the members @www.chaoticdimension.com say that poser and bryce isnt real 3d what do you think .i love them all

Just tell'em Happy Holidays, and let that old dog lie, lol. Merry Christmas. AgentSmith

Amen to that!

Tell 'em to get over it. Art is art, good is good, and bad is bad.

I don't know why they use 4 views, they must only use 3 views because the perspective view don't belongs to the 3d world and hasn't any coordenate axis associated.

kaweki, perspective is only really in 3d world. we usually call it binocular vision. ( two eyes ) the perspective view in a 3d application adds the depth that the ordinal views don't have. this is why there is no locked co-ordinate axis with perspective view. walk around a building, your perspective changes constantly. the co-ordinate axis of your view is constantly changing. what is really useless is applications with only 1 view. specially when that view has locked co-ordinate axis. poser isn't real 3d? not. it isn't real modelling. ( create a Vicky in poser, not possible ) poser is an home user animation tool. that is the target market for it. look at the "professional" animation tools. particle streams, collision detection, network rendering. dynamic materials, animation of both camera and character. poser has the last 2. hmm... maybe if they said it's not "professional 3d" they would be accurate. and it was never intended for professional use. the interface alone says that much. all the professional apps have small controls, not the metacreations big goopy buttons like bryce and poser. attached image is from one of the "professional" packages. look at the way the controls are kept completely out of the viewport, maximising usefullness of workspace. all controls are easily located.

I hate 3dsMax, the Poser interface is much better.

:-p and I hate the poser interface. ~l~ max, maya, rhino have very similar interfaces.

I hate 3dsMax, the Poser interface is much better. Max can also DO a lot more than Poser can. It is far more than just a renderer.

A new advertising slogan for Max: "More than just a renderer; It's the Second most expensive 3d toy out there" :) (I use Poser and Max, BTW. And vue and Bryce and Rhino)

"More than just a renderer; It's the Second most expensive 3d toy out there"

Which is exactly why I switched to Lightwave. Having not upgraded Max since 4.2 (I HATED all of the problems C-Dilla gave me), I took advantage of a deal that Newtek had, when I could get a full LW license for less than the Max upgrade.

Discreet seems to be the only player that hasn't lowered their prices. Instead, it keeps going up.

And, to keep on topic ... Poser does have a lot of cool features for its price, but I don't think it should have modeling capabilities. That would jack the price beyond what hobbyists would be willing to pay.

Message edited on: 12/25/2004 15:06

I'm still using Max 4 because i got the academic price on that and I'm not about to pay what a full license costs. If I had the money I'd buy lihghtwave.

I'm, quite frankly, really sick of this feud between what/who is a true 3-D program/artist. As Fugi has mentioned, I, too, have heard this at CGTalk. A great percentage of the members downtalk both Poser and Bryce, saying that using these programs is "cheating", and does not make anyone a true 3-D artist, because they are parametric model generation software. I'm sorry, but since when did a program decide on who is an artist or not? I had always believed that it was on HOW a medium was used that made an artist. You know, I can literally throw crap on an open-face paper bag and call it art, and someone may actually like it. I don't need to grab a brush and oils to be an artist. Composition, style, and the imagination. Does anywhere in that sentence say that Maya, paint brush, acrylic, toothpaste makes an artist?

I agree with that, but I think the issue here is whether or not Poser is "real 3D", not "real art". In my opinion, anything that allows you to change the position of a camera and be able to view an object from any direction IS a "real 3D" application. As to whether or not Poser is a "real 3D modeler" is another issue. In my opinion, it is not, because as someone mentioned above, you cannot create a figure from SCRATCH in Poser. ANY of these applications can create art.

Sorry, Arty. That subject just chafes my ass. I can get carried away. True. Poser isn't a three dimensional creation platform. If this is what the bigheads are referring about and to, then tell them they are correct and have them wipe their snivelling noses.

Ironically, the very thing that makes Poser so appealing is the very thing that users of higher end 3D applications criticize ... the ease of use, and tons of ready-made content. That is what makes it attractive to those who have never done 3D before. Most are happy to stay with that level of ease, but others choose to "graduate" to products that allow you to model yourself.

That's the whole point of me using Poser. I'd rather fork over $200 for one program than $100-1000 for every modelling session with an actual person for them to pose for me, photographically, and use that as my art perspective when I do my pieces. Eventually, I'll build up my expertise in ZBrush for creature creations. But for now, Poser is the way to go for what I want to do. There is just too much to do and understand in a 3D modeler that it takes away alot of time that I could have spent working on a piece in Poser.

The main reason I like poser, Vue and Bryce is that they do what I need to do, for a price I can afford to pay. If I had a high-paying job in 3d graphics then I'd consider Maya, but it's just too much to spend on a hobby.

You know..... I totaly amazes me that people have the audacity to say this is art and this is not. I don't like this interface, or that one. Well.....then don't use them!!! I do not look at how easy or hard a program is to use, I look at it for what it can do for me, as well as the price tag that is attached. Personaly I use Poser5 and Vue5. Why? Beacuse they do what I need and want. Does that make my work any less art, or 3D art? If you say yes, then you are a moron. Art is not a matter of grabbing a few preset models and slamming them into a scene. You have got to have composition. Anyone can jump into just about "any" 3D program and make something. Does that make it art..... Art is all subjective to the viewer. If I don't like something, I don't bitch about it, I just don't look at it. I am getting my degree in Graphic Design. My color theory prof is a locl artist. Personally I do not like any of his work, but does that take away from the fact that he is an artist? NO!! I use Photoshop. Why not Paintshop Pro, they both do similar things? I do not care for the design in PSP. So I use Photoshop. My point is.....if you don't like a program, then don't use it! I just wish those individuals who bark up the wrong tree about what is and is not art would just concentrate their efforts and energies into their own art. Or maybe they are not artists....???

I'm sure they are in whatever program they use. Discussion, not personal. Thanks. ;o) AS Mod

I have one complaint about all the apps mentioned here. they don't run on a decent os. LINUX!! get rid of this winders only crap. the "hobbyist" apps are suitable for thier purpose, the "professional" apps for theirs. all qualify as real 3d. renders from all qualify as art. quality of art is dependant on the skill of the person creating it. not really the application. for making a cg animation, in most apps, the library of models needs to be built. in all the scene needs to be setup. the animation needs to be setup the render needs to be done. these are where the skills / talent of the user are most critical.

What I learned is that anything that you try to make in 3D has 3 coordinate vertices... but it never actually prints to the screen in three dimensions. When you write the program, you have to have a "Screen Flattening" code that puts it into two dimensions so you can assign screen locations to everything. One of your variables has to be a "Viewpoint" location, and it is taken into account when you calculate each items screen location. It makes an imaginary "Sheet of paper" or "Screen" between the object and the viewpoint to calculate everything's two dimensional coordinates. This is the variable that will change as you circle an object. Not being able to move the viewpoint would not make an object less "3D".

So, like... Fugi... was your questioned answered? 21 replies and you sit in silence.
:)

Seems like a touchy subject, but I think the person who states "poser and bryce isnt real 3d" needs to explain what "real 3D" is before any of us really can answer the question. Half of us are explaining the geometries of the programs, and the other half have opinions on why we use it.

The Poser 5 interface is the most sucky UI I've ever seen in my life, but it's still 3D. It's just this old bullshit argument about programs people don't think are professional. I don't model people. If it weren't for Poser I wouldn't be able to put humans in my work. If it weren't for what I learned from several years of using Bryce, I would never have been able to move on to MAX or Maya. Are they full out 3D programs? No. You can't really model in them much. But they're definitely legit 3D programs.

"I HATED all of the problems C-Dilla gave me" Oh yeah. That C-Dilla file is worse than a freakin virus. I'm still using MAX 3. It does everything I want to do, so why change. Though I admit I'd love to try Lightwave, though I'd still be a hard core MAX user.