes 1.5 times slower in comparison then, CPU-only. Of course Iray will be much faster on a dedicated NVIDIA GPU, but that's not for everyone (Mac compat issues, for instance).

    The 3Delight shader that Wowie is working on is extra optimised and should be able to slash rendertimes down even more.

    We'll see if he bundles his mod of my GI light or if Parris' light is going to be more useful, but either way, UE2 (the slowest link) should be out of the question eventually.

  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 1,643

    That's good news, Kettu!!

  • Oso3DOso3D Posts: 15,009

    Until anyone actually gets to use that stuff, it’s irrelevant to this conversation, though.

    If it changes, then things change, but until then...

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    Kevin Sanderson said:

    I thought 3Delight was the same with all versions in regards to features. I thought the coding was the key, e.g. scripted render unlocks the features if you know the code.

    Yes you are right. The only thing you cannot do is hook up pre-existing 3Delight DLL extensions to DS.

    There's just one caveat re:features, that is, the built-in DS plugin runs a 2015 version of 3Delight. So if the DNA devs improve on some aspect like speed, it won't automagically come to DS. This is why I always prefer to export to RIB and render through the standalone.

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    BeeMKay said:
    Sven Dullah said:
    BeeMKay said:

    ... and so the topic descends into vitriol and "mine is longer than yours".

    All you to-may-to vs. to-mah-to people, is that really neccessary?

    Those render engines are both tools, nothing more. Crayons or water colours, they both nake images. You use the one that helps you express yourself, your story, your imagination best.

    Or you use the one your current system can handle. But basically I agree about them being tools;)

    BeeMKay said:

    Maybe if you focus back on the topic... and on why there aren't more PAs coming from those who are really good now with 3Delight, making those 3Delight sets for existing items? Just think about the possible collaborations. If the resulting 3DL texture setting is great, why wouldn't a PA allow you to sell it as an add-on for their product?

    Op was asking for advice and thoughts, these comments are thoughts as far as I know.

    Yes, and my question is, if the PAs who create the "original" don't do 3Delight textures, why are there not PAs who specialize in creating 3DL textures for existing Iray sets?

    "Textures" as in actual image maps should be the same.

    What is missing is a contemporary _shader_ for 3Delight that would a) use all the current developments and b) be available to each and every DS user = at no cost AND coming from the DAZ store (to have the "official" clout).

    Wowie is taking care of it.

    It's probably the main reason I'm "hanging out" in this thread, so as to create awareness =D

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    Slosh said:
    Mustakettu85 said:
    Slosh said:

    And also, glass and metal never look as good in 3DL when I try.

    It's not about you. It's because the shaders that come with DS are limited.

    At the very least, when using them, you need to add a "physical" environment dome into your scene, or parts of your reflective and refractive surfaces will come out black.

    Did anyone ever tell you about this?

     

    They didn't have to.  I already know that (if you have my salon or ice cream parlor, you will see just that). 

    Sorry, no I don't have these products of yours, I don't really buy that much stuff unfortunately (and when I do, I make my own materials anyway =)).

    But that M4 UV and clone for G2M, now that's a lovely and very useful product, so I'm going to use the occasion and express my gratitude to you for creating it =)

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    drzap said:

    From comments I have seen from PA's, it generally is much less profitable to include support for 3DL.  Compared to iRay, it is much more work for them and more and more users are switching to iRay anyways.   Why do they continue to support a dwindling user base?  Good business!   A customer who stops purchasing from you is a money you will probably never see again.  Even if it is more effort, it is usually better to keep a customer ( who is likely to be loyal to you and possibly be an iRay user in the future) you've worked so hard to attain.  It costs time, effort and sometimes money to gain a customer.  It costs nothing to lose one.

    This is going off on a tangent, but I'm genuinely interested. Does anyone really purchase "from a PA", though? And not specifically stuff you need for a particular project with these or those specs?

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    algovincian said:
    Mustakettu85 said:
    algovincian said:

    My own opinion is that generally speaking a proper albedo map created for Iray is not going to work well as diffuse map for 3DL.

    But why would you think this way?? Even if we are talking about "oldschool" shading that is currently all that vanilla DS can do. A proper albedo with light cancellation is still a vastly better choice than a 1998-style cheatfest with baked-in highlights and AO.

    All I was trying to say is that when I've tried to convert the mats for a character (whose original mats were designed for Iray with an albedo map) to 3DL (specifically, using the DS default shader), I have not had good luck producing good results using the same maps without editing them in Photoshop. There may be other 3DL shaders that would allow for better results, but, IMHO, it needs to be the DS default 3DL shader that is used. Otherwise, I just don't see PAs producing content supporting 3DL.

    I understand this logic, but in all honesty, this specific DS default shader should be abolished =D

    DS has had UberSurface as part of its free bundle for so long (since DS4 Pro was made free), which is miles ahead of the DS default.

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040
    edited December 2017
    Mustakettu85 said:
    Oso3D said:

    Yes plus most of the available basic ways to improve the realism (point occlusion, UE2, etc)

    UE2 is also a shader.

    Then yes this is a slow system because it's so old.

    I compared my stuff to Iray, going full-on SSS etc, and Iray becomes 1.5 times slower in comparison then, CPU-only. Of course Iray will be much faster on a dedicated NVIDIA GPU, but that's not for everyone (Mac compat issues, for instance).

    The 3Delight shader that Wowie is working on is extra optimised and should be able to slash rendertimes down even more.

    We'll see if he bundles his mod of my GI light or if Parris' light is going to be more useful, but either way, UE2 (the slowest link) should be out of the question eventually.

    ...however, if you are not using UE2, then 3DL render times are dramatically shorter.  That was the idea behind AoA's advanced lights.

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • DaWaterRatDaWaterRat Posts: 2,885
    Mustakettu85 said:
    drzap said:

    From comments I have seen from PA's, it generally is much less profitable to include support for 3DL.  Compared to iRay, it is much more work for them and more and more users are switching to iRay anyways.   Why do they continue to support a dwindling user base?  Good business!   A customer who stops purchasing from you is a money you will probably never see again.  Even if it is more effort, it is usually better to keep a customer ( who is likely to be loyal to you and possibly be an iRay user in the future) you've worked so hard to attain.  It costs time, effort and sometimes money to gain a customer.  It costs nothing to lose one.

    This is going off on a tangent, but I'm genuinely interested. Does anyone really purchase "from a PA", though? And not specifically stuff you need for a particular project with these or those specs?

    If there are two variations on X that are roughly comparable in price, I may pick PA Y over PA Z - Usually because PA Y provides additional support in the forums, or more versitile options (including 3DL shaders.  There we're on topic) than PA Z, or sometimes because I happen to like PA Y's interpretation of stuff better than PA Z in general.

    But yeah, I usually buy with a project in mind, and PA only comes into play when I have to narrow things down.

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    Oso3D said:

    Until anyone actually gets to use that stuff, it’s irrelevant to this conversation, though.

    If it changes, then things change, but until then...

    The topic says "is the support fading", and well, if a PA like Wowie is about to release a cute new superpowered shader with extra bells and whistles, which does constitute support, this is pretty much relevant, ain't it =)

  • Mustakettu85Mustakettu85 Posts: 2,933
    DaWaterRat said:
    Mustakettu85 said:
    drzap said:

    From comments I have seen from PA's, it generally is much less profitable to include support for 3DL.  Compared to iRay, it is much more work for them and more and more users are switching to iRay anyways.   Why do they continue to support a dwindling user base?  Good business!   A customer who stops purchasing from you is a money you will probably never see again.  Even if it is more effort, it is usually better to keep a customer ( who is likely to be loyal to you and possibly be an iRay user in the future) you've worked so hard to attain.  It costs time, effort and sometimes money to gain a customer.  It costs nothing to lose one.

    This is going off on a tangent, but I'm genuinely interested. Does anyone really purchase "from a PA", though? And not specifically stuff you need for a particular project with these or those specs?

    If there are two variations on X that are roughly comparable in price, I may pick PA Y over PA Z - Usually because PA Y provides additional support in the forums, or more versitile options (including 3DL shaders.  There we're on topic) than PA Z, or sometimes because I happen to like PA Y's interpretation of stuff better than PA Z in general.

    But yeah, I usually buy with a project in mind, and PA only comes into play when I have to narrow things down.

    Thanks for your input! Yeah I follow a similar logic, too.

  • drzapdrzap Posts: 795
    BeeMKay said:
    Sven Dullah said:
    BeeMKay said:

    ... and so the topic descends into vitriol and "mine is longer than yours".

    All you to-may-to vs. to-mah-to people, is that really neccessary?

    Those render engines are both tools, nothing more. Crayons or water colours, they both nake images. You use the one that helps you express yourself, your story, your imagination best.

    Or you use the one your current system can handle. But basically I agree about them being tools;)

    BeeMKay said:

    Maybe if you focus back on the topic... and on why there aren't more PAs coming from those who are really good now with 3Delight, making those 3Delight sets for existing items? Just think about the possible collaborations. If the resulting 3DL texture setting is great, why wouldn't a PA allow you to sell it as an add-on for their product?

    Op was asking for advice and thoughts, these comments are thoughts as far as I know.

    Yes, and my question is, if the PAs who create the "original" don't do 3Delight textures, why are there not PAs who specialize in creating 3DL textures for existing Iray sets? Of course, not every PA is willing to do this, but I'm sure some are game, as long as it's a separately sold package, maybe with "extra textures" rather than trying to emulate the Iray version.

    There obviously appears to be a market. But no one here seems to be willing to do it, but instead it's pointing fingers in all directions.

    Because it is a free market.  Noone is compelled to do anything!  While there may or may not be a profitable market for 3DL texture add-ons, apparently PA's do not want to do them, for whatever reason.  After analyzing the numbers (particularly the part about a significant enough number of 3DL users can't afford to upgrade computers in order to use iRay), they may have decided its not worth the effort, which is well within their rights in a free market economy.

  • nemesis10nemesis10 Posts: 3,418
    Mustakettu85 said:
    drzap said:

    From comments I have seen from PA's, it generally is much less profitable to include support for 3DL.  Compared to iRay, it is much more work for them and more and more users are switching to iRay anyways.   Why do they continue to support a dwindling user base?  Good business!   A customer who stops purchasing from you is a money you will probably never see again.  Even if it is more effort, it is usually better to keep a customer ( who is likely to be loyal to you and possibly be an iRay user in the future) you've worked so hard to attain.  It costs time, effort and sometimes money to gain a customer.  It costs nothing to lose one.

    This is going off on a tangent, but I'm genuinely interested. Does anyone really purchase "from a PA", though? And not specifically stuff you need for a particular project with these or those specs?

    Just watch when someone like Stonemason releases a product; I have products from his that I still haven't used yet but don't regret purchasing...

  • alesiaschumannalesiaschumann Posts: 94
    edited January 2018

    Post voluntarily removed by the user.

    Post edited by alesiaschumann on
  • alesiaschumannalesiaschumann Posts: 94
    edited January 2018

    Post voluntarily removed by the user.

    Post edited by alesiaschumann on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040
    nemesis10 said:
    Mustakettu85 said:
    drzap said:

    From comments I have seen from PA's, it generally is much less profitable to include support for 3DL.  Compared to iRay, it is much more work for them and more and more users are switching to iRay anyways.   Why do they continue to support a dwindling user base?  Good business!   A customer who stops purchasing from you is a money you will probably never see again.  Even if it is more effort, it is usually better to keep a customer ( who is likely to be loyal to you and possibly be an iRay user in the future) you've worked so hard to attain.  It costs time, effort and sometimes money to gain a customer.  It costs nothing to lose one.

    This is going off on a tangent, but I'm genuinely interested. Does anyone really purchase "from a PA", though? And not specifically stuff you need for a particular project with these or those specs?

    Just watch when someone like Stonemason releases a product; I have products from his that I still haven't used yet but don't regret purchasing...

    ...on my very tight budget I have to focus on items I would actually use for my work.  Most have been merchant and materials resoruce content as I find they make models (particularly figures) more versatile.

  • nemesis10nemesis10 Posts: 3,418
    alesiaschumann said:

    No they don't. They see photorealism as the holy grail and don't understand how you can say no to it.

     

    DaWaterRat said:

    People who are putting down 3DL *do* realize that not everyone wants photoreal, right?

    I am actually a mac user but granted one with a Nvidia card... One thing I love are products like Marshian's which are on the off side of photoreal. One thing that might be helpful is for the 3dl fans to come together and start making 3dl materials for existing products, place them in a forum in free stuff for the community along with tutorials that show distinctive things that can be only done in 3dl.  Back when Daz Studio started, there were few DS materials so fan had to roll their own.  If you create an impressive enough number of high enough quality, you can teach the PA's (and the rest of us how and why to make them).

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040
    alesiaschumann said:

    You won't win that argument against the Mac crowd, which I'm a part of. Having fun with our hobby involves not dealing with Windows laugh

    In addition, you are making a very simplistic point. The Mac hardware is also quite capable/powerful in general and soon enough, there will be access to external GPUs because Apple recognized the need to offer that to answer a market demand. That, however, won't mean that a bunch of us will rush to hardware stores to get an NVIDIA GPU anyway. The question: "do I really care that much about photorealism?" still stands. (Update: some people will say that IRAY doesn't automatically mean photorealism, but it's certainly how it's sold to us.)

    Mustakettu85 said:
    alesiaschumann said:

    Because your hobby is more important than the choice of OS? After all an OS in and of itself doesn't entertain or fulfill you creatively, it's just there for you to interact with your software. Just like the computer. Assuming you're talking Mac, a much better question to ask would be "why should I stick to Mac if it doesn't do what I want because Apple can't be bothered giving me capable hardware"? That would be my line of thinking at least.

     

     

     

    ...yes

  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    edited December 2017

    The Last Man Standinglaugh:

    image

    Last Man in Cyberspace pp.png
    1800 x 1013 - 3M
    Post edited by Sven Dullah on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040
    edited December 2017
    alesiaschumann said:

    No they don't. They see photorealism as the holy grail and don't understand how you can say no to it.

     

    DaWaterRat said:

    People who are putting down 3DL *do* realize that not everyone wants photoreal, right?

    ...currently have an old 3DL piece I did a while back on the other screen. It's a fun little homage to one of my favourite artists, Maxfield Parrish.  Save for the signature, everything was done in the render pass, even the "godrays".  It wasn't intended to look like a photo, it was intended to look like a painting and I feel it succeeded in that. I don't think I could have even come close to what I am looking at had I rendered it in Iray.

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • dreamfarmerdreamfarmer Posts: 2,128

    I have a Macbook Air and have had Mac laptops off and on over the last fifteen years. They are... okay. I use my Windows desktop more, though.

    I've used 3DL enough that I've purchased many shader and lighting addons for it. I found the AoA lighting transformative.

    I prefer a painterly or anime-style to photorealism.

    I still mostly use Iray except when I want to use a 3DL sky or shader. (The Lantios content that was free a couple months ago is AMAZING.)

    I'm glad a new 3DL extension is coming. Yay for people who love 3DL!

    I prefer Genesis 3. Damn, I wish more content was coming out for Genesis 3.

    I do postwork.

    Soon I'm going to pick up Vue, and I think I'll have to export stuff and then import it and set up whole new shaders and use a different rendering engine entirely. Maybe I should feel like this is 'ugh'? But... it's just a tool.

    It took me a long time to get past not buying products in the 20,000 SKU range that don't have Iray textures, because before I made a concerted effort to learn to use it, 3DL scared the crap out of me. My first experiences with Daz involved everything rendering black! *shiver*

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040
    nemesis10 said:
    alesiaschumann said:

    No they don't. They see photorealism as the holy grail and don't understand how you can say no to it.

     

    DaWaterRat said:

    People who are putting down 3DL *do* realize that not everyone wants photoreal, right?

    I am actually a mac user but granted one with a Nvidia card... One thing I love are products like Marshian's which are on the off side of photoreal. One thing that might be helpful is for the 3dl fans to come together and start making 3dl materials for existing products, place them in a forum in free stuff for the community along with tutorials that show distinctive things that can be only done in 3dl.  Back when Daz Studio started, there were few DS materials so fan had to roll their own.  If you create an impressive enough number of high enough quality, you can teach the PA's (and the rest of us how and why to make them).

    ...I wish I could help because I so want to see 3DL be supported well, however digital painting is not one of my strong suits due to severe arthritis which has made my hand rather useless for any fine detailed work (which is why I had to give up traditional painting and drawing), and I do not have a digital camera to create materials from photo references.

  • IgnisSerpentusIgnisSerpentus Posts: 2,500
    edited December 2017

    I have the opposite problem... in that it has taken me a really long time to warm up to iray. And if Ive found disappointment in how things look, its thus far been with iray lol Displacement issues.... velvet doesnt look like velvet without very specific HDRIs (not even gonna mention how long it took me to get good velvet) emission that doesnt actually glow without bloom turned on (and then makes shiny stuff like metal glow too, not to mention, things that backscatter in general that should not glow) metals can be quite dingy looking without a surplus of futzery (which you know sometimes suits armor... but sometimes, u want pretty pretty shiny shiny) The only thing Ive been sooooo impressed with, is its refraction.

    I think it by and large depends on what ur doing tho. I tend toward surreal/fantasy styled rendering (which is what suits my products, or the other way around) Im not into the uber real thing (that isnt to say I dont like iray... but I still post the crap out of it to look like my targeted style)

    So some of us are still supporting 3DL along with iray.

    But I admit. When u do massive packs, it does become quite tedious having to support 2 sets of materials. I think how crazy I could get with models, and then the thought of double materials tones me back lol Might also be why some have decided to support their fave engine, alone.

    Post edited by IgnisSerpentus on
  • BeeMKayBeeMKay Posts: 7,019
    edited December 2017
    Mustakettu85 said:
    BeeMKay said:
    Sven Dullah said:
    BeeMKay said:

    ... and so the topic descends into vitriol and "mine is longer than yours".

    All you to-may-to vs. to-mah-to people, is that really neccessary?

    Those render engines are both tools, nothing more. Crayons or water colours, they both nake images. You use the one that helps you express yourself, your story, your imagination best.

    Or you use the one your current system can handle. But basically I agree about them being tools;)

    BeeMKay said:

    Maybe if you focus back on the topic... and on why there aren't more PAs coming from those who are really good now with 3Delight, making those 3Delight sets for existing items? Just think about the possible collaborations. If the resulting 3DL texture setting is great, why wouldn't a PA allow you to sell it as an add-on for their product?

    Op was asking for advice and thoughts, these comments are thoughts as far as I know.

    Yes, and my question is, if the PAs who create the "original" don't do 3Delight textures, why are there not PAs who specialize in creating 3DL textures for existing Iray sets?

    "Textures" as in actual image maps should be the same.

    What is missing is a contemporary _shader_ for 3Delight that would a) use all the current developments and b) be available to each and every DS user = at no cost AND coming from the DAZ store (to have the "official" clout).

    Wowie is taking care of it.

    It's probably the main reason I'm "hanging out" in this thread, so as to create awareness =D

    Well, not every PA will want you to use their texture maps, because they have their own vision of the clothing/environment, but maybe some can agree that you create your own 3DL "vision" of the item. 

    New shader system...that is all fine, but in the interim, why aren't there already people who specialize in creating those extra "mat packs" settings? I mean, a contemporary shader system is a pie in the sky. Why not using the market now, where so many people are obviously wanting to do have those "3DL Materials"?

     

    drzap said:
    BeeMKay said:
    Sven Dullah said:
    BeeMKay said:

    ... and so the topic descends into vitriol and "mine is longer than yours".

    All you to-may-to vs. to-mah-to people, is that really neccessary?

    Those render engines are both tools, nothing more. Crayons or water colours, they both nake images. You use the one that helps you express yourself, your story, your imagination best.

    Or you use the one your current system can handle. But basically I agree about them being tools;)

    BeeMKay said:

    Maybe if you focus back on the topic... and on why there aren't more PAs coming from those who are really good now with 3Delight, making those 3Delight sets for existing items? Just think about the possible collaborations. If the resulting 3DL texture setting is great, why wouldn't a PA allow you to sell it as an add-on for their product?

    Op was asking for advice and thoughts, these comments are thoughts as far as I know.

    Yes, and my question is, if the PAs who create the "original" don't do 3Delight textures, why are there not PAs who specialize in creating 3DL textures for existing Iray sets? Of course, not every PA is willing to do this, but I'm sure some are game, as long as it's a separately sold package, maybe with "extra textures" rather than trying to emulate the Iray version.

    There obviously appears to be a market. But no one here seems to be willing to do it, but instead it's pointing fingers in all directions.

    Because it is a free market.  Noone is compelled to do anything!  While there may or may not be a profitable market for 3DL texture add-ons, apparently PA's do not want to do them, for whatever reason.  After analyzing the numbers (particularly the part about a significant enough number of 3DL users can't afford to upgrade computers in order to use iRay), they may have decided its not worth the effort, which is well within their rights in a free market economy.

    Ah, but what keeps a new PA from entering the field? Sorry, but I don't see the need for "all products must be supported right now", the important thing is that someone starts doing it, a child of love labour, if you must. Rome wasn't built in one day. Just like some people sell extra Iray add ons for their stuff, and people buy it. So I'd assume that you'd also be willing to pay for those extra 3Delight settings.

    And if you (general you) don't have the skill alone, collaborate. It won't be riches, but you just want to show the other PAs that you are selling, right?

    My general observation of this thread so far is:

    • people seem to want that extra 3DL
    • people complain that "no one is willing to do it"
    • there's a conversion tool but no one really likes it because it's no instant gratification "press render button now after application"
    • People are at each other's throat over what render engine produces better images
    • people agree that both render engines could do better
    • eventually, all's going back into circular arguments that "we want it and no one does it any more" but no one's willing to do something about it and create what is needed

    Sorry if I sound a bit acid about this, but instead of working on solution, just time is wasted saying how bad the world is.

    Post edited by BeeMKay on
  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 41,040
    edited December 2017

    ...I would have no issue with purchasing 3DL shader sets and resources.  They could be set up just like the current Iray ones.  As I mentioned above, I no longer have the ability to create detailed material and texture files in a 2D programme and to my dyslexic eyes, the Shader Mixer looks like a mess of tangled wires.

    I would also purchase plugins and extensions that opened more of 3DL's features because I'm not into scripting or writing code. 

    The bottom line, I'd rather use my waking hours and remaining years actually creating finished works which is what I got into this for in the first place.

    In this discussion, the term "better"is very subjective.  I look at both Iray and 3DL having relevance and merit, one is not "better" or "worse" than the other and it is up to the individual artist to choose which one suits his/her workflow and desired style the best. To throw in an old cliche, it really is an apples to oranges comparison.

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • TynkereTynkere Posts: 834
    edited December 2017
    kyoto kid said:
     

    In this discussion, the term "better"is very subjective.  I look at both Iray and 3DL having relevance and merit, one is not "better" or "worse" than the other and it is up to the individual artist to choose which one suits his/her workflow and desired style the best. To throw in an old cliche, it really is an apples to oranges comparison.

    This was an interesting topic for a realtive newcomer.  FWIW, I use both, and have only been DS since Sept.  Based on limited experience though, I agree that both have their merits & 'apples / oranges.' 

    Hopefully 3Delight will continue to be supported. 

    So why is it 'on decline?'  3Delight seems to offer softer shadows / gradients and more pleasing tones.  You can control the shadows which is very handy imo.  IRay (when I get get the lights to work) seems very good for outdoors and high contrast shadows/gradients like I might see on a bright sunny day.  

    Don't think I would buy a product that said "IRay only."  Not as versitile in my opinion.  We should be able to use both & repeating-- hope DAZ will continue to support both.

    Just my two cents.  : )

    Post edited by Tynkere on
  • Sven DullahSven Dullah Posts: 7,621
    edited December 2017
    Tynkere said:
    kyoto kid said:
     

    In this discussion, the term "better"is very subjective.  I look at both Iray and 3DL having relevance and merit, one is not "better" or "worse" than the other and it is up to the individual artist to choose which one suits his/her workflow and desired style the best. To throw in an old cliche, it really is an apples to oranges comparison.

    This was an interesting topic for a realtive newcomer.  FWIW, I use both, and have only been DS since Sept.  Based on limited experience though, I agree that both have their merits & 'apples / oranges.' 

    Hopefully 3Delight will continue to be supported. 

    So why is it 'on decline?'  3Delight seems to offer softer shadows / gradients and more pleasing tones.  You can control the shadows which is very handy imo.  IRay (when I get get the lights to work) seems very good for outdoors and high contrast shadows/gradients like I might see on a bright sunny day.  

    Don't think I would buy a product that said "IRay only."  Not as versitile in my opinion.  We should be able to use both & repeating-- hope DAZ will continue to support both.

    Just my two cents.  : )

    Nice to see a "relative" newcomer with an open mind;) Ya if you have the hardware and skills to handle both engines that's the best thing you can do! If you make a 3DL render or animation you want to share, or have questions about 3DL, feel free to visit show-us-your-3delight-renders

    or ask the real harcore guys over here: delight-laboratory-thread-tips-questions-experiments

    Post edited by Sven Dullah on
Sign In or Register to comment.