Quote - > Quote - While we're on the subject of technology, what about shader tree/map compatibility with poser?   For me this has been near the #1 reason why DS4 has trouble with existing Poser content created by 3rd parties (including some DAZ brokered artists.) Cheers!

-Kerwin

 

You are aware of this part in the Poser manual:

Technology or content provided in part by

Portions of the FireFly renderer and associated shading technologies ©2002 by Pixels Digital, Inc.

 

I guess in order to make DS compatible with the Poser shader tree DAZ would probably have to obtain a licence from PixelsDigital**.** IMHO that's like asking E-on to make Vue compatible with Bryce materials or vise versa**.
**

Why yes, I was aware, but that's because I've been around both Poser since V2 and DS since V1.   But as I said in another post, achieving good compatibility between renders is certainly within reach.  Pixel-for-pixel, identical rendering with identical is not likely possible for the reason you cite, every renderer is a little different (even between versions of the same program!)

But DAZ isn't coming close.  They're not mapping even the identical Renderman-like nodes between the programs.  So, no, DAZ does not need to license Pixels Digital's tech (unless they want to), but they could at least parameter map the brick shader with equivalent paramentes and to give a sort of minimal compatibility.

If you study the two shader systems, they are not that different.  In fact as PAs, we can move most mapped stuff (color, displacement, bump, etc.) between the products with relatively little tweaking.   But even for this, when DS4 reads the CR2, it decides to turn on a glossy node that makes everything look like plastic for many content files.

IMHO, it not too much to ask DAZ (which claims to read Poser files) at least map what is mostly compatible.  Sadly, IMHO they are not rising to that rather low bar, hence forcing many content providers to simply say "Not tested in DAZ studio."  With a little work, DAZ could get much better fidelity to existing Poser textures (virtually all the most common Renderman-like nodes are supported in both products) than they are doing.   Not asking for pixel-level perfection, but it seems that there is lack of emphasis on Poser compatibility.  The purely manual (and tedious) process of translating shader trees forces an increased reliance on high density bit-mapped textures to simplify delivering content.   This increases memory use and reduces usability of things like props where procedural textures tend to make more sense.

So, rather than a question, I'll give DAZ my 2 cents: Don't make it hard for Poser users to take their existing libraries in DS4.  Don't make it hard for Poser content developers to deliver DS usable content.

Hopefully that clarifies what I mean in terms of compatibility.

 -K