Quote - ---I dont really know what I can say. Software advances and requires more and more powerful computers to run it.  It really isnt that we dont want you as a customer or want to write you off... but this isnt a situation that is unique to us. Backward compatibility of Operating systems are a good example. when Lion came out earlier this year it discontinued a lot of compatibility... even for those with perfectly capable computers. I wish all software could work forever on every machine but that wont happen, the cost to maintain that infrastructure would be enormously prohibitive. if we stopped making use of advancing technology to enable lesser host machines, not only would that be illogical, but we would likely be branded as out of date or told to get with the times. There would be just as many angry from the other side. We want you as a customer, but the minimum requirements arent personal, they just are what they are.

...I guess that leaves me out then, as since I have a notebook, it means getting a completely new system. 

As I have tried to explain, maybe not clearly as I am very frustrated and discouraged right now, is that if the memory leak and bloating issues were addressed and fixed in one of the previous editions of the application, there would already be a version which would be reasonably stable and still work on older systems. This didn't happen.  It was "tolerable" to an extent with the early versions of Studio as they were offered for free.  However, when the Advanced version of Studio3 came out, it became a sticking point because people such as myself paid for what is essentially now a broken product.

DanaTA has the right idea (thank you) and I think development should actively pursue this.

It's hard to remain a customer when there is little in the store to buy anymore.

Quote - I'm personally skeptical that any open discussion can take place with DAZ using the internet forum medium.  (Disclaimer: I have had substantive discusions with Rand and Dan by email.)

---We are here... this is a discussion... BELIEVE, Kerwin! :D

So a few questions for Rand and Dan to think about:

• How can DAZ hope to recapture the goodwill of the Poser customer base through an uncontrolled policy of censorship and bans on their own forums?   This is where the discussion should have been taking place.  Why come here to a third parties forums when you're unwilling to discuss the issues in your own house, so to speak?   When will you revamp your forum policies so that you can get feedback from all your customer base?

---Forums are a tricky business. I am here because i sensed a need to be here. I am not neglecting our own forum.

Even with as much goodwill as I have to the customer base, I am in full support of banning and censoring. Some people just cant be reasoned with and insist on ranting, bullying and generally making things unpleasant for everyone. Those people get banned. Just for the sake of being candid... I will mention that nobody promised unrestricted free speech on the forums. It is not a right. You may use the forums only as long as you follow our Terms of Service. We have indisputably had situations where the banning and censoring was overzealous and unfair... and we are working on a new strategy that will hopefully improve the environment there. My position on this is that we need to state plainly in black and white with big letters what the rules are,  stick to them... and apply them fairly... end of story.  In my opinion, there really is no more complex plan needed than that.

• As a former DAZ PA, I felt strongly pressured by DAZ to stop work on V4/M4 series products and focus all my efforts on DS4 & Genesis.   Since DAZ as a Broker is always at the concent of DAZ to accept a product, this is clearly attempting to drive PAs in a specific direction.   Shouldn't DAZ just be clear about this?
• DAZ's PA process and how it selects what to broker is fundamentally opaque.   There seems to be no written criteria as to what DAZ wants from PAs and has to be obtained purely from folklore and statements by PA team managers in a non-public forum.   Shouldn't DAZ make clear what they want to broker, for what tehcnologies, in a public way?   

---I will not speak to PA issues or any other topics that are based in how we run the store here on Renderosity's forum... 

• Why was Poser compatibility such a low priority in the Genesis release cycle?   Should DAZ have made that an up front need?   Much of the angst now felt by customers and PAs alike is that the compatibility appears (I am not saying it is, but appears) to be of a low priority.

---Appearances evidently CAN be deceiving, because this has been a very high priority. But really... does Coke try to work with Pepsi to create a new flavor together? We are businesses... COMPETING BUSINESSES. Nobody should have had any expectation that we would do anything other than compete. Having said that... Against all Laws of nature, DAZ 3D and the guys at SM (who are great guys)  have reached out to communicate and work together.  As I have stated earlier in this forum We talked with Smith Micro about Genesis over a Year before DS4 was released and have steadily tried to get them to Join us in the Effort to push this new technology. They have been very cooperative, They do not have to work with us and could have told us to pound sand, but they have been very cool and I think its safe to say that everyone wants full compatibility.  

• Why has the necessary documentation and SDKs been so absense, that third parties have been somewhat disabled from filling the gap?   (I applaud D3D's work at moving morphs, at least one way, into DS4.)   A major discouragement is that the DSF format is poorly documented and is not, at least as of today, likely to be fully stable.   This disables thrid parties from improving Genesis to Poser (and vice-versa).  Should DAZ put a much higher priority on documentation and format stability to reduce the risks for 3rd parties. 

---We have been bad at Documentation. This is a known issue. The fact that 3rd parties CAN create for our software is a BONUS, not the intent of our efforts. We want to accomodate developers and want to assist in all the ways we can. but those efforts are secondary to our own developmental priorities. The fact is that there are many developers, Dimension 3D included, that had little trouble getting stuff done. He is a real Pro. Paolo is another. We have gone out of our way on many occasions to work one-on-one well above and beyond normal customer service to assist Plug-In Developers as well. DAZ is putting great priority on Docs and format stability... but not to reduce risk for third parties... that is yummy icing.

• DAZ and its followers frequently excoriate (always wanted to use that word in a post) SM for not adopting DAZ technologies.   Has DAZ adopted capsule zones and dependent parameters in DS4?  PMDs?  Can you please show us your roadmap to make DS4 more compatible with existent poser technologies.

---We have not, to my knowledge, had anthing NEAR the request for those things as we have had to bring Genesis to Poser. Having said that. I do not know if those who are communicating have talked about Poser tech in Studio... they may well have.  We also do not excoriate Smith Micro. Our users may... but they are not under our control.

• 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.)

---The Shader systems are not compatible because they are different on a fundamental level. The only solution would be to completely convert everyone to one or the other, which is extremely unlikely... or to have two side by side systems... even more unlikely.  We are at a dead end on that one. The disclaimer I am making on this is that this is how i recall it being explained to me by Rob. Human Error may be a factor in my relation of it.

• When will DAZ support preview of realistic light fall-offs in DS4?   How about preview of those falloffs?   The dependency on plugins for lighting features is a productivity killer.

---Viewport improvements including this one have been planned and are on the very long list of things we would like to do, but we are not in a phase where we will be adding new features for a while until we get some other things done.

I'm not saying these things to be mean to DAZ.   I wish DAZ well and continue to by content from DAZ almost every week, but my own journey as longtime customer of DAZ, becoming a PA, and then becoming an ex-PA have made me keenly sensitive to the business and technical issues raised above.   DAZ has asked to command a premium price for its content, and to win my business it needs to start acting like a premium business.

 

Cheers!

-Kerwin

 

[Wow!  Nearly 20 posts at Renderosity in 12 years!   I'm becomming dangerously outspoken! :) ]

 

edited by Bantha

Quote - Randall,

What improvements does the Poser SR bring for the exporter?

 

It was posted previously, but here is a response from Rob Whisenant

Work on the Cr2 Exporter continues. The next iteration includes fixes for a few bugs and exposes the exporter to the DAZ Script API, similarly to the OBJ exporter. This means that a script can be written to improve the process by dramatically reducing the number of manual steps and consolidating any options that are still needed into a single dialog. Writing that script is the next thing in the queue [for the exporter]. Following that will be the documentation, as it is likely to change significantly. Said script will not be in the next build... it will have to follow. No, I don't have a date for when the public will get the next build or the script. There is a [private] testing cycle that is scheduled to start tomorrow. Feedback from that batch of tests will influence the release schedule. 

included in the build I mentioned is a fix for the bug where the default UVs are always exported instead of the current UVs as was outlined in the tutorial. There has been some work done on scaling, but I don't recall whether that made it into the 4.0.3.19 release or if it is in this next one; sorry, way too much going on to keep details from several builds ago in the front of my mind - the team is already quite a ways past the 4.0.3.x branch and into 4.1.x. Also realize that some of the things we've done is dependent on a Service Release for Poser in order to work... clothing and hair among them. 

Quote -  

 

 

Quote - Installers are simply our preferred method and we are within our rights to use the method we prefer. We have heard the request to do simple zip files and as I have already stated... and with all due respect... that is just not a direction we wish to go in. I would be happy to listen to any other ideas.

Quote - ...don't have them throw useless folders like "Templates", "Readme", "Data", etc.  into the Studio "runtime" tree.  It is an absolute mess compared to the Poser one and is so hapazardly organised.

Quote - None of those folders go into the Runtime folder (well, not sure about templates but they are usually a separate installer you can point where you like) - they go beside it. Some Renderosity and RDNA merchants, and many freebie makers, do put their readmes in the Runtime folder or in a sub-folder thereof. The Support folder for the metadata does go in the Runtime folder, however - possibly to make sure it isn't showing in the Content palette in DS3.

...please refer to image above.

These are a collection of screenshots from my Studio "Runtime" folder content tree in S3A.  All of the blue highlighted selections are non-content folders (e.g. contain nothing that can be loaded into a scene) which are clearly the result of Daz installers as can be seen from the folder names.  When I install content from Zip files, I do so manually by first extracting to a temp. folder and then moving the individual component folders (Geometries, Characters, Poses, etc.) into their proper locations.  Templates, Readmes & the like go into separate folders outside of the Studio application.

Content "Data" folders, while important for the application, should not be visible anywhere in the Content tab.

This is just downright sloppy programming and I'm not even a programmer.

This isnt the doing of DAZ 3D. its the doing of PAs and mostly its Poser content compatibility that is the culprit.  Since DS4 came out, this is less of an issue because we check this more.

Quote - Trying to put things civilly now. 

Genesis and V5 won't work in poser, I really don't care.

Miki3 won't work in DS, also, I don't care.  I don't have either of them and probably won't.

I may sound hostile to DAZ, but in reality, I'm not.  I am disgusted that DS is known, as well as Cararra, for lack of documentation. 

A lot of the other arguments, like the lack of "morph follower" in Poser, okay, so instead, I use dynamic cloth to get the same result.  A lot of dynamic cloth can be used between different figures with little or no tweaking needed.

Characters, currently I'm on the way to making Kate into something in the sixteen to eighteen year old bracket, not hard, and the only thing I'm using is Poser.  (Not hard, but time consuming, very time consuming.)

Lousy mesh that doesn't bend right, I don't care much either.  I clothe almost everone, so how their butt bends, big deal.  I'll never see the tearing and compression. 

So most of the arguments are set aside except what am I comfortable working with.  In reality, that's the only question that counts for anything.  Were there documentation available for DS4 that I could even print a few pertinent pages of to work with, I may be tempted to give it a try.  Without it, well, I tried, I failed, and frustration is not a good thing. 

http://docs.daz3d.com  - we are adding to them every day and have a substantial team working on education inititives... of which Docs are a major part.

Quote - > Quote - We could no more "Make V5 Poser compatible" than we can Genesis because it IS Genesis.

I think we should start a betting pool as to how many times you're going to have to repeat that. 

Quote - Having said that... we are working on it. :D

Randall, do you have any "solid" information as to whether Smith Micro may reconsider making the DS4/Genesis system available within Poser, or whether there will be some sort of plug-in for Poser that would achieve the same thing?  Having messed around with Genesis enough now to appreciate its capabilities, I would dearly love to be able to use it in Poser instead of in DS4-- which, to be honest, I don't like any more than I liked previous versions of DS.

Our ultimate desire is to have Genesis open natively in Poser. Only time will tell if it can be accomplished.  A plug-in may be the only way but we arent focused on that as a sole solution.

Quote - To the best of my knowledge-- and I've been brokering at DAZ since 2003-- DAZ has always refused to accept content for any figure not sold at DAZ, for at least two reasons: 1.  If the figure isn't sold at DAZ, then DAZ has to purchase copies of it for all its Q.A. testers.

2.  If the figure isn't sold at DAZ, then DAZ has no control over the figure's quality or continued availability.  For instance, let's say that Vendor A makes a figure that is sold only at RDNA. And let's say that Vendor B makes an add-on for that figure, and DAZ accepts it.  What happens if it turns out that Vendor A's figure has copyright problems and RDNA takes it off the market?  DAZ is then stuck with an add-on for a figure that is no longer on the market.

3.  If the figure isn't sold at DAZ, then there may be customer-support issues.  DAZ is the only store that provides customer support for products, rather than laying that job off onto the individual vendors.  So, let's say that there's a problem with Vendor B's add-on for a figure that isn't sold at DAZ.  If the problem is caused by the figure itself, there isn't anything DAZ can do to resolve the problem, because the figure isn't sold at DAZ-- but even so, the upset customer is likely to blame, and become angry at, DAZ rather than at the creator of the figure.

Interestingly, to me, this feels like it equates to a good explanation also of why SM COULD be reluctant to support DS features that SM didn't already have in mind (such as dsf support) and because DS is under constant development, trying to support being compatible with it could be a logisical nightmare.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - ...so basically we are "written off" because those of us on limited budgets don't have the disposable income to buy a big ticket item like a new computer every couple of years.

Ok, let me get this right. You actually are upset that Daz will not cater to your OLD computer and to make this concession because you can't afford to buy a new computer??. You must be joking ;). I hope you don't mind if I say so, but that is beyond ridiculous. They're a business. They can't do that. And I completely understand that and I can't afford the newest version of either DS OR Poser. However, I don't feel so entitled that I expect them to make concessions just for people like poor little me. shakes head

Laurie

I think a more sensible point (rather than the specifics of a individual user's computer) that DAZ might address with us is the subject of resource utilization.   I'm blessed with a fast workstation and oodles of memory.  DAZ has made claim in the past (I thought) that it was more resource efficeint that Poser in several areas; a principle example being it's dynamic loading of morphs.   I have not found in my own testing a substantive different between Poser 9 and DS4 in terms of memory usage.   Your milage may vary, of course.  

However, I used inexpensive, older computers as render nodes that don't have oodles of memory and some are pretty dated.   Questions for DAZ:

• When will we see network rendering in DS4?  Not even the pro version of DS4 seems to support this common 3D feature.

• If DAZ plans to offer network rendering, will the requirements on the render nodes be equal to or less than DS4 Pro itself.  (The question is not as facetious as it might sound on first blush--more advanced node management software leverages virtual memory/disk techniques to allow render nodes to handle big renders, albeit more slowly, than high-end workstations.)

-K

 

[Almost 24 posts in 12 years!   I must be going for the record today.]

---We do not support network rendering because of the limitations of the 3Delight licence... they dont allow it without a hefty additional fee per Processor Core

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Randall, do you have any "solid" information as to whether Smith Micro may reconsider making the DS4/Genesis system available within Poser, or whether there will be some sort of plug-in for Poser that would achieve the same thing? 

shouldn't you direct that question at SM and not a third party?

I would not consider DAZ-Rand as a third party, because as a spokemen of DAZ here, he is rather second or first party of all the involved parties (first party would be the developers/product managers). Second, as far as i see it, SM is a big company specializing in something having to do with mobile communications, probably nobody understands what it is good for (stockholders included), the Poser staff being only a very small part of it, probably completely fitting into one or two cubicles; DAZ on the other hand is a small company (i do not know how small, 100 people perhaps?), but working entirely on 3d stuff. So innovations and ideas and willingness to kick in some doors are more likely to come from DAZ than from SM; they not only have more time for it, but they are also courageous enough to take higher risks to do something new (as they have proven with genesis) at the cost of some compatibility issues here and there. That includes ideas of how to get genesis into other programs as well. My suggestion: when DAZ wants to get genesis into Poser they should lock one developer of DS4 and one of Poser (nobody at SM would notice someone missing there) into one room and let them figure out how to put the dsf import into Poser. Cannot be so difficult since both formats do practically the same. And of course, they should try to keep the lawyers out of it as long as possible. I have seen many good technological innovations turn into dust, just because some lawyers who make a living by inventing long and complicated contracts (NDAs and such) were involved too early.

We are only about half the size of your estimate.

Quote - Autofit, this is one of the main things that I need to work when I do purchase my Genesis goodies.  I've heard mixed feelings on how it works...

Issue 46 of '3D Artist' has a free Autofit serial number on the disc.

Quote - > Quote - Daz isn't even 10 people I bet...lol. If you include the PA's perhaps....

I was never quite sure how people thought Daz was this big, huge company. In the scheme of the American business landscape, it's a mom-and-pop. They are big to us, but not in the general scheme of things ;).

Laurie

I ran a business search on them a feww weeks ago which indicates that they're less than 50 employees and do $10M-$50M in business anually.  Since they're privately held, there is very little good information about them.   My own (outside sources) put the number closer to the $10M/yr side of it.   Not very big, really.

It's been hard for me to guage the size of their PA program.  I did ask once (along with sales stats to help guage the market for brokered products) and I think I got the "that's confidential" response--no point in asking questions here.   If I was to reformat that into a question for DAZ, it might be:

• Can DAZ give some idea of the size of the customer base for Genesis?  For V4/M4 products?   What is expected size of the customer base using Genesis in about six months from now?   These would be really useful to help content makers guage the market transition from Gen4 to Gen5.   3D Content development for models like V4 and V5 represent a considerable effort on the PA's part--misguessing the market can have disasterous consequences for PA.   DAZ and SM should possibly consider how they can reduce that risk.  From basic appearances, V4/M4 has a big market and runs on lots of platforms.   Genesis only runs on DS4, really just coming out of beta.   For example, a key figure technology, Geografting, only came out in an update in the last three weeks--it is not well documented from a content creator side.

---I dont have the authority to answer those questions, im afraid. It will be up to the new executives to decide if that information will be shared for the benefit of our published artist community. 

I have stated many times that we are working on the documentation. The CCT including GeoGrafting is part of that effort

• A more general question for DAZ: A a broker, technology provider, and content maker, what is DAZ doing to reduce the risks for brokered artists who may be venturing into Genesis technology?   [That's a softball, Rand.   Hit it out of the park!  ;)  ]

---I dont know about it being a softball per se. I dont know that we can reduce the risk for anyone. Free markets are risky, you pick your lane, come up with something you think people will like and roll the dice. We do feel like we have made it easier than ever before to create quality content... no more rigging clothes, for example.... so hopefully there is less time investment to have risked in the first place.  beyond that... As you well know, Kerwin, my friend, We do our best to help our PAs succeed. We offer suggestions on how to make products more successful based on our experience. We provide some guidance an instruction on everything from texturing techniques to Promo imagery, shader support to Naming.  We feature products in the newsletter and on our front page. Of course none of this is a promise of success.

We cannot guarantee a broker will make any money, let alone a profit. there is hearty competition on our store and some creators just arent going to be able to quit their day jobs. I know its the same thing here at Rendo.

But here ive gone and let you pull me into a topic Ive promised to steer clear of out of respect for the venue. Ill leave it at what Ive said. 

-K

Quote - > Quote - Its not all that interesting is it?

Ah, but that's just what you'd think we'd want you to say if you were a double-agent spy, deep undercover quietly destroying the 3d community from within for the benefit of the Bavarian Illuminati or whomever else might wish to bring the whole sh*thouse down...

 

(Satire)

 

 

Almost correct... its the Jamaician Illuminati

Quote - Randall-

You mentioned that DAZ had made it a priority to issue documentation for its software. I will skip right past "It's about time" and just say "Thank you."

But I have a related suggestion. Might not DAZ put pressure on its vendors to tell customers how to use the prodiuct they just bought? The "Read Me" created by the installer usually links back to a DAZ page that thanks you for buying the product and tells you where to find the file(s) in your runtime. That's all.

Read Me pages that actually describe the use of the product and offer tips and tricks are few and far between. Is the dress superconforming? Are the morphs in the Body actor functional?  Is there a reason you supply no poses to change textures but instead require the user to go to the Material Room? And so on. A vendor should be required to offer at least a rudimentary "how-to".

Ill pass that notion on to the QA team. I have a feeling that it wont be something we can insist on, but it may be that we can apply some friendly pressure in the right situations.

Quote -  I completely understand the fact that there is not one single human being that looks like the other; cloning is not that advanced yet, but there are some basic anatomy rules that need to be followed for every human being. Honestly? There is not one 3D human model I've seen that is within the hobbyist's price range that follows those rules, not Genesis, not V4, not V3, not Antonia, not Jessie, not one.

I have often wondered if there's not some sort of 3d Mafia, issuing decrees from on-high that any and all hobbyist human model MUST be f**ked up in some way, in order to keep the good stuff out of the hands of the public.

Would certain technologies be withheld from the public for national security  IE if one could 3d render an animation of someone well-known doing improper things to the point of believability...maybe that's a pandora's box that they don't want to open?  (For "They" read:  Intelligencia)

You should have laid low and kept your mouth shut. Agents of The ministry of 3D Human Restriction have been dispatched. They will hopefully leave you some of your memories when your brain is wiped.

Genesis UV sets have different numbers of vertices. Could you explain the reason behind this, or is in an issue that we can expect to be "fixed" with a consistent number of vertices (and consistent splitting between body part when exported as a .cr2)?

 I ask as this would seem to have some bearing on current/future Poser compatability of Genesis.

I'm a bit puzzled actually as to why Genesis has a grouped mesh in Poser - doesnt' Poser support "single skin" meshes like DAZ 4 does? (honest enquiry, I thought Poser 9/2012 were supposed to suppor tthis feature and was surprised to find Genesis all split up).

DS3 runs fine for me with a prehistoric Nvidia GeForce MX 400/32MB. That’s on the same medieval 1GHz Duron (remember those) with 512MB of RAM (remember MB), XP SP2 system that can run Vue 6, and that ran the demo of 3DS Max 2008 with no problems. I realize those aren’t the latest versions, but if even such paltry hardware can run 3D applications that are arguably more heavyweight professionals than DS4, then the requirements for the latter seem a bit strange. I’ll download it if I can for future use, but the future will probably be when the Chelsea Clinton administration fixes the economy.

I’m good with what I have and I really don’t care whether DAZ does Obama, struggling to accommodate people who only want their failure no matter what – of if they do Assad and burn the world down around them. I assume they’ll try to split the difference. The whole Genesis/V5 debacle is really IMO, DS4 vs. P9/2012. If you don’t have one of those, then it’s irrelevant, except as compelling entertainment and study material on internet forum psychology. Some aren’t going to use DS4 because they’re happy with their version of Poser, or because of the interface, or the stability, or the cost, or the hardware, or chronic DDS (DAZ Derangement Syndrome). Pretty much the same can probably be said the other way, though not frequenting the DAZ forums, I don’t know the extent of PDS. The point is that there are (probably not a few) people with DS3 or pre-Poser 9/2012 who until/unless they upgrade will have less and less incentive to fill DAZ’s coffers.

Now, I know, progress progresses, dogs bark and the caravan moves on, yada, yada, but maybe Daz should have thought about a transition strategy/figure rather than cutting the cord so abruptly. Consider that SM can afford to slumber while the Antonia Mafia has provided just such a transition for them with a dual-rigged figure. She doesn’t have the DAZ infrastructure behind her, and DAZ may hope V4 can soldier on for a while but… I can’t help but imagine that there is money that could have been made from the non latest, greatest Poser/DAZ software users, people who want direct import in Vue, older versions of Carrara etc. How much, I don’t know. I suppose the limits of what could be done with the ‘old’ technology were reached with V4 – though the Apollo and Antonia fans would surely disagree. At any rate, a ‘real’ standalone V5 would have been interesting, in an alternate universe sort of way. But the future is here and as to what it will mean, I can only quote Chou En-lai when asked about the historical significance of the French Revolution, "Too soon to tell."

Quote - > Quote - There are tons of ideas we can come up with. I refuse to believe that either installers or zip files are the best possible way to do it. I know better. Comfortable? Maybe, traditional? Maybe... a good user experience for new customers? Absolutely not.

From a content creator point of view, I keep hearing about all these 'new customers', and would like to know more info about DZ direction, so I can tailor my content to fit the general direction - should I choose to contimue makign content for DAZ, but can't seem to pry any kinf od information out.

This makes supporting DAZ a bad risk for me, from a business point of view. Especially considering that this is a 'take no prisoners' kind of a market, sticking you neck your neck out can be very costly. For a small vendor, it can out you out of business, which is close to happning just now.

Another thing is, DAZ keeps talking about 'new customers' but yet you're here trying to appeal to existing or recapture recently aliented customers. They don't want to hear what you want to do to accomodate someone else. It's all very confusing.

THis is a small market there is no denying it. We all know it.  Its one of our main inititives at DAZ 3D to attract new users  to this community and create new 3D "addicts" like us. We have been accused and attacked for "abandoning" the Poser users, we have no intention of doing that, which is why I am here, but NOBODY should have any issue whatsoever with us trying to bring in fresh blood.  Are you saying that you woudlnt give almost anything to reach 100,000 more customers... even if they were complete novices? Adapting to a position where we can appeal to a complete novice AND a seasoned veteran is the goal and we believe it can be done

Quote - > Quote -  I cannot answer this with any certainty, we are trying to get basic functionality in order first, then we will work on things like this.  What we would ultimately love is DAZ file format support inside of Poser, but that may or may not ever happen.  Until then it's going to be something of a workaround jury-rig kind of thing.

Whatever you guys do, please keep in mind that in orderto get people interested in more content is to let them have time to actually use it, and figure out they are missing this or that piece for their ideal scene.

In many years of using this stuff before I vecame a vendor, I can't telly you how may times, by the time I installed the content via individual installers, one by one, all my free time was gone, and I never got to actually play with it, till the next day or next week when I found some more time for the hobby, and by then the time to capture my interest was long gone.

Zip files, I can purchase 20 items, unzip them all with one right click (if I don't get into runtime sorting), and be off to play. 

I remember when I was fresh out of college way back when, and got my forst engineering job, one of my mentors was this old timer engineer. His favorite saying was "Keep it simple, stupid". While I'm aware that things can sometimes get into the extreme of too simple, in case of the installers (which are only getting more and more complicated) the erring is on the side of too much.

If DAZ has non-exclusive product, and it was shared with another store, which had the same thing, except in zip or simpler more time effective installers, I'd always get it fron the 'other store'

Oh we have ideas for simple.  You should try our DAZ Studio Online.  

Quote - > Quote - Zip files, I can purchase 20 items, unzip them all with one right click (if I don't get into runtime sorting), and be off to play. 

I remember when I was fresh out of college way back when, and got my first engineering job, one of my mentors was this old timer engineer. His favorite saying was "Keep it simple, stupid". While I'm aware that things can sometimes get into the extreme of too simple, in case of the installers (which are only getting more and more complicated) the erring is on the side of too much.

If DAZ has non-exclusive product, and it was shared with another store, which had the same thing, except in zip or simpler more time effective installers, I'd always get it fron the 'other store'

 

Oh we have ideas for simple.  You should try our DAZ Studio Online.  

"simple" has the very strong potential for two layers here.

The first and most obvious, since it's your point of view, is the user experience (especially in an ideal world) where many contend that zips are simpler than installers. In your case you seem to be hoping for a solution that is "simpler" for end-users than either.

The second is in the design of the solution. If the design of the "download and install" solution were to shift to a whole new paradigm, like the DRM-riddled steam and equivalents where it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain your content offline, and harder to identify, backup, and restore product then the design of that solution would not be simple IMHO.

As with everything, it's all about your point of view :)

How about a quick and easy link to "DAZ Studio Online"? :)

Ah. Found it:

http://devcenter.gizmoz.com/newsite/digimiCreator/digimiCreator.html?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRonuazNZKXonjHpfsX66%2BsuUKWg38431UFwdcjKPmjr1YIFRMB0dvycMRAVFZl5nRlWE/SML4Q%3D

I have to install something called "unity web player" in order to use/look at DAZ Studio Online. :(

To me, the attraction of an online app was just lost, as I may as well install DAZ Studio as install unity web player. The online version doesn't "simply work" like other online experiences I've had.

Quote - Since this needs to be in a Q&A form...

 

1.  Is daz ever planning on updating DS4/Gene so it can run on machines with multiple users?

This is solely an install issue. the default is to install to your current user account. Some people see this as a feature because they may not want all users of a machine to have access to the same content. If you want all users of the computer to have the same content, install it to a shared directory or drive. I have my content on an external eSata drive and I use it not only with multiple accounts on the same computer, but on other computers both MAC and PC alike.  Its been so nice to have the same stuff available no matter what machine im working on... and I have quite a few

2.  Is daz ever going to update the interface on DS?  As a poser user I can't stand DS's interface or navigating around in it.

Im afraid it is what it is until some future version... be it DS5 or whatever. We have no intention of making it closer to Poser. Why would we... you have Poser if you want it to be Poser :D  We may add other styles or layouts as time goes on. Darkside is a good example that is quite popular... and we may have some other customization options in the works already.  All I can really offer is that the anecdotal evidence points to the notion that it takes a little getting used to, but it is great once you do.  If we changed it now, we would have an equally irate mob who like it as is.

3.  Has an option of a user easily exporting a posed Gene (including hair and clothing) as a SubDed object into a poser friendly format ever been considered?

Of course its been considered. that is essentially what our CR2 exporter is doing. If you are talking about exporting a higer rez Subdivided figure out instead fo the Genesis Base.. A) SubD and Subdivided are different. B)Poser has a different method of Subdivision that isnt compatible with the DAZ version of SubD... yet. and C) until that happens... a higher Rez Genesis would actually bend worse as more polys tried to cram into the tight areas during a bend.

4.  Did Daz ever fix the problem of your clothing converter stripping out movement morphs?  Older hair items will never work with gene until it is fixed.

It has been on the development list for quite some time and it actually made it into the pipeline this last week. We cannot promise the functiuonality some are dreaming of, but we will do the best we can with it.

5.  If a poser version of Gene becomes available, will there be sales on older Gene/V5 items as well as letting people with expired PC memberships return at the renew cost?  No new V4 stuff means for now, I'm probably going to let my membership expire and a lot of others have felt that way.  Basically I can't use Gene in my set up so there isn't much point in my buying things from Daz until I see something in the store that I like.  If I don't see things I like, there's no point in being in the PC.

We are good at sales. Im sure you will be happy when that day comes

6.  If SM and Daz couldn't be bothered to communicate before Gene was released, and given how much both companies need one another, why should I trust either in the future?  As soon as this Gene split goes away, if it does, it's easy to imagine both companies not talking again.

THis is a terrible misconception and unfounded rumour. We talked about Genesis over a year before DS4 came out and we are in constant communication these days to improve compatibility. 

7.  Considering most renders are of pretty, half naked women, NVIATWAS images, why make a gender neutral character that can morph?  Why not create another pair of female only and male only characters?  Likewise, has Gene been worth all the new headaches and such brought on by its arrival?

It is the way it is because we liked the idea. We wanted to demonstrate that Genesis could be anything from the first moment you looked at it which is also why its a plain gray, like clay... to inspire you to mold it and change it. There is a Genesis Male and Genesis Female in any case... If you prefer one over the other, you can set your peferences to load it that way

8.  Gene in its default form doesn't look very friendly to clothing creators, especially if you want to make an item that is trying to take a female's bouncy bits ino account.  Is anything going to be done to improve this?  What about for non-human forms?  If someone creates an item for Gene, are there V4 or M4 body morphs that will easily adapt that item for the older figures so a vendor can support both generations easily?

You are free to model on any shape you want. We just recommend that you correct to the base to make as many shapes as possible work better with your creation.

9.  Is there ever going to be a no-ears morph for people who want to do nekomimi, twilieks, and other things that don't have traditional human ears?

This is surprisingly difficult to do on Genesis with a morph. Smoothing away the ear will work somewhat as you see in the alien Exo morph in the creature pack... but the morph projection and texture distortion that result make for a poor user experience. GeoGrafting makes this very easy in one regard: getting rid of them... and very hard in another... matching the texture. The answer is that It isnt as easy as it seems and any way you do it there will be tradeoffs. The best solution is to geograft the ears away and create a custom texture for the graft to match the rest of the head. 

10.  SubD and dynamic items don't go very well together at times does genesis offer any solutions to that problem?

Not yet. We are researching our options and looking for answers to this issue

Quote - Poser has a different method of Subdivision that isnt compatible with the DAZ version of SubD... yet.

IMHO this is the kind of statement that has lead to misinformation. It IMPLIES that Poser will get a compatible method of Subdivision, and is in line with all the "hints and teases" that DAZ made when and after Genesis was announced. Back then, prior to Poser 9 and Poser Pro 2012 being announced, the words from DAZ were "We've been talking with SM" and "it's in SM's ballpark now" and so on and so forth, implying that Poser 9/Pro 2012 would make Genesis work. Which, as you know, didn't happen.

So - in this new era of no misinformation, no disinformation, and no datinformation - do you mean to say that it IS being worked on by SM, or that you would LIKE IT to be worked on by SM? Because these subtle "we can't say what another company will do, but we've given them all the assistance we can to make it work" hints are IMHO at the root of much of the confusion.

Quote - Ummm now after all of that I have a few questions, and since this thread is still user friendly I though I may ask a few questions, Autofit, this is one of the main things that I need to work when I do purchase my Genesis goodies.  I've heard mixed feelings on how it works, some say clothes carry over smoothly and others say the program does not work well on all clothes.  Is there anyone looking into this, I see you have posted that the Gen 3 figures are in the works for autofit, unless that was wishful thinking on my part, and I would like to think that by then autofit will work smoothly on the G4 outfits as well as the G3 ones.  Because I would give anything to be able to use all of my Gen 3 content on a figure that I can morph into having hooves for feet.....

Well... I have good news for you.

1. We are indeed working on Gen 3. We have already released David 3.  A3, M3, and V3 are half finished.

2. We are doing R&D on how to make the fitting better, we recently updated the autofit clones and they work better now and we are looking into other options to give you flexability on how the fit is adjusted. 

3. Our Engineers prioritize development in three week segments. In the current segment they are looking at how they can improve the fitting of shoes, and how to carry over bones and morphs in the the process

4. We are we are going to be doing hooves at some point. With Geografting this should be easy

 

If the above is a stupid question, I apologize, I don't know much about the technical stuff and I haven't yet had the chance to use autofit for myself, just going by posts I have seen by those who have.

 

A new equine on the way, call me excited to hear that.  YAY!

Well we are committed to the idea. It hasnt been put into the pipeline yet. I am guessing Q2 2012... but that is just an informed guess at this stage.

 

Also, I thank you for coming on here, braving the storm so to speak, so that those of us who want to have our voice heard without having to shout above the uproar just to be acknowledged have that chance.

My pleasure, its great to talk nicely with Y'all (yeah, im from Tennessee... wanna make sumthin of it? LOL )

Quote -
So, a question to DAZ_Rand...will they address the outstanding issues in DS3/DS3A?  I do see that they've done some work on Hexagon, for which I'm sure many are thankful.  Is this a precedent?  Or just a fluke?

Dana

If im being completly honest, and I am.... I must tell you that DS3 is a low priority. Hexagon was a big priority to fix this last round of issues but now that its done its low priority again. Documentation (and education), The Store, and the Download/install issue have top billing at the moment.

Quote - WinterClaw,

If I am not mistaken Rand stated that DAZ believes that exporting a high res (subdivided) version of Genesis for Poser use would result in poor bending because they state that the lower polygon count contributes to better weight map performance.  Hopefully I'm getting the context of the statement right.

I very much disagree with this.  I have done several re-rigging tests in Poser Pro 2012 and have not found that the polygon count of figures that Poser users are accustomed to doesn't at all affect weight map rigging performance.  It is still a smooth and beneficial approach.  Though this is the POV a Poser-only design.

I agree that I find it to be sideways thinking to develop for a neuter figure, especially when that involves a "realistic" human form.  Sure I've done it with toons but I don't believe the same level of structural detail is expected or required.

its not that we believe it. we witness it. more polygons does not equal better bending... beyond an obvious minimum threshold

the unsatisfactory performance of V4 in poser is evidence of this.

Seeing you here right this minute.....Has Daz been working with getting Genesis into Vue? Simple question Oop I mean with or with out poser in the equation...lol

Quote - Circumstances are just a bit different between Windows lifecycles and Daz Studio life-cycles, Male_Media. WindowsXP is a fully-functioning operating system. Bugs were being addressed and fixes provided even after Vista was well and truly part of the landscape.

I have numerous bug reports lodged at Daz regarding DS3Adv vapourising without a trace whilst I was working in Shader Mixer. These were neither acknowledged nor addressed. I gave up lodging reports after reaching double-digits: I realised then that DS4 was going to be the fix (like Win7 was supposed to be the "fix" for Vista) but I'd have to pay for that fix.

I still have Vista running on one of my machines - the bugs that Win7 was meant to fix were also dealt with by Microsoft in Vista. So, love it or hate it: Microsoft Vista is a fully-functional operating system.

According the Rand DS4 is what? 75% complete? DS3Adv is not a fully functioning programme and never will be. Is DS4x going to suffer the same fate as DS3x when we move on to the next shiny thing?

that was a joke. :D

We are getting much better at bug tracking respoinses and Tech support. Try us again.

Just sayin'...

Quote - Genesis UV sets have different numbers of vertices. Could you explain the reason behind this, or is in an issue that we can expect to be "fixed" with a consistent number of vertices (and consistent splitting between body part when exported as a .cr2)?

 I ask as this would seem to have some bearing on current/future Poser compatability of Genesis.

I'm a bit puzzled actually as to why Genesis has a grouped mesh in Poser - doesnt' Poser support "single skin" meshes like DAZ 4 does? (honest enquiry, I thought Poser 9/2012 were supposed to suppor tthis feature and was surprised to find Genesis all split up).

Ill have to get a response to your question from someone who can better explain it. Ill get back to you.

Quote - > Quote - Randall,

What improvements does the Poser SR bring for the exporter?

 

 

It was posted previously, but here is a response from Rob Whisenant

Work on the Cr2 Exporter continues. The next iteration includes fixes for a few bugs and exposes the exporter to the DAZ Script API, similarly to the OBJ exporter. This means that a script can be written to improve the process by dramatically reducing the number of manual steps and consolidating any options that are still needed into a single dialog. Writing that script is the next thing in the queue [for the exporter]. Following that will be the documentation, as it is likely to change significantly. Said script will not be in the next build... it will have to follow. No, I don't have a date for when the public will get the next build or the script. There is a [private] testing cycle that is scheduled to start tomorrow. Feedback from that batch of tests will influence the release schedule. 

included in the build I mentioned is a fix for the bug where the default UVs are always exported instead of the current UVs as was outlined in the tutorial. There has been some work done on scaling, but I don't recall whether that made it into the 4.0.3.19 release or if it is in this next one; sorry, way too much going on to keep details from several builds ago in the front of my mind - the team is already quite a ways past the 4.0.3.x branch and into 4.1.x. Also realize that some of the things we've done is dependent on a Service Release for Poser in order to work... clothing and hair among them. 

Rob is explaining what is being done in the next version of the exporter. He also hints at needing the next Poser SR for it to work on the current version and the next version.

I wanted to know what improvements does the exporter bring when the SR is used?

Quote - Ill have to get a response to your question from someone who can better explain it. Ill get back to you.

Thanks. Sometimes even an acknowledgement (so long as it gets followed up) is a vast improvement on silence.

Quote - > Quote - Poser has a different method of Subdivision that isnt compatible with the DAZ version of SubD... yet.

IMHO this is the kind of statement that has lead to misinformation. It IMPLIES that Poser will get a compatible method of Subdivision, and is in line with all the "hints and teases" that DAZ made when and after Genesis was announced. Back then, prior to Poser 9 and Poser Pro 2012 being announced, the words from DAZ were "We've been talking with SM" and "it's in SM's ballpark now" and so on and so forth, implying that Poser 9/Pro 2012 would make Genesis work. Which, as you know, didn't happen.

So - in this new era of no misinformation, no disinformation, and no datinformation - do you mean to say that it IS being worked on by SM, or that you would LIKE IT to be worked on by SM? Because these subtle "we can't say what another company will do, but we've given them all the assistance we can to make it work" hints are IMHO at the root of much of the confusion.

We have asked them if they could and would implement  CC SubD, and we hope to convince them to do it, it would, after all benefit everyone even without considering Genesis... maybe if we send Donuts?

Quote - Seeing you here right this minute.....Has Daz been working with getting Genesis into Vue? Simple question Oop I mean with or with out poser in the equation...lol

We havent approached Vue to my knowledge, but I dont know everything thats going on. It may be that Dan has talked with someone there.

Ill bring it up again.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Randall,

What improvements does the Poser SR bring for the exporter?

 

 

It was posted previously, but here is a response from Rob Whisenant

Work on the Cr2 Exporter continues. The next iteration includes fixes for a few bugs and exposes the exporter to the DAZ Script API, similarly to the OBJ exporter. This means that a script can be written to improve the process by dramatically reducing the number of manual steps and consolidating any options that are still needed into a single dialog. Writing that script is the next thing in the queue [for the exporter]. Following that will be the documentation, as it is likely to change significantly. Said script will not be in the next build... it will have to follow. No, I don't have a date for when the public will get the next build or the script. There is a [private] testing cycle that is scheduled to start tomorrow. Feedback from that batch of tests will influence the release schedule. 

included in the build I mentioned is a fix for the bug where the default UVs are always exported instead of the current UVs as was outlined in the tutorial. There has been some work done on scaling, but I don't recall whether that made it into the 4.0.3.19 release or if it is in this next one; sorry, way too much going on to keep details from several builds ago in the front of my mind - the team is already quite a ways past the 4.0.3.x branch and into 4.1.x. Also realize that some of the things we've done is dependent on a Service Release for Poser in order to work... clothing and hair among them. 

 

Rob is explaining what is being done in the next version of the exporter. He also hints at needing the next Poser SR for it to work on the current version and the next version.

I wanted to know what improvements does the exporter bring when the SR is used?

 

 

No idea. Ill ask and see if its something we can share.

Wow... that took a really long time tonight. Im off to bed.

See ya laterz!

Quote - We have asked them if they could and would implement  CC SubD, and we hope to convince them to do it, it would, after all benefit everyone even without considering Genesis... maybe if we send Donuts?

Thanks for that, and I agree. Donuts would be good. I mean, err, post-posing would be a good time to do mesh smoothing, and being compatible is often preferable (which would make CC SubD an obvious method from what I've read).

Plus, my favourite is chocolate-covered with a custard filling. Just saying. Vue support without going via Poser would also be good, but donuts are better.

Many people have asked, and if you answered I missed it.

With all the talk of what Smith Micro needs to add to Poser for compatability, What about the other way around?

Is Daz Studio going to incorperate the new things in Poser 9/Pro ?

Or the things that have been around since Poser 6 that it still can not do?

Seems strange to go to a company and ask them to add compatability for your way of doing things, when the reverse has not happened in the past.

Quote - > Quote - You may get automatic updates as a courtesy, but if you had a software issue and you tried to call support, you'll be told to upgrade to the next version as the software is end of life.

I'm not saying that that issues that people have should have been fixed (only issue i've had is that big memory hole that was never plugged), but I doubt that's going to happen as the new version is out and that's where the effort is going. There does however needs to be a focus on producting rock-solid software with the current feature set before adding new functionality and getting the documentation out the door. With some of the efforts of getting Genesis technology into other applications, that platform needs to work and well documented.

Per the Microsoft document you linked above, the end of extended support for Windows XP is April 8, 2014.

 

Which consumers do not qualify for. This is for companies that haven't upgraded from XP or have applications that do not work in later versions of Windows and haven't modified. Also they may be paying for that support.

http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifepolicy

funny. I removed that post after reading further.

Would certain technologies be withheld from the public for national security  IE if one could 3d render an animation of someone well-known doing improper things to the point of believability...maybe that's a pandora's box that they don't want to open?  (For "They" read:  Intelligencia)"

Poser/Studio figures that look like real people ?

What a preposterous idea !  ;-)

*edited to make readable by JenX

We are all missing ONE crucial point.

Here we have a General Motors co-worker, discussing and comparing General Motors Products and company policy with FORD products and company policy, in a Toyota forum.
(Car Company’s picked at random)

I close my eyes, and only wonder : WHY?

Why Here? Wrong place.
Why Now? Wrong timing.

Although I appreciate the effort, it looks more like a panic attempt to rescue a sinking ship because the Captain made a crucial marketing mistake.

And then to take it just a tiny bit further?
I have read at least 24 requests for ZIP files.
And the listening ears stay firmly closed. (At least 5 confirmations to this.)

What is the point to start an (ahum) open discussion if one refuses to listen to its customers???????

This is neither the first, nor do I hope it is the last time someone from DAZ has come over here to answer questions. Smith Micro employees do the same from time to time.  We welcome discussions like this.  And, to say that because ONE subject was answered in the negative does not mean that this discussion is not fruitful.

Vilters, your comparison isn't correct, and Randall is welcome to post here. While it's true that Renderosity does not want advertising in the Poser forum, we have always allowed discussions about the base figures and other DAZ things. So, as long as Randall does not advertise here, he is not breaking the TOS.

Further I may add that most of the products sold here are add-ons for DAZ figures. So, no, we're not Toyota against GM. 

DAZ Studio 4 and Genesis did start a lot of discussions here. The issues with the bans from the DAZ forums made the situation even more tense. We have that kind of discussion here at Renderosity. Removing some speculation and getting official answers is good.

Frankly, I have seen enough of that "sinking ship" discussion here, and Randall answered to that already. 

Additionally I would like to add that an open discussion does not always lead to the result the majority wants to see. 

Quote -
Although I appreciate the effort, it looks more like a panic attempt to rescue a sinking ship because the Captain made a crucial marketing mistake.

And then to take it just a tiny bit further?
I have read at least 24 requests for ZIP files.
And the listening ears stay firmly closed. (At least 5 confirmations to this.)

What is the point to start an (ahum) open discussion if one refuses to listen to its customers???????

Marketing.  If the daz higher ups have put their foot down on zips (and I don't like the cloud DL idea either) Randall can do two things about it: jack and squat.  Yet he still needs to post and try to make his company look good as best he can.

BTW randall, thanks for the responses.  I'll try reinstalling DS in the future and see if I can get gene/DS to install to the right place.

I actually appreciate the chance to ask questions and get some official answers from DAZ without being colored by opinions of what it meant.

I want to have choice as wide as possible for the figures I use, so I would like to have Genesis and its derivatives in my arsenal. I have taken the steps to see what obstacles there still are in using it in Poser and there are still many obstacles left. What I want to find out from DAZ is whether they will able to produce something in the future which I can use in Poser without too much hassle.

So far I am not convinced by the answers I got.

• All genesis assets may need to go through a conversion process in DS4

• Difference in architecture between Poser and DS4 regarding conforming and fitting (from Roberts notes in the CR2 exporter documentation)

• A solution for the SubD smoothing

I know that part of the solution must come from Smith Micro, but a large portion of it needs to come from DAZ itself - not only in the technical aspect of the exporter, but also in the commitment to deliver Poser Genesis content in Poser compatible format whenever possible

Regarding zips, I think we should keep in mind that 24 'voters' represents maybe about 0.003% of the DAZ customer base, if it reaches 100,000 mark. DAZ needs to do whatever it thinks is best for the majority. 

Having said the above I would also personally prefer ZIP files. I would be happy with an executable which requires that I actively accept the EULA, and if I accept the EULA the executable then creates a ZIP file in the same directory.

Quote - What is the point to start an (ahum) open discussion if one refuses to listen to its customers???????

What's the point? there is none.

Listening to clients requests and basing the corporate strategy on such information is not in the corporate culture of DAZ. Other firms, in this situation, would have the CEO jump in and write "due to general request, we will adopt a ZIP based installation procedure; please give us some time to fix the whole process" but this won't happen with DAZ.

The only question is how long this surreal show will go on (and how many colors and formatting tricks will be used; last DAZ_Rand responses managed to be slightly covered by the right bar, let's see whether somebody can best him).

Pointless. There are not even cat pictures.

Quote - Genesis UV sets have different numbers of vertices. Could you explain the reason behind this, or is in an issue that we can expect to be "fixed" with a consistent number of vertices (and consistent splitting between body part when exported as a .cr2)?

That is the whole point of having multiple UVs is it not? I usually want to have two UV sets when an object is to be viewed from e.g. from behind and from the front. So i want to have one UV with it's seams on the backside and one with the seams on the front. Those would necessarily have a different number of vertices.

Quote -  I ask as this would seem to have some bearing on current/future Poser compatability of Genesis.

I'm a bit puzzled actually as to why Genesis has a grouped mesh in Poser - doesnt' Poser support "single skin" meshes like DAZ 4 does? (honest enquiry, I thought Poser 9/2012 were supposed to suppor tthis feature and was surprised to find Genesis all split up).

It does, but that does not mean you want it that way. In Poser (as in DS) you can select a body part by directly clicking with your mouse in the 3d-viewport (besides selecting the body part in the actors list menu). But the 3d-viewport does not show actors, it shows only the mesh. So when you want to get the 'head'-actor selected when you click on the mesh-part that supposedly belongs to the head, Poser has somehow to know which actor belongs to that mesh part and for this it uses the groups.

Quote - Why would we... you have Poser if you want it to be Poser :D  

Somewhat illogical...why would Burger King make burgers?  You have McDonalds if you want Burgers.

Why does Pepsi make cola?

Why does Apple make macs?

In each case, the competitor makes essentially the same thing but makes it better or at least they think that's what they're doing. 

Being different just to be different doesn't necessarily make it better.  If Pepsi decided to make their Cola taste like Bird Poop so as to distinguish themselves from Coca Cola...eh, not so good, yes?

The interface is the same...bottle and twist cap or can and pull-tab.

I'm not saying Daz's interface is Bird Poop, but I am saying it's not Cola, if you get my drift.  I spend WAY too much time trying to find features and/or tools and/or commands.

As a new user, I've been limited to using Daz just to play with Genesis and go "Neato!  Wow, I hope I can use this in poser someday..." and that's the end of it.

Randall, what are the plans for 'Studio Online'? Is it something that will be developed into a full fledged service? Clearly it's only a start - I assume that's what 'devcenter' in the URL indicates. At this point, the rendering doesn't seem to do anything but output an unrendered image of the scene, and obviously there is only minimal content and options. 

Having said that, fleshed out, it could be your best selling tool for DS4. It really leads to a new of thinking about figures, being able to combine and change them on the fly and have the clothing fit any shape. If you could output this into Vue or have DS host Ozone, I'd be casing a bank right now :-) 

Add the entire DAZ content library, account management, storage, render farm infrastructure etc. and you have something that might be pretty compelling for some people. If you tie it in with the application on the local machine it might be possible to start a scene at home, upload just the description of the content, lighting, poses etc. and then continue working on it from anywhere or vice versa. Make it happen - call it '3D Everywhere'. You can buy me a new PC to pay for the name.  

Quote - If DAZ has non-exclusive product, and it was shared with another store, which had the same thing, except in zip or simpler more time effective installers, I'd always get it fron the 'other store'

And I would always get it from DAZ for the installer. :)

Quote - > Quote - - A more general question for DAZ: A a broker, technology provider, and content maker, what is DAZ doing to reduce the risks for brokered artists who may be venturing into Genesis technology?   [That's a softball, Rand.   Hit it out of the park!  ;)  ] 

---I dont know about it being a softball per se. I dont know that we can reduce the risk for anyone. Free markets are risky, you pick your lane, come up with something you think people will like and roll the dice. We do feel like we have made it easier than ever before to create quality content... no more rigging clothes, for example.... so hopefully there is less time investment to have risked in the first place.  beyond that... As you well know, Kerwin, my friend, We do our best to help our PAs succeed. We offer suggestions on how to make products more successful based on our experience. We provide some guidance an instruction on everything from texturing techniques to Promo imagery, shader support to Naming.  We feature products in the newsletter and on our front page. Of course none of this is a promise of success.

We cannot guarantee a broker will make any money, let alone a profit. there is hearty competition on our store and some creators just arent going to be able to quit their day jobs. I know its the same thing here at Rendo.

But here ive gone and let you pull me into a topic Ive promised to steer clear of out of respect for the venue. Ill leave it at what Ive said. 

I can name a couple more for you (it was really intended as softball since is pretty open question which I was fairly certain you had good answers to.)

• Excellent QA (IMHO):  Your QA people are very helpful at catching things my own testers missed.
• Significant effort promotiong Genesis and accessories for Genesis which creates market demand.
• Ongoing efforts with the CR2 Exporter; you could say more about where this going from a content creator's perspective if you wanted to assure the community how easily their new creaqtions will transport to your the poser market (which is part of who you're addressing.)
• And, of course, a host of internal things for brokered artists, which you have decided to censor yourself on.

DAZ has multiple business functions.  Primarily they appear to be:

  1) A content provider

  2) A software maker

  3) A content broker

These are intimately related, as all three are wrapped up in the offer of Genesis.

You could have saved the response part about the common risk to the business model (phrased in the negative, starting with statements, "We cannont guarentee . . .") The question did not ask DAZ about gurarentee, it asked about reduction of risk.

You also countered your own reply.  :)  You started out with "I don't know we can reduce the risk for anyone."   Of course you can!  And you cited a couple, such as counceling and promotion (newsletter.)

A lot of the discussion about Genesis/DS4 I've observed for the past few months revolves around risks (which are a continuum) not guarentees (which are typically binary in nature.)  DAZ through it's three functions above can modify how much risk is involved.

From the users, a few of the risks raised included:

• Will it run well (or at all) on my current equipment?
• Will it support advanced functions like inter-object dependency (like DP's in poser or network rendering or realistic light fall off?
• Will my existing content (which may be a large investment in the case of some users) work well with Genesis?
• Will more (and the kind of content desired) be available for Genesis at a price I can afford?

From brokers, the risks raised include:

• This compliated new stuff, can I afford the invest the time needed, especially with many functions in beta or in flux?
• How will I price and justify delivering content when the market right now is poitentially small copmpared to the more general, more broadly supported market.
• Will my content need more support or maintence due fluxuations in the platform?
• When will this technology that my content is built for be available on other platforms, thus give me ongoing opportunity to make more money with my creative effort?
• And may others we won't discuss here.

So, the opening statement in your reply, "I dont know that we can reduce the risk for anyone" appears to significantly underestimate DAZ's role here.   (It's not uncommon--small creative companies have the "build a better moustrap syndrome" where they focus on the moustrap assume the world will beat a path to their door, and miss the bigger picture.)  DAZ needs to feel its own power.  Awakern the giant within!  Stop the insanity! :D  (No prizes for guessing which 80's motivational speakers I'm referencing.  ;)  )

Not phrasing as a question, I will summarize my own POV: DAZ can and does reduce the risk for users and brokers around Genesis/DS4 tech by the examples above and even more than what we discussed is this thread.  There are other risks that DAZ could (and in my own opinion, should) address.  You know, because I told you personally back in the beta days, that I believe that Genesis can be a game changer in this market segment.   DAZ perhaps needs to focus more (now that Genesis and DS4 technology is reasonably feature complete) on these concerns and perhaps be slightly less dimissive of the risks (expressed as concerns) by a portion of your user base.

I want to believe in DAZ (referencing your earlier post addressing me by proper name), but it's hard when I feel that my concerns (and concerns you're hearing voiced by others) are dismissed.  The means that some DAZ personnel have used to cope with those raised concerns leaves a bad taste.   (I could reiterate a number of observations about those means, but I think you get the point.)

-K