An UltraPoser would be nice, but who would buy it?

The casual user? Probably not, because it would cost too much.

The serious CG user? Probably not, because it's that whole "If I cant make it myself, it's not really CG!" mentality.

And that doesnt leave a whole lot in the middle. I grant you, it'd be great to have, but I doubt there's sufficient market to make it happen. And certainly not when the program is defined in the marketplace by a T&A mentality.

Not raining on your parade, but perhaps sprinkling on it a bit.

No, you're right.
Not likely to happen anytime soon, but with the way technology is going, and as more and more coders can easily write the difficult features, it wouldn't surprise me if Poser eventually just got there on its own.

Quote - Do I get the impression I'm the only one who would like to see a really advanced version of Poser?

I'd love for Poser to get some advanced features, particularly better rendering; however tens of thousands of people demand 100% backward compatibility with all their ancient content, and many who are fiercely loyal to Poser argue against any major change. 

>> however tens of thousands of people demand 100% backward compatibility with all their ancient content

"Ancient content"? That's rather cold, but let's look at that idea for a moment, huh?

I have hundreds of files built in Bryce 1 and 2 that I can no longer access because Bryce 6 -- or 5.5, for that matter -- cant read them. They're not great files, by any stretch, but frankly, the program hasnt changed so much that I understand why this should be. It's the same bunch of Bryce primitives, using the same procedurals. But they're no longer accessible -- that, combined with the trainwreck that was Bryce 6.1, has made me reconsider whether I want to continue using the program at all.

Some of that, sure, is because I've moved on to more complex modeling and rendering programs. I use FormZ exclusively at work and have become pretty gosh-darn good at it. But I can look at files made in the earliest FormZ files in our company's archives, which date back to version 3.1, from six years ago, and have absolutely no problem opening them. I can also, if I want, continue to save them in that earlier format, although I have no idea why I would. Still, the option exists.

IMHO, backward compatability is essential in maintaining your user base, especially one as fast-changing as this one. You never know from week to week what new "developments" will succeed, and which will be dropped off the map (not to mention the ones that should be dropped off the map, but thats another discussion for another time). Without backward compatability for all that "ancient content" you seem to deride, many users would find complete libraries worthless... and when you factor in that this aint exactly a cheap hobby, that would royally PO the user base, to the point where Poser's existence would be far more threatened than by some inevitable change of hands to a new owner.

But consider further: in a thread over at That Site That Shall Remain Nameless Lest I Start To Hurl, it graciously re-released an old character mesh for a centaur, one that dates back to P3... and some folks, myself included, are having a blast re-discovering it and re-interpreting it with all the new bells and whistles that just weren't around when it was first released. As a result, it's become almost like new again... something we might all want to remember as we rush to get the latest bright 'n' shiny (and slightly buggy) version of Vickie. It lets us re-discover skills that seem to be getting lost, as we become more and more dependent on merchants to provide to our every whim, even on the most basic things.

I'm not saying that the ancient content isnt risable, particularly in light of what we have today, but it still serves its purpose -- and you never know when it might come in handy yet again. I've actually noticed a small wave of renewed interest in Posette: folks are re-rigging her to correct some of the boning issues, and others are creating new textures that allow the mesh to really shine. Still others are tinkering with the P4Guy and accomplishing the same ends -- not because they feel the figure is superior in any way, but because it's fun. Not everything has to depend on the latest REM or ROM or INJ pose to make it enjoyable... nor should it ever be.

Quote - I have hundreds of files built in Bryce 1 and 2 that I can no longer access because Bryce 6 -- or 5.5, for that matter -- cant read them. (etc etc)

So, to spare you the personal inconvenience of having two versions installed - because the old versions still open your data right? - all development past a ten year old set of technology (Poser 4) must be avoided for everyone, whether they want it or not.  Right.

See, for any hopeful person looking for improved function from the Poser family, there will be somebody with five times as many paragraphs demanding that no progress be made.

>> So, to spare you the personal inconvenience of having two versions installed - because the old versions still open your data right? - all development past a ten year old set of technology (Poser 4) must be avoided for everyone, whether they want it or not.  Right.

Pardon me, but in your rush to embrace the future, you're missing the point.

Backwards compatability is essential to any program if it wants to maintain its user base. I can open files built in Photoshop 1 and still see them. I can open files built in Illustrator 88 (those are twenty years old, in case you're counting) and still work with them. I dont need an intermediate program to step from one to another.

I'm all for forward technology, but to write off the past just because you find it laughable and ancient is, IMHO, rather shortsighted on your part... particularly when you see what the "wonderful new developments!" have brought us.

(Two paragraphs and a bit, in case you needed the count.)

I have tons of other examples, but this should do....

The point is, being a torch wielding luddite is as wrong as being a bleeding edge technophile.
Giving up perfectly good content just to run after the latest greatest "Oh, shiney" because the big' ol' gods of capitalism (NEVER STAND STILL ! YOU MUST GROW !) and progress say so can be very hazardous.

The typical Poser user is not a semi-professional 8GB RAM Quad-Core Power user, but somebody with a machine three or more generations old and on fixed income.
Why do you think stuff above $20 doesn't sell in Poserland ?

Making all that content they spent thousands of $$$ on over the last ten years obsolete would be quite...unwise IMVHO.

It's the small people who fill the galleries with kitschy softcore renders that made Poser great, not the few "elite users" who have wet dreams about finally getting some "respect" from those "professional" Max/Maya guys.

I'm all for progress.
But I ignored P5 and P6 and kept working with P4 until something "really" better came along, and now I'm using P7 exclusively.
And I will ignore V4 completely and happily stick to Posette and Dork and all the now "obsolete" DAZ Unimeshes until I see some "real" progress made.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Creepy, innit?

It's also possible that Smith Micro just hasn't quite gotten around to merging Poser in with their other product lines yet......perhaps it's nothing more sinister than that.

Not sinister - creepy.

Meanwhile, their customer service wrote back saying my email addy was nowhere to be found. Now, to see if any spam shows up from them.

/P

Interesting that they'd write you back to tell you that they couldn't find your addy.  Now that is creepy.

Quote - I'm all for forward technology, but to write off the past just because you find it laughable and ancient is, IMHO, rather shortsighted on your part...

Thank you for rudely and effectively demonstrating exactly what I was saying.  And thanks to Joe also for showing very good examples of how poor Poser's renderer is, appreciate that too.

>> Thank you for rudely and effectively demonstrating exactly what I was saying.

Excuse me, missy, but kindly note that you were counting paragraphs, which is pretty well up there on the Rudeness Factor As An Argumentative Device. I will further remind you that it was you who described older Poser content as "ancient", not I. If you see your own words as rude, that's your problem, not mine. Now, if we can return to the subject at hand?

I gather you dont like Poser's rendering engine. You're not the first. But that has little, if any, impact on the age of the files: I can import them into just about any other software, using any one of a myriad rendering engines, and they still work. You probably dont like Poser's interface either; again, that should mean nothing in terms of the basic geometry and the application of textures.

So what exactly is it that you dont like about the older content? What, in your world view, is so disposable? The clunky meshes? The polygonally-formed eyebrows? The poor rigging? Again, no disagreement, but that has nothing to do with the technology itself. It's how all 3D models are made. So what, in specific, is your issue?

Quote - *...*I have hundreds of files built in Bryce 1 and 2 that I can no longer access because Bryce 6 -- or 5.5, for that matter -- cant read them.

You should be able to open from .br2, up to and including, current install version by using the file type pulldown menu in the 'open file' navigator.
I have opened some of my older Bryce files in 5.5 and 6.x already, for nostalgic purposes :)
I don't have B4 or earlier installed anymore.

Nothing from br2 seems to want to open, but I'll give it another shot. Thanks for the info, tho.

Love your sig line, BTW.

I've heard the Poser render engine maligned many times.  Can you be specific about what is wrong with it?  What are you trying to achieve that it can't produce?  Can the same effect be achieved through post work?  Below is a picture of the Freak with IBLs I did, would it look better if rendered in Vue for instance and how much better would it look.

Mike J, I don't have an objection to Poser having more advanced features--my point was mainly as other's have echoed what would be the target market and would they use it because it is a "Poser" product?  I guess many of us fear that a high end Poser would stop development of a version that we all could afford.  I really don't object at all, I just want to be able to afford the next upgrade when it comes.  I doubt, as I said previously, buy Poser Pro because I have no use for the additional compatibility modules--unless it has the Quidam module that was earlier promised (I can't afford Quidam, though I'd love it if they had a $100 version I could play with with an affordable Carrara exporter). 

Quote - Excuse me, missy, ...

We're done here, I think.  Have a nice day.

Trust me, I will.

Now... where did I put that M1 figure? :)

By the way Tomsde that's a really classy render, nice job.

Oo, Joe's a cranky monkey isn't he.  The mark of a real pro is to go post nasty comments in somebody's gallery, huh :)

Thanks for your valuable and informative feedback Joe, appreciate it.

Ah, it's so hard these days to find new users who are willing to respectfully listen to the knowledge more experienced artists have to share, so I'm glad my little advice will fall on fertile soil.

There is a lot more where that came from, so all you have to do is ask, and I'm sure I can find the time to take a look or two at your other works, too.

:biggrin:

Quote -
Interesting that they'd write you back to tell you that they couldn't find your addy.  Now that is creepy.

True - but no spam so far - so I officially dunno what to make of it.

--

Quote - Backwards compatability is essential to any program if it wants to maintain its user base. I can open files built in Photoshop 1 and still see them. I can open files built in Illustrator 88 (those are twenty years old, in case you're counting) and still work with them. I dont need an intermediate program to step from one to another.

...true to a point, but that's not always the case. For instance: I double-dog-dare you to run a typical Windows 3.1 app in Vista. ;)

Sometimes, you just have to cut the cord, you know?

Insofar as Poser? Poser 3 files still work just fine in 7. D|S files did have a ton of breakage during the open beta, but w/ 2.0 (on the mac), I can open stuff made all the way back to 1.4 (and some 1.2 files).

Old mesh? Use it - knock yourself out. Push the crap out of it. New mesh? I love it too, if it's built right. V4 and Apollo can do things in movement that were impossible with V3, V2, V1, Dork, Posette...

Use what you like, and stop whining in either direction, eh?

/P

Thanks Joe, and whenever you get stuck on something really hard like editing a text file or rendering decent shadows, ask for my help sooner.

"Thanks Joe, and whenever you get stuck on something really hard like editing a text file or rendering decent shadows, ask for my help sooner."

Of course I will.
And I'm happy to say that your nice offer just earned you some more of my helpfull advice.

:biggrin:

I encourage you to go through my entire gallery, that's what it's there for.

"Ah, it's so hard these days to find new users who are willing to respectfully listen to the knowledge more experienced artists have to share, so I'm glad my little advice will fall on fertile soil."

So Joe, since you're such an experienced and knowledgeable artist, how about showing everyone some of your work? No one has seen any evidence that you are an experienced and knowledgeable artist, although you seem to be very good at trolling pjz99's gallery.

Coldrake

>> ...true to a point, but that's not always the case. For instance: I double-dog-dare you to run a typical Windows 3.1 app in Vista. ;)

But we're not talking about operating systems, Tom. We're talking about changes within a specific program's development. Illustrator 88 may have been built when System 6 was being used on the Mac, but I can still open those Illustrator 3 files within Illustrator CS under OSX 5.

And I note our friend here still hasnt said what it is about the older content that restrains her so. I"m starting to think her issues lay elsewhere, but she hasnt quite figured that out yet.

Attached Link: http://www.mohvisuals.com

Just kidding and your exactly right. I think you need to understand that Poser users are somewhat complacent and it's more of a hobby tool. I think there is really very few of us who need it for production purposes. Most users seem to plain ignore the things like a logical interface, cloths that conform improperly, etc.

People have fun with Poser and thats cool, but don't sell me a buggy tool like Poser 7 or a completely bug infested plug-in like Poser Fusion as a professional tool.

Quote - Every year or os now poser seems to change or get bought by some other company.
Poser as evolved somewhat but basically remains the same...

Since version 5 it has acquired more features, but to me some of those are completely worthless,

I was wondering what would make a real difference in upcoming versions of poser, something that would make it a must buy!

The render engine has practically not much evolve since the intro of firefly which is sad. Poser could also have the following in my humble opinion.

A real cartoon render engine. the one it has is just awfull.

Poser should be modular with plugins like 3ds max or lightwave, that way you buy just what you need and it does not become an overbloated app.

Poser should have its own inside graphic editor, meaning that when you have to change a texture in the material room i would be able to do so without going to a grpahic editor program, I would see the change in real time just like in zbrush when i paint on the figure. It would be a tremendous time saver....

Get rid of some of those poser room. somehow i find most of the poser room useless...i only use the pose and material room.

The other rooms are not worth my time because they are very limited in what they do and there is way to much tweaking involved in those rooms to get any proper results for my liking...

I think that poser shoudl be rewritten from the ground up to make it more compatible to other 3d apps so that it caan be taken seriously...

Imagine a new version of poser wherein you can add plugins from lightwave or 3dsmax or maya...

The companies are trying to do that now  but with each new release the chnages are so minimal that i don't even think that it is worth the effort to invest in upgrading because the worlkflow speed is not really improved...

If poser would speed my workflow i would gladly welcome any new versions...that is why 3ds max, lightwave and maya suceed, the base program is made to allow add-ons to speed up or ease work...

I think that is the reason why poser can eveolve so little at a time, the base programming that was used for poser is very limiting and hard to implement features that is why i am lamenting that poser should be rewritten from the ground up...

The figures are evolving faster than poser which is good...

Poser as so much to offer but the companies who have had the ability to make poser something special have failed to make this app a truly trail blazing app...

....

I hear this a lot -- "Poser 7 is buggy!!!". Well, hate to spoil everyone's fun with that one, but I've found it to be the most stable version since P4. Granted, I run on a Mac, which seems to have less issues about drivers, but I've only seen it crash a very few times in the last year that I've been using it.

Insofar as the rest of the list, I'll say the same thing I said to MikeJ on the preceding page: anyone want to actually pay for all this wonderful stuff? It wont come cheap, guys, and we already moan and complain when a store item is more than twenty bucks. Imagine the outrage if our little proggie suddenly shoots up to six hundred, maybe a thousand bucks, just to accommodate a bunch of arcane features that only a few users would avail?

You want all these features? It's probable that Poser just isnt the right program for you any more. Perhaps it's time you look at it the same way I see Bryce: something I enjoyed very much, but now I've moved on to more advanced programs with more features. Face it: not everything can be Lightwave or Maya... nor should it be. And perhaps Poser is just like the train set you used to play with as a kid and now sits in a dusty box in the closet.

Quote - >> ...true to a point, but that's not always the case. For instance: I double-dog-dare you to run a typical Windows 3.1 app in Vista. ;)

But we're not talking about operating systems, Tom.

Software is software is software. Windows, DAZ Studio, Linux, Poser... they all share many things in common: They're written in C and/or C++, they all had to be compiled, and they all sit on a hard disk as bits and bytes.

An app on an OS is conceptually no different than a file on an app, and backwards compatibility is a bugaboo that plagues them all.

Going even further, changes in an OS sometimes changes the app, which in turn changes the app's behavior with regards to the files it generates and loads.

Quote - We're talking about changes within a specific program's development. Illustrator 88 may have been built when System 6 was being used on the Mac, but I can still open those Illustrator 3 files within Illustrator CS under OSX 5.

This is because Apple went out of their way to insure as much backwards compatibility as possible under their circumstances (hence "Classic", Carbon Libraries, etc), and Adobe went out of their way to do the same with their apps. Not everyone has that luxury.

...and, OSX (or any operating system) is merely a collection of files, and in UNIX (which OSX is) everything (be it an app or a device) is literally just a file as far as the environment is concerned.

Quote - And I note our friend here still hasnt said what it is about the older content that restrains her so. I"m starting to think her issues lay elsewhere, but she hasnt quite figured that out yet.

"Her" name is Paul, a.k.a. The Prince of Lies.  Clealy*, Sir, you don't know him so well. :)

/P

(*typo intentional - he'll know why).

Anyway, although I did for a time use Poser a lot in commercial work, in my personal work I actually used it for its orginal purpose, as the base for work in conventional media. I could work out composition, color and foreshortening as well as sometimes more subtle stuff like expression and gaze. When my health was at its worst and my motor difficulties made drawing difficult I began to use it for final art works to keep my commercial work going.

This is the issue: Poser is a toy... in a good way.

It is not a professional tool. It is a play thing. Using it for commercial work was like using a Holga for photography. I think Joe is right in that Poser can be best appreciated and most enjoyed understanding it as a "machine" for making kitsch. Again, in a good way.

It was intended to help people with drawing deficits make drawings but developed to the point that people with poor drawing skills can use it to make complete and satisfying art. It is a modern and terribly sophisticated new folk art media... it goes far beyond paint-by-number and 'recipe' painting in permitting average people to enjoy making art. That is certainly nothing to be ashamed of... it is a real achievement.

I gotta run without re-reading this post so hopefully it is not too idiotic...

>> This is because Apple went out of their way to insure as much backwards compatibility as possible under their circumstances (hence "Classic", Carbon Libraries, etc), and Adobe went out of their way to do the same with their apps. Not everyone has that luxury.

Uh, no. That's not how an Illustrator or a Photoshop file works, so your explanation is essentially useless, not to mention incorrect.

If one wanted a real comparison here, I'd point at something like GameMaker, a cute little program used to create card-based, point-and-click games, sort of like low-rent Myst. But it doesnt run on any OS beyond 8.

But the Illustrator system of vector points has not changed in over twenty years, which is why things built in 88 can still be viewed in CS2. The basic mechanics are the same. The bells and whistles that have been added since -- gradients, transparencies, and so on -- have all built on the basics established when Illustrator was first starting out, which is why those basics can still be read today. Apple's creation of Classic has nothing to do with it, nor do Carbon libraries, nor has any especially strenuous work on the part of Adobe. If anything, Adobe was sharp enough to realize that not everyone could afford to the latest version of their overpriced products: backwards compatability was a business necessity, just as it is in Poser.

Should you still find this doubtful, we just upgraded our offices machines to CS3, and for a laugh, I opened an 88 file. Still works. CS3 and OSX5 dont support Classic, remember?

And the same would hold true of supposedly "ancient" Poser materials. It's a geometry mesh just like every mathematically contsructed geometry mesh since 3D hit home PCs. A texture map is a texture map. A joint parameter is a joint parameter. While the program has built on these, the same basics apply equally to the P3girl and the latest wahoo version of Vicky: the latter is simply more complicated in its execution, but the core essentials are the same.

So stop whining about operating systems, especially Vista. :)

Quote - Oo, Joe's a cranky monkey isn't he.  The mark of a real pro is to go post nasty comments in somebody's gallery, huh :)

Thanks for your valuable and informative feedback Joe, appreciate it.

Interesting.
He actually went and posted a bunch of V4 criticisms on your first 5 gallery images. I guess he got bored after that.
There's something to be said about someone so seemingly obsessed with hating a 3D mesh as to go so far out of one's way... but I don't know if I ought to say it here. ;-)

I don't think he hates the mesh so much as the magnets! I certainly wish I could have a go at Phantom3D's re-rigged V4.

Hey, if I was afraid of a little negative criticism (intelligently delivered or no) I wouldn't post my work in a public gallery.

Quote - >> This is because Apple went out of their way to insure as much backwards compatibility as possible under their circumstances (hence "Classic", Carbon Libraries, etc), and Adobe went out of their way to do the same with their apps. Not everyone has that luxury.

Uh, no. That's not how an Illustrator or a Photoshop file works, so your explanation is essentially useless, not to mention incorrect.

Oooookay....

Here' let me boil down what I'm getting at. Just as much as an OS won't understand an app that contains calls for now-missing APIs, a data file can easily contain calls for now-missing functions within the app trying to open it. Replace "now missing" with "repurposed", and you've covered 90%+ of all eventualities when it comes to losing backwards compatibility.

Quote - But the Illustrator system of vector points has not changed in over twenty years, which is why things built in 88 can still be viewed in CS2.

Because, quite simply, a list of vectors are pretty freakin' easy to carry forward. Now if you're trying to carry forward a bit of data that relies on an algorithm that no longer exists in the new version?

I know, I know - you're going to say "well they should just keep it!", but it ain't that easy. One reason it could disappear is because of security reasons. Another is because that algorithm is no longer supported by the current operating systems. Another still is the desire to reduce bloat.

If programmers followed your advice, you get (drum roll please...) Windows Vista - something that desires so much backwards compatibility that it often eats (on average) 600+ MB of RAM just to run itself.

Quote - backwards compatability was a business necessity, just as it is in Poser.

Sure it is - but how often do you have to open a Poser 1 file?

/P

Quote -
Sure it is - but how often do you have to open a Poser 1 file?

Dammit Pengy, if somebody wants to open a Poser 1 file they should be able to do it anytime, any version, even fifty years from now with RetroTekk's Pozer 37.5, SP 2.1.1

Just like I should be able to download  Kodacolor pictures of my grandma's wedding to my PC, which I can't, thank you very much, without first digitizing them into a modern format.

See, it's people like you, thinking those negative thoughts holding us all back.
Damn software people!  Y'all think you run the world or something, always with the "you can't do this" or the "you can't do that" mentality.

One day Pengy, one day, you'll all see the effects of your collective miscalculations, and there will be hell to pay for your lack of forethought and your vile attempts to intentionally limit us to the present.

Maybe, maybe not. Probably not. But I'd watch my back if I were you, anyway.
Harumph.
;-)

Photoshop cannot open my drawings that I did with papyrus and squid ink.  Incompatibility FTL.  Why do programmers have to go and change stuff, they make the users so mad! 

Pen and Ink Pro 2.4 (PIP2, SP4) can't even edit it's own work, let alone anything made w/ previous versions. You have to buy an additional 'Whiteout' module, and even that never really seems to do an entirely suitable job of it.
Magic Marker does OK (unless you have the Permanency plug in installed); but that's limited to certain types of surfaces, of course.
Pencil 3.2, w/ Eraser 2.1 add-on installed, however, can still edit work that was done w/ Pencil 1. I do hear that even good old Pencil has some trouble with the Colors Pack.

>> Because, quite simply, a list of vectors are pretty freakin' easy to carry forward.

Well, duh, Tom: that's the point. The backwards compatability is there because the essentials have not changed. Adobe figured that out; why havent you?

And as was pointed out, maybe -- for whatever reason -- I want to open a P1 file. Maybe for a laugh, maybe for nostaligia, maybe because it simply pleases me to do so. As I noted earlier, over at DAZ, there's a couple of threads with people having a grand old time with the "ancient" P3 centaur, taking that old model and sprucing it up. If we didnt have this awful, terrible "backwards compatability"... why, those folks would just be laughed right out of Dodge. But , see, funny thing is, so far, no one's given any kind of solid reason to completely rewrite the geometry-based system we've used quite well, all across the myriad forms of 3D software, for a decade now. It's one of those things like vectors that just seems to work rather well, for whatever reason. Now, having said that, if you - or MikeJ, who wants to burden Poser with a bunch of tools that would put the price point outside the range of 90+% of the users, or even the dazzling pjz99, who has decided to grace us with her presence yet again -- wish to rewrite the system from the ground up, be my guest. But dont expect a rush of folks to follow you, because somehow I doubt the market will. Sad thing for you three is, that's just not the usual Poser user. And maybe it is time for you three to move on to a higher, more elevated, more sanguine piece of software so you wont feel burdened by the limitations of this sad, restraining little software that forces you to use tools like, like... well, I dont know what exactly, but it has to be something. Otherwise you guys wouldnt be whining so much about it. Just my guess, you understand.

Yes, someday, the market will change, and we'll build 3D models on some other form. Perhaps, lucky us, you three'll be the ones to design it. But right now, with the system in place that works for everyone from Maya down to Blender, I dont exactly see a trend out there that's capable of surpassing it. Bryce tried, with a proprietary geometry system, and look what happened there: they had to cave and put in an export function that allowed users to move items created in Bryce to any other 3D program that reads obj files. That's not negativity, by the way, just simple facts. You want to improve on the system? Go for it, buds. Best of luck to ya. I look forward to seeing your contributions to this in an article in the New York Times.

And as for you, missy: you still havent said what it is about the "ancient" content you find so confining. If you have a specific issue with Poser content from the days before you made your centre-door fancy entrance into this little community, please share, for the benefit of our television audience... but at least try to make them specific, something you've carefully avoided since raising the issue in the first place. Or, to put it more succinctly, put up or shut up.

That's five words, in case you're still counting. :-)

Quote - >> Because, quite simply, a list of vectors are pretty freakin' easy to carry forward.

Well, duh, Tom: that's the point. The backwards compatability is there because the essentials have not changed. Adobe figured that out; why havent you?

You missed a bit, but I'll fix it for you: the essentials have not changed in that particular context.

I'll be honest, Sean: You're in way over your head if you think you're going to argue that all programs should have backwards compatibility as its prime objective, to the exclusion of all other objectives.

Why? Well, I'll point a few bits:

• Moore's Law is not eternal, and as the likes of Microsoft and Adobe are rapidly finding out, it won't bail them out when their next edition of bloatware issues forth. (I forgot to mention that Adobe has quite a reputation for writing bloatware - see also Acrobat (and Reader), FrameMaker...).

• You wanna open a P1 file? Then install Poser 1 or 2, either on your current machine (if the OS can run it), or in a virtual machine (VMWare and Xen both make free --as in $0.00-- virtual servers that you can park on your computer, and the VMWare one is drop-easy to use).

IOW: Don't expect the rest of us to continue to party like it's 1999, please.

Quote - As I noted earlier, over at DAZ, there's a couple of threads with people having a grand old time with the "ancient" P3 centaur, taking that old model and sprucing it up. If we didnt have this awful, terrible "backwards compatability"... why, those folks would just be laughed right out of Dodge.

...so what's stopping you from installing/keeping a version of Poser that allows that, or at least using that version to 'carry the flame' and convert your old goodies into goodies that work in newer versions?

Now here's the real funny part - I use "old" crap every day. /bin/bash has worked just fine and essentially unchanged since the days when Poser itself was just a dream. I also have no kick against elegant software that performs useful function no matter how old it may be. But then, I primarily use an environment that encourages elegant and un-killable software that Just Works - it's called Linux. OSX has that concept (on occasion) too.

Even funnier - I'm only providing (explained as layman-like as possible) the technical reasons why backwards compatibility is not always possible for an app. Argue against them all you like, but I do this stuff for a living, and I gotta tell you: General Ludd isn't exactly a benevolent or intelligent leader for you to be following, y'know?

Quote - But , see, funny thing is, so far, no one's given any kind of solid reason to completely rewrite the geometry-based system we've used quite well, all across the myriad forms of 3D software, for a decade now. It's one of those things like vectors that just seems to work rather well, for whatever reason.

That's great for vectors. Now tell me why we should continue to have to push polycounts through the stratosphere just to get a figure to bend halfway decently, when there are newer and more useful figure-building means out there that can cut those down by orders of magnitude. Then maybe you can tell us why our only current choices for clothing involve conformers (which are time-consuming to build, morph, and rig correctly), or dynamics (which require a ton of patience while my CPUs go on an ADHD episode just to calculate how it should hang a bit of cloth).

I'd also like to see someone push Poser-weight geometries off of the CPU and onto the GPU, which --if it can be done-- can push render times to only a fraction of what we deal with now. This would likely require a lot of re-thinking about how the data is presented to the app.

While yes, you have a grand old time using what's there, I'm willing to bet cash money that animators would happily kill an infant to implement even one of the bits that I just mentioned. The reason is simple - while you're dealing with only one frame to post-work, animators would have to do that at least 24 times over for just one second of footage.

Quote - Now, having said that, if you - or MikeJ, who wants to burden Poser with a bunch of tools that would put the price point outside the range of 90+% of the users...

You (IMHO rather ignorantly) assume that this is all an either/or proposition. The existence of a high-end Poser-like tool does not preclude the existence of a standard Poser-like tool. Carrara didn't wipe out DAZ|Studio, and the presence of Microsoft SQL Server didn't destroy MS Access.

Quote - Sad thing for you three is, that's just not the usual Poser user. And maybe it is time for you three to move on to a higher, more elevated, more sanguine piece of software so you wont feel burdened by the limitations of this sad, restraining little software that forces you to use tools like, like... well, I dont know what exactly, but it has to be something.

Over in DAZ-land, this is already happening - folks can start out w/ D|S, and when they want something higher-up, they can move to Carrara, then Carrara Pro. Then they can start getting tools that can export to FBX, and push the results of that into 3DS/LW/Maya-land.

Meanwhile, Poser is... err, Poser. Without export tools, it's pretty much stuck where it is. Maybe it is time for the Poser code-jockeys to start thinking about a continuum of elevation, where an entry-level Poser tool can smoothly take a user to higher levels.

/P

the essentials have not changed **in that particular context.

**And? You're complicating something pretty straightforward, like a geek usually would.

Subsurface division a la the new dragon isnt changing the essentials, Tom, just like a wheel hasnt changed in, oh, several thousand years or a lever is still the basic of mechanics.

Build on the essentials all you want. No one's stopping you. Put in all the bells and whistles your little geek head wishes... but you're still gonna be hard-pressed to change the basic mathematics at work here. I dont care what program you ramp up to: a polygon is a polygon is a polygon. An obj is still an obj is still an obj.

>> Over in DAZ-land, this is already happening - folks can start out w/ D|S, and when they want something higher-up, they can move to Carrara, then Carrara Pro. Then they can start getting tools that can export to FBX, and push the results of that into 3DS/LW/Maya-land. Meanwhile, Poser is... err, Poser.

Exactly. So why are you so clearly wasting your time here when you could -- and probably should -- be there?** For that matter, go join the gear-heads at CGTalk and wail at anyone who'l listen there about how awful Poser is, how limiting, how so low on the scoreboard when it comes to real CG work. Frankly, Scarlett, I dont give a damn, because while you're moaning about how terrible it is that I can actually use all this stuff that dates back a decade, I'll be having fun... I'll be building my little illustrations and posting them on my website and enjoying every damn second of it while I do... and that's all that matters, pumpkin. If I want to move on to higher-end proggies, I can do that anytime I clock in at work. Hell, I can do it at home with my own copy of Carrara and my own copy of Maya, now that you mention it. If I want to play, I'll open Poser. Deal with it.

Unless, of course, you just like to whine about something you know you cant change. You know, like T&A in the galleries, as you're always so quick to feel you need to remind me. :)

But hey, whatever rocks your boat, bud.

Quote - >> the essentials have not changed **in that particular context.

**And? You're complicating something pretty straightforward, like a geek usually would.

Huh? So who said anything about needing to cast out vectors?

Quote - Subsurface division a la the new dragon isnt changing the essentials, Tom, just like a wheel hasnt changed in, oh, several thousand years or a lever is still the basic of mechanics.

So the next time I get new tires on the car, you're asserting that four chariot wheels will work just fine instead of Goodyear or Firestone?

Sean - are you even sure what you're arguing for anymore?

Quote - >> Over in DAZ-land, this is already happening - folks can start out w/ D|S, and when they want something higher-up, they can move to Carrara, then Carrara Pro. Then they can start getting tools that can export to FBX, and push the results of that into 3DS/LW/Maya-land. Meanwhile, Poser is... err, Poser.

Exactly. So why are you so clearly wasting your time here when you could -- and probably should -- be there?**

Again with the stupid either/or mentality... You do know that the concept of Yin and Yang weren't meant to be demarcations, but rather extremes of a continuum, right?

Here - let me repeat the crux of what I'm saying:

Maybe it is time for the Poser code-jockeys to start thinking about a continuum of elevation, where an entry-level Poser tool can smoothly take a user to higher levels.

/P

Maybe it is time for the Poser code-jockeys to start thinking about a continuum of elevation, where an entry-level Poser tool can smoothly take a user to higher levels. <<<

Agreed, and there is no reason why it can't happen. If other apps (DAZ Studio, Carrara, Cinema 4D and InterPoser Pro, and others) can import native Poser content while also leaving it open to use other methods, it proves that it can be done. A change to a different way of doing things in Poser can't happen abruptly (there's too much legacy content out there). But that doesn't necessarily mean that it shouldn't happen.

Backward compatibility is a good thing to a point.  Going back to Poser 4, things were a lot simpler. But in Poser 5 and beyond we see a more advanced renderer, more advanced materials, dynamic clothing, dynamic hair, and so many other things that put a higher burden on the CPU and other resources. It's getting more and more difficult for animators to use it as a viable tool because the rendering times make it impractical.

Yes, Poser IS a lot of fun, and it DOES have a lot of hobby and casual users. But there are also a lot of users that would like to see it do more, or do it faster and better. A gradual movement toward that would be a good thing - and it can be done in a way that would benefit the entire user base in the long run.*

Only thing with that thinking, Deecy, is those other programs DON'T open poser content properly.. and DS still doesn't handle even legacy poser content properly.

Try some advanced stuff like advanced erc codeing, or scaling, and DS chokes. And new features and developement can break older code, and older content. Look at the changes just in displcament in poser, 5,6,7 and no DS.. the settings can't be used the same in each, and you can't even use a 16 bit tif file in anything older then P7.

And for everything that breaks, there's a huge amount of developement hours trying to figure out in millions of lines of coe, how to restore old compatibility.. man hours that COULD be spent giving us a better rigging system, a better renderer, more renderer features, ect.

I'm all for legacy content support up to a point.. at some point in time, it become a loose-loose situation to spend hours upon hours trying to keep older things working.

I can't load my old Fun with Art files into any current graphic program, and I can't use my old deluxe animation movies into any known current animation program. That's why I have my old system still, if I want to tinker or play those old freinds.

All the major 3d graphic application DO have incompatibility with very old formats, because it wasn;t worth investing developement dollars to try to retain that legacy content,which in many cases, looks like hell compared to what's available today.

Sooner or later, poser will run into that same issue, and a lot of really older legacy content will be lost.. but odds are the majority of the poser users won't even notice it anyway.

Peopel can complain about it all the want, and grasp at their old content as much as they want, but it WILL happen sooner or later.

My guess would be sometime around Poser 9, so we still have a few years with all the older content working in some fashion.

Yup, I hear ya Gareee ... completely understood. 8-)

Actually now that I think of it, I should hook my old atari and amiga up, and digitize those old works.. but at this point, I don't know if I even WANT them in my portfolio.. they look like ass compared to what we can do today.

4/3/08

I know all of this is obvious, but also bears on the actual topic of this thread.

Computers will change at a fairly steady rate, as they have for decades. Computers will get faster, and offer more resource density (RAM, hard disk space, 128 bit bytes, etc.). Peripherals will need to change to keep up with new standards, and benefit from the increased power.

For any one casting a nostalgic eye to the past, do you really want to return to programming computers with spaghetti wire and AND/OR/NAND/NOR/XOR gates?  A program to do simple math functions could fill an entire room and would have been devilishly hard to download over the Internet. Who would like to enter data using keypunch cards, and get all output on paper instead of computer monitors?

Operating systems will change to take advantage of the extra resources (and as they have for decades waste much if not most of the increased resources of the hardware). Extra and often unwanted features will be added to disguise the fact that the OS is hogging too much of the computer's power. The user will be left to weed out the junk to produce a leaner installation so that the computer will actually function better than previous generations of computers.

It took me years to give up DOS, and I have resisted every new MS operating system. But, I would not go back. I still run a W95 music notation program that is better than the bloated slow klugey EXPENSIVE programs on the market today. Virtual machines will let me use it for a few more years. I will not, however, tie my new computer to DOS or even W95.

Applications will change to accommodate the changes in hardware and operating systems. When added assets are offered, there has always been a tendency to bloat applications with inefficient or sloppy code, and added features. Some of the change, however, will actually be progress, and the user will be able to do more with the updated software or new applications.

As applications evolve, and new applications are introduced, content will also evolve. New standards will develop, and old standards will fall into disuse. The content of market front-runners will have a large influence on how data will be formatted and stored, and how it will be shared to assure compatibility.

At some point old standards, formats, and interfaces will have to be abandoned so that hardware, operating systems, and applications can advance. Some of the older conventions will survive longer than others. Some people will mourn the loss of the old way of doings things, and some will thankfully leave the past behind. If that big asteroid doesn't find us (or some other disaster), all of this will inevitably happen.

Legacy standards hold back advances, and greatly increase the cost of hardware and software. Legacy does have its place, but sometimes its place is in a museum. I look to the past fondly, but I look to the future with anticipation of wonders (and yes, frustrations too) yet to explore.

The Greeks said, "panta rhei," that is "everything changes." Change will occur. If we know that both Poser, and the figures used in Poser WILL change, then we are empowered to decide how they will change. We can avoid the chaos of just letting change happen without planning or direction. Using the very human capacity to look into the past and imagine the future, we can choose changes that have greater benefits for the various different uses of Poser.

A discussion along the lines of what makes sense to leave behind, what should be to left the same (for now), what would be best to develop or change, and what makes sense to add could be very useful. We should probably remember that presently the big changes in hardware and software are multiple processors/cores, and 64 bit processors/peripherals/OSes/drivers/applications. Present systems and software seem to be riding this wave from behind rather than at its leading edge. So, Poser and many other applications seem to be playing catch-up at this point.
 
LMK