Any opinions on this as a BRYCE look? BTW- NO Post work and I used Traveler's 3D Sky Dome as a background.

Well, might be. Although I think it lacks a bit of bump on the dragon as well as some depth, cause there're no atmospheric effects like haze.

I guess it could look like a really stylized bryce render. I don't know, Bryce is such a powerful tool, I think it's pretty hard to duplicate.

There is NO post work done on it- also using the skydome.

Veritas, I think you'll be the "Agent Smith" of DAZ Studio! I still can't get past some technical issues between D/S and my 'puter, but I also don't like how D/S uses lights... it takes forever to aim and balance the lights, especially since the preview and the render are so different. Great stuff, tho!

well, it's definitely possible, i think you have to duplicate the object, scale it up just slightly, and turn it to one of the thin glass textures, and maybe tinker with some settings.

Very nice.....very scary....needs fire!

Excellent Render and I also must say I wish I could play with DS but I am just a small time buyer of DAZ products like Vicky3 and a few smaller Items so I havent had the chance to play...YET...Also you can achieve Glossyness in Bryce you just have to go a step further then just apply a slider...

Well, first of all, DAZ Studio is FREE! It's hard to beat that price! Plus it imports ALL Poser file formats and they will be adding others in the future. It also has full Python support, Shaders, and advanced control settings that are (in this early alpha version) starting to look like MAX or Lightwave control panels. I've only had it for one week, so I have barely tapped into what it can do. Also in the works are HDRI Plug-ins, Cel-Shade Plug-Ins, Hair-Fur Plug-Ins, etc. It uses a high-end Ray-Tracing render engine developed by 3Delight. BTW- if you already have Poser, the quick and fast way to light a scene in Daz Studio is just import your favorite lights from Poser. That's what I do. Plus DS doesn't delete one set when you bring in another, so you can actually layer in lighting with fills, spots and even POINT LIGHTS. Actually for me so far, lighting has been the EASIEST part of using DS. You can also make sky domes with your Bryce skies, so you won't lose those, and another thing I'm working on is bringing in Bryce backgrounds as Alpha Planes. Basically you can Bryce-Out a Daz Studio scene with hugely faster render times using the 3Delight render engine.

yeah..it's free to Platinum members, or was as of yesterday..once it works down to the base metal members like me, I'll give it a whirl..;) great work..hope you posted it in the Daz Studio forum, to keep the interest up..;)

Yep I cant wait to play....But I feel they snubbed their main base of Buyers by excludeing some of the buyers by just letting the Platinum members download first,Now we as small time buyers and not able to afford PLATINUM Status are already falling behind the other Merchants who are already making products for DS and or learning DS for making Products...Of course Newer Programs that come out after a program that has been out for a couple of years and had their MAIN company basically say that it was Scrapping the Project will have Better Codeing and Be Faster at rendering and Modeling,But it all comes down to one thing, The Person useing the program...

foleypro you're not really missing out. PC members are testing the alpha version. You can't really make content for an alpha. The general public will get the even more stable beta version to start.

DAZ has stated that Daz Studio is NOT a replacement for Poser, either. This is why I have dropped into the various MAX and Lightwave forums to give people a heads-up on this software, as it appears to me it is aimed at a NEW 3D niche that is somewhat Poser-like, Vue-Bryce-like, and serves as a link to high end render software as well. It's a pretty interesting 3D strategy, I think. The software is just BARELY getting started as an Alpha version, and will go into BETA maybe later this month, but DAZ hasn't stated this officially yet.

As I stated I really cant wait to play with Daz Studio,I Know that they will do very well and in the long run it will help out the 3D community a ton...

I'll post the rest of these test images in the DS Forum.

Veritas, a displacement map in bryce would be adding a bump map channel into a texture.

Not so; displacement maps are different from bump maps. Displacement maps affect the profile of an object, which bump maps do not. Bryce doesn't do them. BTW those pictures don't look particularly Bryce-like to me.

I disagree Phantast, at a simple level they are the same, both distort the base mesh along the surface normals according to the colour of the map used at that point. Displacement maps generally are used on bigger surface variations then bump maps. In high end applications either a temporary revised mesh will be created or a permananent revised mesh created, in the first scenario, the effect is that of a big bump map. The closest you'll get in bryce is a bump map, in the example veritas has given, using the map he's used as a displacement map as a bump map would get the same effect of scale edges etc. Dislacement versus bump is really a matter of how big the bumps are, if they're big effectively you need to change geometry, if they're small (as in this sample) then it's effectively a change in surface lighting unless very close to the surface being modified.

Displacement map actually deforms the mesh along its deformation references usually a grayscale bitmap and can be deformed to a very high degree even to the point of complete physical (in a virtual sense) distortion of the mesh. Best effects are achieved with high poly count meshes for better defined visual effects. Whereas bump maps do not deform the mesh at all but promotes the illusion of bumps using height map information namely a grayscale bitmap in conjunction with the direction of the light. What usually determines which one to use depends on the closeness of the viewers POV. Since deformation usually require high poly counts this means it should be used sparingly to avoid long render times. Oftentimes objects in the distance would fair just as well with a bump map without the added cost of longer render times. But when youre in your face close to an object, no doubt the actual 3D deformation pays off in visual devidents. My 2 cents.

Quest, In some apps in may not be a permanent deformation though, which makes it no different to a bump map it's just dynamic application of a height field. (Truspace used to do it this way) If you actually wanted to make a mesh change you needed to apply a displacement map and then specifically make it a permanent mesh change. The displacement map modifier without making it permanent was identical to a bump map.

Just look at the profile of an object and you'll see which it is.

Gog, many packages have this feature, it doesn't matter if it's permanent or not, the outcome upon rendering is an actual deformation of the geometry of the mesh and not a mere visual illusion as provided by a bump map. This contouring of the mesh geometry, permanent or not, is better realized, and executed, on high poly count models for better visual impact and therefore comes at the cost of increased file size and render time. Therefore the artist/modeler must determined before hand whether its cost effective and worthwhile to use a deformation map (high poly count) or if he/she can get away using a bump map (low poly count) for the finale illusion. Yes Phantast, because the deformation map actually deforms and distorts the mesh geometry, the profile of such a mesh will be contoured to the map, whereas using a bump map will not alter the geometry and therefore would not produce a contoured profile.