Difficult question :P, an ethical one.
gabriel.delacruz
Posts: 82
Hellu,
With Aiko I just hit the 1k installed packages and I thought to celebrate it by asking a painful question:
When will we have a native support for genesis in Poser? When are Daz and Poser people going to realise that this is not a question to see which software are we going to adopt, but in fact realise many of us are just using BOTH packages. You guys are not just competing for a market but are in fact sharing your customers.
As a Daz customer I want to protest for all the pain the DSON importer causes, and for those ridiculous moments bouncing forward and backwards with both technical support teams blaming each other and forwarding you to the other team to find a solution. Ones blame the Dson package, the other ones blame Poser... at the end I had no option but to install my OS fresh (meaning a BIG pain), then it magically solved. Thank u.
I own a thousand daz packages, and not just cheap files but the main figures and an insane number of morphs (all the v4, genesis, and genesis2 excepting a few I already decided to purchase), as well I own Poser pro with all their figures and got a very large amount of morphs for Daz figures in renderosity. And I make my own morphs. And my own figures too, by the way. The decision about what I purchase is made according to a criteria which no marketing head is going to predict... so why does V4 run correctly in poser and why genesis doesn't? with this amount of morphs loading a genesis figure in poser is nearly imposible... DSON cannot do the job without sooner or later crashing, as a matter of fact I am now using Daz studio just for Genesis and Genesis 2, all the rest in Poser.
I do think DAZ studio is outstanding for developing figures, I do appreciate many features in poser which are not competing with daz studio but are complementary. I bought Carrara and I can say that unless DAZ takes the time it deserves to improve the software I am not going to use it... Daz models are the best, Daz studio is free, so why to prevent poser users to load their files natively?. Everybody shall be able to chose his own workflow so a native support would be the appropriate.
Those were just some ideas in my head, I will hope for a day when we don't have to carefully plan how to use the models depending on what generation or what software...
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
The simple answer is never. Poser and Genesis uses two completely different methods of Weight mapping, and they are as compatible as trying to install an iOS App on a WindowsPhone (to use a hopefully working metaphor).
Dawn tried this using different rigs, one for DS one for Poser, and what I've seen it quickly turned out to be 98% Poser 2% DS.
Is there a way to convert Poser Dawn clothing to DS Dawn?
I am hesitant to reply because this has been hashed out in many other formats but the next gen figures of both Daz3d and SmithMicro use very different systems for weight mapping and morphs. It is unlikely for any company to pay the money into research and man hours make a competitor product to itself just for altruistic purposes. My own belief is this is a place where the consumer can vote with their feet and decide which system they like.
Hi,
I disagree in comparing weight mapping with OS development since the levels of complexity between both are light years away, however the example can as well illustrate that the incompatibilities are at the end political, since software vendors are not allowing their competitors to implement compatibility libraries.
I kind of doubt that poser engineers would see disadvantages to implement the same weight mapping in poser. The same way that they develop a cloth simulator, they would develop a weight mapping system compatible with genesis. It seems that they don't do it because they have no right to do it. This seems once again an issue of protecting a proprietary technology.
Weight mapping at the end is not such a complicated thing, it is about the correlation of vertices and bones, however the exchange of technology is always a trade, the one who developed a technology would face the fact to realease it away... my idea is that Daz shall not understand the trade as giving technology away but to support their own customers on different platforms. Same way that pixar gave away subdivision surfaces (which greatly helped daz) daz can give away the genesis technology as such, anyway we are paying them with our money, and their turnover seems good enough to change the mentality and move forward. This can be solved granting a special license.
Anyhow just ideas.
Yes, completely rerig it from scratch...
Problem is both companies thought they had the entire community behind them when they moved forward, but that was not the case. Half went one way, half went the other, and the batch of users who enjoy using what both companies have to offer were simply left, flabbergasted, upset, and undecided about what to do. And that indecision left them open to the wolves where their frustrations are concerned.
Neither company seems to want to give any leverage on their standing, both have spoken of ways that they may try to make things more compatible but in the long run they moved farther and farther away from that plan. In my humble opinion, we are left with great figures who work perfectly in a subprime rendering program, or a great rendering program that has not so great figures.
The days of being able to choose are over but we're moving forward! Ain't progress great?
This is why these discussions always break down... there are two conversations going on: what people want and what they can have. There isn't really a situation where one company has a set of secret libraries of compatibility. Both companies have evaluated each other's technology and agreed it wasn't a direction they wanted to go. So, it is not political...it is a case of incompatible technologies. any solution requires one company giving up its own standard, or creating a kluge, or basically creating a special product for their competitor and taking the loss.
I understand you want the genesis figure but don't want its technology. Why I am trying to explain that basically the genesis figure is its technology applied to a somewhat generic mesh.
Actually, as was stated very many times in previous threads about this subject, DAZ 3D did offer Smith Micro their technology (or some of it) and told them of the way they were going to move forward.
The simple answer is never. Poser and Genesis uses two completely different methods of Weight mapping, and they are as compatible as trying to install an iOS App on a WindowsPhone (to use a hopefully working metaphor).
Dawn tried this using different rigs, one for DS one for Poser, and what I've seen it quickly turned out to be 98% Poser 2% DS.
That's not strictly true, the support for DS dawn is growing, more and more Poser venders who create for Dawn are making the effort to produce DS versions the divide is still there but its decreasing.
And Direwrath Poser does not have a superior renderer it really comes down to the user.
I use Cross Dresser 4 to convert my Dawn (and other) clothing to Victoria 4, then I use Daz Studio with Genesis and the genesis gen4 package to fit the clothes onto Genesis. Then I save the clothing I just fitted to Genesis as a .DUF file following the tutorial on the Cross Dresser 4 website and tell my Daz Studio content library to create the Poser files. Once that is done I can load the converted Dawn clothing onto Genesis in either Poser or Daz Studio.
Boojum the brown bunny
That's not strictly true, the support for DS dawn is growing, more and more Poser venders who create for Dawn are making the effort to produce DS versions the divide is still there but its decreasing.
And Direwrath Poser does not have a superior renderer it really comes down to the user.
I did stress that it was my own humble opinion. ;)
They have stated multiple times that they didn't want their program to depend on third-party technology, and that it was the reason they decided not to implement Genesis technology in Poser when DAZ offered them to.
And given how fast DAZ is making their program and technology evolve I can see why they would be reluctant to support it, as keeping Poser compatible would require quite some work from them.
Greetings,
This. A lot.I want to 'Like!' this specific post a lot.
-- Morgan
But my poor Dawn still doesn't have much to wear, and I don't see it changing anytime soon....
If you have used Dawn, you would know that it is not as simple as it sounds. Dawn was rigged in DS and ported to Poser. It has a load of internal errors that were not corrected.
Go to SMS official Poser Blog. There is a long post explaining the whys and wherefores. You have two options. Do your own porting from DS to Poser but be ready to clean up the internal errors or use the DSON. It's what there is.
+1 Chohole
Unfortunately, those of us who like and use both DS and Poser (my favorite is Carrara though) are kinda left holding the bag. SmithMicro seems to be unwilling to implement the needed changes to Poser that would make Genesis work natively (apparently because they don't want to use development resources to support another companies technology). So I don't see native support of Genesis coming to Poser anytime soon - if ever.
At the same time, DAZ seems to be unwilling to make concessions on Genesis technology to make it work with the native weight mapping in Poser (also keep in mind when Genesis came out there was no SubD in Poser, and weight mapping was about to be release with Poser 9/Pro2012). Having two different versions of the mesh like what Hivewire did with Dawn also has its drawbacks, especially for those of us who use both DS and Poser. I would guess that the extra costs associated with having a DS and a Poser version of the mesh may be what is keeping DAZ from doing this. For those of us who use both DS and Poser, this approach increases our cost quite a bit because we have to purchase both versions, so that make it less than ideal for the cross-platform user.
IMHO, as it stands right now, the cost of supporting DS, Carrara, and Poser as they diverge is getting more expensive, and less productive. Which is exactly opposite to the reasons I started using them all together. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, so I could pick the one that best supported what I wanted to do. Now, if Genesis, or Genesis2 is in the mix of assets I want to use, Poser is my last choice (unless it's a simple scene). It looks like quite possibly in the near future, I may have to make a choice and drop continued support for either DS/Carrara or Poser. Because DS and Carrara can use many the same assets easily, and the new Poser weight mapped figures don't work in Carrara, it's sad to think that Poser will probably be the one that I stop supporting/upgrading (I have every version since P2).
Hopefully at least one of the companies will decide it's in their best interest to work together, but I really don't see this happening, Given the way things seem to be going right now, I'm actually expecting to see a greater divide in the future, which may force many of us to pick between the two as we move forward.
I do agree with dust rider. Not a fan of Carrara as I said but respect it.
I personally rarely would end a work in Poser or Daz, but forward them to other software to be used as reference, as background elements, for further modelling and even rige them again, but I do think poser is great for my storyboards, and to work with the cloths. Whatever workflow I choose I would like to be able to move back and forth.
I do understand that Poser and Daz have a great deal of enthusiast users (and sorry I hate making differences based on skills, i use this word with my greatest respect) and are supposed to be solutions for the entire working process, but compatibility is essential and the path shall be left open for the users to decide. I think both companies shall think through the fact that predicting the workflow of the users is not a good idea, and splitting paths shall be something for couples, not for companies... no matter how hard the break up was they do still have things in common.
...and this is part of the reason why we need "open ended" cloth dynamics in Daz Studio.
I only have one release that I did for Dawn, with BadKittehCo. at RDNA. What I can tell you that even though I didn't do the rigging, I watched from the sidelines and the experience of rigging for both programs, with double the work, double the testing, and double the bugs, was akin to preparing two different products. Small wonder vendors are not following this route. :smirk:
+1 Chohole
Unfortunately, those of us who like and use both DS and Poser (my favorite is Carrara though) are kinda left holding the bag. SmithMicro seems to be unwilling to implement the needed changes to Poser that would make Genesis work natively (apparently because they don't want to use development resources to support another companies technology). So I don't see native support of Genesis coming to Poser anytime soon - if ever.
Also, keep in mind that while DAZ3D is an independent company (or relatively so, I've lost track of the mergers but as far as I know it still makes their own decisions), Poser is owned by Smith Micro, which is a parent company that has a finger in a LOT of pies... What follows is speculation, but their policies might not be set up just by kuppa and the gang, but directed by the main company, who have little idea of the history or market. If their hands are tied, they might not be able to put any resources into it at all even if they wanted to, and at the same time, it does seem silly to keep DAZ, as a separate company, tied to the whims of the head honchos at SM who might be making their decisions based on sales and profit rather than what would advance the whole community and might see the program as yet another doll-making passtime.
Also, keep in mind that while DAZ3D is an independent company (or relatively so, I've lost track of the mergers but as far as I know it still makes their own decisions), Poser is owned by Smith Micro, which is a parent company that has a finger in a LOT of pies... What follows is speculation, but their policies might not be set up just by kuppa and the gang, but directed by the main company, who have little idea of the history or market. If their hands are tied, they might not be able to put any resources into it at all even if they wanted to, and at the same time, it does seem silly to keep DAZ, as a separate company, tied to the whims of the head honchos at SM who might be making their decisions based on sales and profit rather than what would advance the whole community and might see the program as yet another doll-making passtime.
DAZ and SMS are two very different companies with two very different business plans and views.
DAZ's main source of income is content sales. If it wasn't, then they would have kept to the original plan for DS4. In which case only 2 of the 5 planned versions would have been free.
SMS sells software. The acquired CP and the eFrontier catalog when they acquired Poser. It was part of the deal. However, only the P10/2014 content is from them. Most of Miki4 was done by eFrontier. CP is still around because it's a convenient portal for selling their graphics software and it probably nets enough so it at least breaks even.
The chasm that exists between SMS and DAZ has mainly to do with development and upgrade cycles. DAZ prefers to develop and update DS on a fairly routine and regular basis. SMS tends to follow the more traditional full number upgrade every couple of years with maybe a service release or two thrown in.
I am not even sure, that Smith Micro the company even knows that they own Poser... The Company is about: "Connect. Control. Capitalize. Helping you survive in a mobile world." (from their website www.smithmicro.com). If you check their last financial report/conference call, you can see that ALL of their consumer software and graphics stuff combined accounts for only ~19% of their revenue (just under 1.6 million US$ revenue in that business segment.That's things like Stuffit and all the graphics packages. On the bright side it is the only part that did not crash and burn last quarter...). Poser is only one item in that category.
Currently, Smith Micro is in financial dire straights. Stock is below one dollar (~97c today, that's down from a stock price of ~$16 in the beginning of 2011). This is mostly due to the poor performance of their wireless and mobility solutions section which is by far the largest part of their business (SM is not primarily a graphics company). The software section which includes all graphics software and things like StuffIt is not doing badly, but it is a small part of their business. You can find the numbers in their last financial report that sent the stock down by 50% or so in a day.
Ciao
TD
...exactly, I get more SM emails for utility software than I do for Poser and add on plugins like Anime Studio & such. When they shut town the CP forums it pretty much said that 3D was not their main interest.
Not going to further derail this thread by getting into a back and forth about what SMS is and is not and it's financial situation. My point about both companies had to do with differing business views and plans. These differences combined with the differences in the way the companies handle development and upgrades will likely keep them from reaching an agreement any time soon. That isn't to say it may never happen but I don't see it happening anytime soon.
This made me laugh out loud at work (LOLAW), but as I read the rest of your comment it made me realize just how much I take things for granted. In much the same way I drive my car and don't take the time to care or keep up with the company that makes it, I use Poser and don't take the time to 'know' anything about SM as long as Poser renders when I click the render button. I haven't really put any effort into caring about any other aspect of it.
I started with DAZ Studio right on the cusp of them giving it away - DAZ graciously gave me a $280 store credit, which was fine by me. I haven't cracked the tough nut of accomplishing pleasing lighting in DAZ Studio myself, but see examples so know it can be done. That said, Poser is my tool of choice, simply because it is what I know and I am able to consistently get good results from. LAMH forced me to spend much more quality time with DAZ Studio and I'm still trying to find that magical lighting recipe I found in Poser. Once that's done I can see myself NOT updating Poser (currently use Poser Pro 2012 more than Poser Pro 2014 as it crashes less. Go figure!) I've had pretty pleasing results with DreamLight's Light Dome Pro, but it is not the ultimate solution to get me completely converted to DAZ. (I'd spend more time on DAZ if the Smart Content feature didn't keep regularly crapping out on me! - Although, on a whim, I discovered you can use the Poser Library browser and drag and drop stuff onto the DAZ Studio stage!)
Aaaaanyways.... Being a typical bottom feeding consumer, I care MOST about what model I am using in my scene. The details of who makes it, why they don't do this, or that, are just a distant clatter and din in the background. I want to create art. If I see a 3D model and it sparks my imagination, I want to use it in my own work. ANY reason why I can't use it is just an annoying excuse, especially when I am willing to PAY for the model in a useable form. I understand the reasons for the split between DAZ and Poser. I understand 'business' and 'intellectual property' concepts and all that. I applaud DAZ for making 3D affordable to the masses. DAZ Content is second to none and I feel their model is truly AWESOME - GIVE the platform away, but SELL the heck out of the content!
I think there is PLENTY of room for BOTH programs, but in my opinion, if not for DAZ Content, POSER would be irrelevant in my workflow. I'm thankful for whatever compatibility there is.
3D On, my brothers and sisters in Art!
...If you are using Daz 4.6, try Age of Armour's Advanced Lights (Ambient, Spot, and Distant). No HDRI to mess with and they render faster than the UberEnvironment lights. I can get very nice lighting effects with a minimal number of lights and rarely ever use UE much anymore.
I have that light set, but haven't had a chance to use it yet - Smart Content failures make using DAZ Studio a real chore right now and an overheating CPU makes doing ANYTHING downright impossible. :shut:
I've also played around with REALITY for both DAZ and POSER.
Here's one example of lighting that blows my socks right off!
http://www.daz3d.com/gallery/#images/29090/
I know, I know.... Octane Render... but THIS is what I'm talking about - rich, vibrant colors with a bright scene that has highlights and shadows. Many (way too many) DAZ scenes I see posted here and there are dark (WHY SO DARK?) and flat/bland with not a lot of highlight balanced with shadow - in some scenes that might be appropriate, but in most it is just bland. I see a lot of these flat, lifeless images and try to be polite and not say anything at all, but inside my head I am SCREAMING "WHY SO DIM AND FLAT!???" but the images like the one above brings peace to my soul and calm to my tortured artist's mind. I have a long way to go myself, but I've had a couple small successes. I think lighting makes or breaks a render.
And attached is another image that exemplifies the qualities I am talking about - color, light, tone, etc. There's a soft quality to the light, a smooth quality to the color, it has light and dark and it is rendered in the FireFly render engine.
How can I get these kinds of results with DAZ?
(I know we're teetering on derailing this thread, but we are still talking about differences in Poser and DAZ...)
...yeah I'm having issues with the CMS as well since I installed the latest update. Fortunately I have a custom runtime/library setup so it is fairly easy to find things using the "old school" method (classic "Tree" view).
Here are a couple pics I recently did using the Advanced Lights:
In both of them all I used was the Advanced Ambient, one Advanced Distant Light and One Advanced Spotlight (as a point light for a bit of fill light). Ambient is set at 60% and the Distant light at 80 - 100%
Both are rendered with the standard 3Delight engine.
I have that light set, but haven't had a chance to use it yet - Smart Content failures make using DAZ Studio a real chore right now and an overheating CPU makes doing ANYTHING downright impossible. :shut:
I've also played around with REALITY for both DAZ and POSER.
Here's one example of lighting that blows my socks right off!
http://www.daz3d.com/gallery/#images/29090/
I know, I know.... Octane Render... but THIS is what I'm talking about - rich, vibrant colors with a bright scene that has highlights and shadows. Many (way too many) DAZ scenes I see posted here and there are dark (WHY SO DARK?) and flat/bland with not a lot of highlight balanced with shadow - in some scenes that might be appropriate, but in most it is just bland. I see a lot of these flat, lifeless images and try to be polite and not say anything at all, but inside my head I am SCREAMING "WHY SO DIM AND FLAT!???" but the images like the one above brings peace to my soul and calm to my tortured artist's mind. I have a long way to go myself, but I've had a couple small successes. I think lighting makes or breaks a render.
And attached is another image that exemplifies the qualities I am talking about - color, light, tone, etc. There's a soft quality to the light, a smooth quality to the color, it has light and dark and it is rendered in the FireFly render engine.
How can I get these kinds of results with DAZ?
(I know we're teetering on derailing this thread, but we are still talking about differences in Poser and DAZ...)
The lights for the Danielle render are from this set
http://www.daz3d.com/valeria-for-v4