Which 4.xx version of DS you wish you kept using?
CHWT
Posts: 1,168
in The Commons
Just being curious... when considering stability, render time and render quality as a whole, which 4.xx version of DS you wish you kept using?
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
For relearning 3DL, 4.20 seems to work pretty good. Sticking with 4.21 until devs & possibly a PA or two work out inevitable kinks found in initial release of 4.22.
Still on 4.15.0.2
Since I only do this as a hobby I always go with the latest release & public beta, although that can carry some risk, if it caused a serious long term problem I think DAZ 3D would make available older matched versions of DAZ Studio, DIM, & the plugins.
Firstly, I can afford to buy whatever equipment I need to use DAZ assets, but there was a time I couldn't afford a pot to P##s in, or a PC needed to run 4.22 DAZ. What DAZ seems to glaze over is that although their software is free BECAUSE consumers who buy their 3D products pay the bills and make this feasible. Without customers who pay, they cannot pay the staff. The least DAZ should do is offer older versions to entice and support all people, especially those who cannot afford to upgrade or have the equipment to run the latest version. WHY TURN AWAY SHOPPERS & USERS? DAZ DOES NOT OFFER OLDER VERSIONS. They should but the don't. If you join DAZ today and find your equipment is not up to snuff you ar S#@^ out of luck.
Edit I have several versions installed. This is not about me.
1. I generally install every update fairly soon after its release. I read the release notes and burn a couple of hours on testing what has changed. Since Daz Studio hasn't added major functionality in years, most of the testing is with changes to Iray.
2. Most software companies offer diminished support for older versions of software, or no support at all. Tech support doesn't really want to address support tickets from folks trying to run 2024 content on a version of Daz Studio from who knows how long ago. I can't blame Daz for not indulging those who aren't keeping up-to-date.
3. What fraction of Daz users find that any .01 incremental update renders their machine unusably obsolete for Daz Studio? I'm sure there are some, but given the lack of major improvements to Daz Studio capabilities in the last few years, I don't think the minor updates usually require significanly improved hardware to maintain functionality. (There are probably some exceptions with GPUs and Iray, but Daz isn't in control of that.)
....yeah, I found Daz 4.15.0.2 to be incredibly stable.
4.15
I always manually downloaded and kept the installers. Was very annoyed when I had to resort to using DIM to get the download of new versions of the program.
The earliest version I still have installed is 4.10, but 4.12 is the one I tend tp revert to as my main go-to. I do have 4.15, and do sometimes use it, since early on G8.1 seemed to need it to fully function. I do have 4.21, but just about never use it.
Of course, I work just about exclusively in 3DL, too. So that may make a difference.
ETA: I'm also on an iMac, so I *don't care* about what Nvidia is doing.
I do have archived versions of installers going back to DS2, but I don't know just where the cut-off is for something that would run on a relatively current OS.
I have always downloaded and installed manually and as far as I know, nothing has changed in that respect.
The beta-versions do require DIM.
The render speed of 4.16.03 can't be beat. I'm not sure why, but its much faster than both earlier (4.12) and later (4.21) versions of DS for my 2060 GPU. Plus its stable.
With 4.15.0.2, VDB isn't supported and the scripts used with G9 don't work (makeup).
I'm still waiting for that one thing I can't live without, until then I'm happy with DS 4.15.0.2
I have 4,15, 4.21beta, 4.22 and 4.22beta all loaded. I stopped using 4.15 though as I did a scene on them all, same scene just loaded in and no other changes, and the compression in the scene was instantly obvious with none on the others.
2023-11-22 11:03:43.818 Total Rendering Time: 2 minutes 33.85 seconds
Studio 4.15
Click on image for full size
2023-11-22 11:14:56.167 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 2 minutes 28.25 seconds
4.21 Beta
Click on image for full size.
2023-11-22 11:23:07.826 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 2 minutes 28.51 seconds
Studio 4.22
Click on image for full size.
2023-11-22 11:30:50.314 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 2 minutes 23.58 seconds
Studio 4.22 Beta
Click on image for full size.
For some positivity about the work Daz and Nvidia have been doing, I'm going to jump in and say "I don't - I'm even using the current beta at the moment".
Sure, for people who have older hardware, I accept that the newer features may not be optimised for that, but features like VDB (particularly now emissive volumes are also supported) are significant, and the new ghost light functions - while different to the old version - have some very useful use cases; "Iray Visible to Primary Rays" allows me to let cameras see through walls when the angles just don't want to work any other way.
The newest betas also have assorted features and bug fixes I put in requests about ages ago: refracted rainbows are actually now the right way around (after having been backwards for years) and native support for albedo canvases is now a thing - and those massively improve the accuracy of denoising tools, allowing much faster and crisper renders.
I'm sure there's more features I'm forgetting, but while I do carefully keep backups of old Studio versions, I can't remember the last time I actually needed to use one.
I might just be less discerning than a lot of you, but I have yet to regret downloading and using a particular version of DS. I don't notice any drastic differences from version to version, certainly not to the extent that I'd go out of my way to keep a particular version installed.
I still use 4.10 on my GTX980, which renders well. and 4.16 on a 3060 which renders fast. And for testing purposes 4.21 on a 960.
Probably because you don't render in it and use external apps like Houdini . The DS version wouldn't matter to me much if that was my workflow. I still use 4.15 and the beta 4.21
I only started seriously rendering in external programs within the last year or two; prior to that, DS was my main 3D program, and I still had the consistent experience that whatever current version of DS was just fine.
edit: also, I don't know which recent version of DS finally fixed FBX export so that geografts export properly, but that was a massive improvement in my workflow that wasn't made by earlier versions.
...some of us have older hardware that also runs on an older version fo Windows which has been deemed obsolete and no longer receives driver updates (save for security purposes) This is why for those like myself 4.21.0.5 is the "end of the line" (unless we want to go back to glacial CPU rendering) as that is last version which supports drivers compatible with the older OS. Some of us also cannot afford to upgrade to the "latest and greatest" or even close.
We still roll with what we have and do our best.
It's always weird when people constantly call DAZ a software for hobbyists and not professionals, and yet don't seem to have the slightish idea of what amateur, hobbyist and independent artists that don't make money off their work have to do to keep up with companies that operate as if everybody who wants to have an artistic pastime has an endly source of disposable cash to keep a computer with the latest OS, and highest end graphics cards, pay monthly subscription fees for the privilege of using software they can never own ( and can't even use if the money gets tight and they can no longer afford the fees ) and a whole host of other things.
I guess it's true that it is extremely difficult to empathize with people that have problems, or even acknowledge hardships that one doesn't personallly have to deal with. Prime example I recently lost access to hundreds of games on Steam because the most powerful computer in my possession with decent specs still ran an OS that they decided they would no longer support, and I was only able to upgrade because an IT guy at my job forgot and left a network disc with Windows 10 on it at our offices.
Hobbies cost money. The cost of DAZ with hardware and assets can be a lot less than the cost for other 3D softwares. Some folks just seem to have thousands and thousands of dollars to pour into DAZ assets, and they like to do that. Others spend a lot less. The learning curve is as steep or shallow as you make it. The hardware requirements are generally manageable - Not always for everyone, unfortunately. Some members within the community here actually gift older (used, still useful, still viable!) hardware to other members. That's a beautiful thing.
Daz Studio and associated assets are an interesting outlet for creativity - They do particular things in a particular way. If your goal is just to have an artistic pastime, you can get supplies to draw, paint, or actually sculpt stuff for a lot less money.
Sorry I have dragged the topic off topic. I am using 4.15. I sat with 4.10 forever before that. I would like to give 4.22 a spin. I simply haven't got around to it. If what I've got works for what I'm doing, I'm not interested in upgrading it. Buttons get moved around, stuff gets added and changed, stuff sometimes gets broken, and I'm not into it.
Using the current version, and wouldn't go back due to the improved G8 character loading speed
I have 4.22.1.88 Public Beta. I always use the latest Public Beta. I have whatever the latest General Release is currently, although generally the only time I use it is during install & configuration.
I deliberately mentioned hardware limitations in my post, in the (apparently vain) hope that it would avoid this kind of explanation.
I'm fully aware some people cannot use newer DS versions because of hardware limitations, but that doesn't make for a very useful discussion, because it's largely a statement of fact - if you have X hardware, you can't use a version past Y - and is fairly specific to the users in question.
...I used to work in the traditional art media most of my life (painting, drawing, and comic book illustration) until severe arthritis set in and made it difficult to even hold a pencil, pen, or paint brush steady and do fine detailed work like used to. It also caused me to give up music (classical keyboard). I also used to have nice clear clean handwriting and printing, Now I can barely read what I write.
That is why I ended up working with 3D after someone suggested it as a means to stay involved with visual art..
I'm just glad my 13 year old system is still hanging in there and the version of Daz I am currently using pretty much covers my needs. It may not load G8 as fast but that's a minor issue..
I recall you talking about some of that in earlier posts. That's a difficult situation! It's good that DS is available. I hope the best for you..
I still use DS 4.8.0.59 most of the time because there's a disconnect between DS and the CMS starting in DS 4.9. I haven't found anyone else who has experienced it, but I can easily trigger it in every version since 4.9. It seems to be something specific to my exact purchase history through 2016. It may only happen if I log into Connect, but I rely on my custom categories, so I don't want to risk having DS not displaying things even though they're in the CMS database.
Other than CMS problems, I haven't run into any major issues with newer versions -- I use the latest Public Build for things that don't work in DS 4.8, but I don't use Iray so I don't have to worry about GPU architecture/drivers. My current GPU won't work past DS 4.10.
I just upgraded to latest GC driver and beta. Should be fun. Thanks Daz Forum. I wouldn't have bothered without you.
Slightly off-topic (and I'd like to note that as a frequent griper about Daz prices, I agree with you about the money/investment being an extremely frustrating barrier): Steam didn't pull Windows 7 support until it absolutely became unsustainable to keep supporting it. At that point Windows 7 was already several years past its official end-of-life and Microsoft was sending out open warnings like "If you're still running this you might as well be skinny-dipping in Lake Salmonella, as far as personal risk factors go." I know, because I, too, was running a Win 7 system well past its expiration date (I hate Win 10) and the Steam change was what finally forced me to upgrade that machine.
Back on topic, when a new version of Studio comes out I tend to wait a couple of months so I can find out what things they broke before I go ahead and upgrade. I've determined that there are only a couple of minor broken things in 4.22 and there are fixes/workarounds for them, so I really do need to upgrade (I hate to do it while I'm in the middle of a project, and I'm always in the middle of a project). But I haven't seen any compelling reason to keep or use an older version. (A couple of months is actually pretty fast, as these things go for me. For example, I have a rule never to buy a Bethesda game until the "unofficial patch" is released, so that's at least six months after the game comes out, often closer to a year.)
I do suspect that when Studio 5 ever happens--if it ever does--I will either put off getting it as long as I possibly can, or will try to install and run it in parallel with 4.x. Once upon a time, back in the Pleistocene, new versions of software usually improved upon the version before. That has not been true for many years now; now new versions of software inevitably make the experience of using the product worse.