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
Yeah I know. Personally I'm not really concerned about core figure mats, though. I don't really consider 8.1 a new base anyway. Absent any other info, G9 not including 3DL mats just made me wonder what it might indicate as far as DAZ's plans going forward.
To be clear, I personally don't even really care about mats so much as I care about the engine itself no longer being included.
- Greg
It would effect people who render in 3DL if they wanted to utilize other features of DS only included in DS5, though.
Anyway, I'm not saying that no longer including 3DL as an engine available in DS wouldn't make sense. I'd just like to know one way or the other . . . know what I mean?
- Greg
I can't speak for any percentage of users but, personally, I have not rendered anything (apart from a few test renders) in 3DL for years. Even before I got an IRay capable GPU I used to render with Reality/Luxrender rather than 3DL. I've seen articles on what later versions of 3DL is capable of but DAZ does not offer those versions.
As for Filament - what a huge disappointment that was. I was really optimistic when I saw some Filament renders online but the implementation by DAZ has, once again, fallen far short of those expectations. Both IRay alternatives are poor-man's versions of what they could be. I feel for those who don't have a recent and powerful GPU because that was me for many years and I do hope that DAZ can come up with something better.
Iray was actually the bait that got me back, 3DL looks just too much like what I got in poser 10+ years ago, didn't like the look then and still don't like it
If we get good documentation, a programmer (and in these forums there seem to be many, for some reason) who wanted it badly enough could just implement it.
I think it bears repeating: Instead of cool features, we should be asking for cool documentation. Among the people motivated, for whatever reason, to make DS better, I am absolutely certain that there are many times more that don't work for DAZ than that do. It behooves everyone to get as many of these people up to speed and being productive as possible.
How would this work? I'm not saying it would not but I am not clear on the process. I can see that working (as it does, obviously) with Blender but DAZ Studio is not Open Source. So independent developers would need access to the code, right? I'm sure PAs have (limited) access but no matter how good the documentation, DAZ are not going to openly publish proprietary code.
Someone made a plugin for Luxrender (at least two), and I think there's even one for Octane? Why couldn't someone make one for 3Delight?
C++ allows the good practice of separating interface from implementation. DAZ has already published the header files that describe the API (the "format", if you will, of the functions DS makes available to plugin developers), as part of the C++ SDK, and that is technically all that is needed. The actually implementations in a language like C++ are in separate files and users receive them only in compiled form, i.e. the DS application that will load one's plugin DLL at runtime.
But in a practical sense, header files do not communicate everything that a dev needs to know, certainly not higher level concepts, and this is where DAZ has completely fallen down. Read the C++ SDK forums and count the number of unanswered questions and the number of cool projects that never come to fruition because a question was asked that never got an answer.
Well yes - the lack of interaction with the user-base is an unfortunate fact of life with DAZ so I understand your frustration there. Despite a long career in computers I never delved into the dark arts of programming but my son is a senior software developer (C++ programmer to boot) in the gaming industry. I keep trying to get him interested in this but he's just not.
Economics. The harder you make it to do something, the fewer the people that will actually do it. If DAZ would have documented how the application works, I am sure that some enterprising geek would have done it already.
I'd like to assert something about people who write software, that I am comfortable saying is probably true about all of them, or at least is true about me and all my friends and colleauges: A nicely organized and implemented piece of software where you understand the environment, that you know is well written, and will never fail is extremely pleasurable to create. That Dopamine fix is a large part of why a dev would devote so much time to a project and not want any compensation: creating it in the first place was its own compensation; it is challening, fun, and rewarding in a way that a couple of dollars can't match. But similarly, when you don't understand at all the context in which your code will run because it's undocumented and it is not code that you are proud of because you know it runs and doesn't crash but by the grace of god, that Dopamine fix, that "it's not the destination but the journey" aspect is totally absent and a large part of why some poor SOB would even take up the task of integrating something as complex as 3Delight is completely and totally absent.
Please believe me. If the documentation were better so that making plugins was actually fun engineering instead of a laborious exercise in voodoo, we would already have plugins for every cool thing you can think of.
The 3Delight NSI looks great. IF it were implemented in Daz Studio 5 is there be a way to convert old 3DL textures/shaders/materials to the NSI compliant format? Is it similar to moving from 3DL to Iray which requires tweaking to set correctly. 3DL to Uber shader is the first step but I have found tweaking must be done get the desired improved look in Iray.
My god, why would you want to do that to him? Steer him towards Blender, Houdini, or god help me, even Maya. They've all got thriving developer communities. This way lies nothing but heartache and wistful dreams of what could be. If the Genesis framework were not so cool, maybe I could quit DS but I just can't :)
marble could be meaner and suggest Poser to him
Unreal is where the Megagrants abound
Iray isn't even that reliable. Just look at how the latest driver update borked it. Do you want up to date drivers, or do you wanna be able to render stuff? Wouldn't be a problem if there were some viable alternative to IRAY, that was actually recieving support from DAZ3D and PAs alike.
Even I couldn't stand Poser. I bought it after getting frustrated with DAZ Studio only to abandon Poser after about a week of trying to navigate around that wierd interface. I quickly came to the conclusion that sometimes the free option is not always the worst. DAZ Studio has always left a lot to be desired but I will forever regret paying good money for Poser.
[Donald] ... my son would agree with you about programming. He says it is as much an art as any other creative enterprise so he would understand your dopamine comment.
All I know, is that if Poser ever comes up with a figure that can give Genesis a run for it's money, I'd seriously consider going back to Poser. Nothing is worse than a cocky dude who's been king of the hill for far too long.
Sure - I'd like to see a good competitor too but Poser is not for me unless they radically change just about everything about it.
Oh yes,
The first thing I do with every new content, is to delete all 3Dlight material options and files.
When ever one is trying to do something that pushes the boudaries of what can be done with ones computer, one never updates drivers before making sure nothing will be broken.
Yup, totaly unreliable. Just update the drivers and you lose weeks to fix the issues just to get new ones at next drivers update. Not mentioning waiting the colossal render times just to discover all-black images due to VRAM issues. And the materials... ARGH!
No, thanks! Just leave my old, always working, 3Delight waiting for a better integration with Filament.
DAZ should have choosen Octane instead of IRAY at that time.
An Octane plug in is no replacement for a well integrated and shader supported render engine.
Poser 12 uses a Blender-based renderer as one of it's options, so why can't Daz Studio?
Why not just revert to the previous version of the driver that was working?
I would love to get an update from DAZ as well, but for now I'll just assume that it's be some time in the new year. Before Apple helped them get DAZ Studio running on Big Sur, DAZ had planned on releasing a mostly-working version somewhere around last January, so by now they've had an extra 10 months to add the features that wouldn't have been available then. January will mean they've had a full year to tweak and polish it, so I'm hoping for January.
The only new features I'm hoping for, as a Mac user, is to finally be able to use Rilament (it's not for everyone, but from my own tests it's exactly what I'm after) and -- hopefully -- that DAZ Studio 5 will be Apple Silicon native. Now, they had Filament running on the Mac 14 months ago (or longer) so I'm assuming that's a given.
Because it just looks better to keep it in Blender. Using the Blender bridge for that is the best option.
And it is free.
Just look at the majority of current Poser Superfly renders and you will see, why it has been a good idea, not to go the Poser way.
BTW:
Look for IRAY renderer and how much they charge you for that. It comes free with DAZ Studio
(EDIT:
IRAY for Rhino, Maya, 3dsMax or the IRAY Server is about 295$ right now.)
Cycles on the other hand, comes free with Blender, but you have to pay for Poser's included Blender-based renderer, which means you do also pay for this renderer.
Nope, they said they were working on getting a PRE-beta out (=minimal functionality, with more bugs than a beta version), and they planned on adding features and functionality all through this year.
But when they got DS 4 working with Big Sur, there was no need to release the PRE-beta.
I'd rather have that then Filament as the only alternative to IRAY. The writing is on the wall for 3DL's future in Daz Studio, now that new Daz base figures are shipping without support for it.
"Nope", they were planning on releasing a PRE-Beta July or August 2021, and a full DAZ 5 release in December, 2021 with features and enhancements rolling out through the year (2022). A post from them told us that Filament was already working on the Mac in the PRE-Beta.
From the first post of this thread (July, 2021):
Details of the upcoming Daz Studio 5 early-access Pre-Beta:
- Release timing for this early-access preview is coming soon, at the very end of this month (July) or sometime next month (August).
As for the final Daz Studio 5 release:
- The timeline for this is to have it out near the very end of this year.
- Features and enhancements will be rolling in through the rest of the year.
- Anyone who has Daz Studio 4 in their account will be able to keep it. You'll be able to continue to download and use it for the foreseeable future.
-- Walt Sterdan
Posers implementation of “cycles” does not even include Viewport rendering display mode. and it is still missing several important nodes
Indeed and to gain access to the Iray plugin in iclone,
you pay $540 USD for iclone plus $99 USD for Iray .
With Poser you get a crippled version of Cycles for $250 USD
and Zero G8/9 Support.
Daz studio alone, or with one of the free game engines or Blender
remains the Absolute $$BEST value$$ not matter how you look at it.
As I demostrate here
That would be awesome, I have an Octane license back when I used it with Poser. I don't believe one is vastly superior over the other, but we wouldn't be locked into Nvidia cards only.
I imagine it would have cost much more and can see why it wasn't chosen.