what was the new change to V4 and when did it happen.  What about my old characters I already made for V4?

Love esther

Quote - That's not what I meant.  The cr2 is altered to accomodate additions to Poser but it is not "re-structured".  You would know that since DSON for Poser uses the customData declaration.

Obviously, if you try to use technology made for Poser 9 in Poser 4 it isn't going to work.  But chances are that something will still load because Poser is designed to ignore what it doesn't understand.  You'll get a Roxie but it's not really going to bend correctly because that tech isn't available in that version.  That was a bit silly, honestly.

If you rig a dress for V4 in Poser Pro 2014, it still works in Poser 4 or whatever, as long as you design using the tech that Poser 4 understands.  Just because the cr2 was made in Pro 2014 is irrelevant.  The only thing that needs to be changed is the version number of the cr2.

However, for example, you decide to put everything on .duf and remove the capability to produce a .dsa (or the number of variants .dsb, dse, whatnot), you've lost those using DS 3.1 (for whatever reason they still might be using it).  Sort of would force you to stay on the current version, wouldn't it? ;)

The .dsa, .dsb, .dse and the deprecated .ds are scripts, like .py in Poser. Are trying to claim that Poser Python hasn't changed? (We both know that isn't true either.) This is not equivalent to DUF or CR2/pz2/pp2 etc.  I notice that you failed to address the rest, that the Poser CR2, as it exists can not express Genesis and still have it be Genesis. For example, while Poser implemented Open Sub-D, in Poser 2014, they did not implement the entire spec, specifically edge weighting. So while you can now use Sub-D in Poser you couldn't before 2014 and you still can't use edge weighting without the DSON Importer for Poser. IIRC Poser does not handle multiple UV sets per object, or followers without issues when the base has animatable centers and end points or a number of other things.

To be fair though, I doubt without the DSON for Poser importer, Poser could handle HD Morphs, if SM had implemented the DSON spec. :) So from a customer standpoint, DSON Importer for Poser is a better way in that respect. 

Well, instead ask SM  for add  "Genesis" support to Poser, I think the right way is ask DAZ3d make a "Poser weight mapping " version of their figures.

I think it never happens because the thing DAZ3d wants is own the "Figure" and the software market at the same time.

I am not trying to claim anything of the sort, but now that's getting into a new subject.  Python, as implemented in Poser is optional.  It is a separated component.  Poser has a core that is different from the python core and they have to provide methods by which Poser's python can communicate with Poser.

The entirety of DS, to the best of my knowledge is built upon a modification of Trolltech's QTScripting, so .ds, .dsa and upwards exists as fragments of the DAZ Studio core.  At one time I was doing some scripting for DS (3.1) and it seemed to be the case but feel free to make a correction here.

A cr2 and a py are totally different animals that live within the same Poser ecosystem but do different things.  Yes, you can call a .py from a cr2 or load a cr2 with a py but they still exist, as they are, differently.

Versions of python change according to python dll used by Poser not by the version of Poser.  Poser 9/10 same python core.  Poser 7/8 same core (but differences in optional modules are included, such as wxPython).  What criteria SM uses to raise the python core, I don't really know.

I didn't know that the rest was something I needed to address.  I was starting to kind of pull off from continuing to engage because this is feeling like more of a squabble rather than something constructive.  And while I have no problem with engaging, I feel that maybe I'm wearing out Shane's patience and it's time to just give this discussion a rest.  It comes up frequently too, perhaps monthly, same rhetoric from both sides, same folks being polarized (but all of us having a stake in whatever we are involved with, and honestly, I think that's understandable).

I agree with you that the entire Sub-D spec was not implemented.  I have been a Poser user and builder for almost 15 years, I've been scripting for many years.  I am a beta tester, enthusiast and ambassador.  By that, I mean that "I have a watch and I know what time it is".  However, what I like to do when I design my own things is look for solutions.

There are always several ways to solve something.  There are things that Poser is missing and I don't think that I've obscured (at any time, anywhere) those but the question that I weigh in is "how necessary are those things?".  You might feel that they are vital to have a complete experience.  I might feel that they are trivial because there are different key points that I feel are required to have a reasonable, well-working figure for Poser.

Also, I think of: "Do the hurdles we have to cross by implementing a solution worth the shortcomings that come with that solution?".  Again, we might feel very differently on what that answer is.

BTW, I have not had a similar experience of "issues" when using moving centers and end points, in terms of clothing not acting properly when the core figure that clothing is conformed to, has this feature.  Not something I'm writing about in theory, I have working example, which I cannot show and I have to honestly play an NDA card on (not a tease, I would need time to provide an example that I can post somewhere).  However, that may very well be something that doesn't work as well in Poser 9 versus Poser 10 - I'm usually on the latest version so it's not something I can verify.

Again, I want to indicate that I have no issue with the road that DAZ is taking and the one that SM is taking and if they are different roads, then they are different roads.  I think I understand that each wants to be in control of it's own tech and own destiny.  I'm not really DS-hostile at all, I'm just pro-Poser.  And I have hardcore DSer friends and I enjoy seeing their renders, it's not a issue for me.  Maybe that makes me an odd fellow. :)

P.S.: Some editing for clarity.

Quote - Again, I want to indicate that I have no issue with the road that DAZ is taking and the one that SM is taking and if they are different roads, then they are different roads.  I think I understand that each wants to be in control of it's own tech and own destiny.  I'm not really DS-hostile at all, I'm just pro-Poser.  And I have hardcore DSer friends and I enjoy seeing their renders, it's not a issue for me.  Maybe that makes me an odd fellow. :)

P.S.: Some editing for clarity.

I don't think that makes you odd and I have a sneaking feeling that is the way most Poser and DS users feel.  There are people on both sides that take the view that is should be done this way or else the company that doesn't is lost.  I can't prove it but I suspect they are the minority but more vocal, all the others users just carry on creating their art using whatever programs they prefer.

The only thing that maks your position different, not odd, is that where you see something missing, or something you feel could be implemented better you create a utilty or add on to make life easier.  This puts you in a position to explain the situation from a facutal basis with an aknowledge leaning to Poser at present.

I find that not only imformative but also a refreashing change from the Daz and SM bashing that seems to be the norm.

Quote - Well, instead ask SM  for add  "Genesis" support to Poser, I think the right way is ask DAZ3d make a "Poser weight mapping " version of their figures.

I think it never happens because the thing DAZ3d wants is own the "Figure" and the software market at the same time.

As I already said, the Poser skinning, and current capabilities of the software are not capable of supporting Genesis/Genesis 2 and have it still be Genesis/Genesis 2.  That does not make Poser bad, or broken, and that is not, at all, what I am saying.

Unless Poser adds capabilities to support the features of Genesis, and if they do that they might as well support the format, then it can't work natively in Poser. 

Over two years now, are we really still complaining that SM should add Genesis capabiltiy.  It is not going to happen and at some point we are going to have to face facts.

Quote - Over two years now, are we really still complaining that SM should add Genesis capabiltiy.  It is not going to happen and at some point we are going to have to face facts.

4 keys issues that I see

1.) Reluctant to learn new software and or loose the Poser material room and Poser dynamic cloth (key factors for me, YMMV)

2.) Reluctant to set aside the heavy investment in time and mainly money in the V4M4 line of characters. ($$$ is the main factor for me)

3.) When G2 characters came out as an example and others since then, if there was a Gee Whiz product for them, you could refit the clothes or the hair with 3rd party tools to the Daz 4 series characters. Now with the Gen 1 and 2 products you can't do that (yet and might never be able to) but see something you want for a render and gripe about the fact that you feel like you are stuck in the past and missing out on the new toys.

4.) You could buy anything and use it (unless it was for Bryce or Carrera). You felt like you were in the majority and now feel like you are in the minority.

Actually, while I do not mind learning new skills or tools learning to use Genesis is not one of them.  If using Poser as it stands is living in the past I have no issue with that either.  The fact that Daz and SM have taken a different approach does not bother me in the least. 

I just cannot understand why, this far down the road, people are still loooking for SM to change.  The spilt has happened you can live with it or keep moaning but I cannot see anything changing to go back to where we were.

Quote - > Quote - Well, instead ask SM  for add  "Genesis" support to Poser, I think the right way is ask DAZ3d make a "Poser weight mapping " version of their figures.

I think it never happens because the thing DAZ3d wants is own the "Figure" and the software market at the same time.

As I already said, the Poser skinning, and current capabilities of the software are not capable of supporting Genesis/Genesis 2 and have it still be Genesis/Genesis 2.  That does not make Poser bad, or broken, and that is not, at all, what I am saying.

Unless Poser adds capabilities to support the features of Genesis, and if they do that they might as well support the format, then it can't work natively in Poser. 

If daz3d wanted, they can make a Poser "genesis version" adapted to poser software, different from the genesis we have now, but almost the same.

The problem here, and I don't undestand why  there are people who still ignore this fact, is that Daz3d don't want Poser exist now , they want to have the control of the figures but they want to have the control over the software to use them  too.

This is the reason of the "genesis way" they take some time ago, and this is the reason why they don't make a Poser genesis.

A good way, well there are different opinions, but that is their choice, and it is a logical decision, why make figures for other company when you  can make figures only for your own software, so you have the entire cake.

 There is only a problem with that, there are people love Daz3d figures, but some people love Poser more.

Quote - If daz3d wanted, they can make a Poser "genesis version" adapted to poser software, different from the genesis we have now, but almost the same.

The problem here, and I don't undestand why there are people who still ignore this fact, is that Daz3d don't want Poser exist now , they want to have the control of the figures but they want to have the control over the software to use them too.

This is the reason of the "genesis way" they take some time ago, and this is the reason why they don't make a Poser genesis.

A good way, well there are different opinions, but that is their choice, and it is a logical decision, why make figures for other company when you can make figures only for your own software, so you have the entire cake.

There is only a problem with that, there are people love Daz3d figures, but some people love Poser more.

Actually I think you really need to understand what genesis does and how it works before you can say what can created in poser, because you are really off base. This issue that most people have is assuming that genesis is just a figure you simply pop into a scene and render.

Once you understand that you can't just convert it into a CR2 and it will be equivalent and that vendors simply will not create their products twice for a return of one (ala Dawn) then you will understand that creating two products that won't do the same thing is not an option. Things such as the multiple UVs, the differences in the implementation of the Pixar subdivision, differences in weight mapping, scaling, and the need of vendors to standardize on one format are some of the reasons that a Poser native figure from DAZ won't happen.

Despite what you think, DAZ has tried to make things work in both apps when poser hasn't, such as using ExP tech to add morph channels to the Gen4 characters that worked in both apps when PMDs were only designed for poser. The DSON importer is a pretty complicated work to get as much genesis functionality in Poser as possible.

But this is really beating the dead horse, but as time goes on, the gap between the figure tech will widen. Both companies have their different focuses, so what you ultimately want you use will depend on what each company offers. So it will be unrealistic to expect another company will make something specifically for you that doesn't have all the features that makes the figure what it is. You may have to pressure your software of choice to focus effort on a figure that does what you want it to do or threaten to withhold upgrading to get what you want. DAZ shouldn't always be the solution to your figure issues.

The things I write that never make it to the forum...

And THAT is why V4 will still be with us in 20 - 30 years to come.

"But this is really beating the dead horse, but as time goes on, the gap between the figure tech will widen".

Now there is something users, whether they use Daz, Poser or both, should be able to agree on.

Quote - "But this is really beating the dead horse, but as time goes on, the gap between the figure tech will widen".

Now there is something users, whether they use Daz, Poser or both, should be able to agree on.

I disagree. For some reason, people just assume that Poser will remain passive and just stay stuck on V4 level technology  from here on out. That's not to say that Poser won't come up with something or commission some third party to come up with a figure that will actually take advantage of the Poser technology already present. That's also not to say that DAZ itself won't come up with another figure that will take advantage of Poser's technology again.

Quote - > Quote - "But this is really beating the dead horse, but as time goes on, the gap between the figure tech will widen".

Now there is something users, whether they use Daz, Poser or both, should be able to agree on.

I disagree. For some reason, people just assume that Poser will remain passive and just stay stuck on V4 level technology  from here on out. That's not to say that Poser won't come up with something or commission some third party to come up with a figure that will actually take advantage of the Poser technology already present. That's also not to say that DAZ itself won't come up with another figure that will take advantage of Poser's technology again.

I think you read more into my post than I intended.  I did not mean that Poser would remain passive, far from it.  However I do not think as they progress that they will go the way of Genesis.  Although anything is possible, having made the break, I do not see Daz coming back towards Poser.  That being the case I expect both to progress but I also expect the tech between Daz and Poser to widen, not narrow.  That is my own personal opinion of course and I have no magic ball looking into the future.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Well, instead ask SM  for add  "Genesis" support to Poser, I think the right way is ask DAZ3d make a "Poser weight mapping " version of their figures.

I think it never happens because the thing DAZ3d wants is own the "Figure" and the software market at the same time.

As I already said, the Poser skinning, and current capabilities of the software are not capable of supporting Genesis/Genesis 2 and have it still be Genesis/Genesis 2.  That does not make Poser bad, or broken, and that is not, at all, what I am saying.

Unless Poser adds capabilities to support the features of Genesis, and if they do that they might as well support the format, then it can't work natively in Poser. 

 

If daz3d wanted, they can make a Poser "genesis version" adapted to poser software, different from the genesis we have now, but almost the same.

No they can't. Poser does not have the functionality for it to work.   

Quote - The problem here, and I don't undestand why  there are people who still ignore this fact, is that Daz3d don't want Poser exist now , they want to have the control of the figures but they want to have the control over the software to use them  too. This is the reason of the "genesis way" they take some time ago, and this is the reason why they don't make a Poser genesis.

Smith Micro is a Software Company, they make software as their source of revenue. DAZ 3D is a content company, they make and sell content as a way to make money. The more software packages that can use DAZ 3D content the bigger the market and the more, potentially, money they can make.

If what you are saying is true, then DAZ 3D never would have built the DSON Importer for Poser. 

Well, I think it is not difficult to undestand that when I say make a "poser genesis version" I am not talking about take the actual genesis and put it in Poser. (I know more or less how Genesis works), the thing I mean is that, if daz3d  wanted, they had made a new Poser figure, adapted to Poser, with more or less functions than Genesis, but a Poser figure, call it Poser genesis, call it Poser V5 or whatever.

Or just, as they do in the past, wait till Poser take a way in Wheight mapping thing  and make their figures (genesis) and their software adapted to that rigging system.

The question is, why didn't they do?, why wasting the Poser user base that love daz3d figures but love Poser too, just simple, their plans was atract that Poser user base to Daz Studio with Genesis, and take the entire control over "poser" market.

Did they do it?, I think the answer is DSON, or easier, no.

DSON was a bungler attempt to try to solve the problem they created in their own bussines.

And now we have the "Poser world bussines" divided as never it was, and I think Daz3d didn't measure well  the impact of their decisions when they take the "genesis" way, but well, it is just my opinion.

Note:bhoins Daz3d was a content company in the past, now they are an content and a software company, just take a look to their website

 They are not making content for other software today, they are making content for their own software, and Dson is only a trying to solve a lost of clients because the "genesis" way.

Quote - Well, I think it is not difficult to undestand that when I say make a "poser genesis version" I am not talking about take the actual genesis and put it in Poser. (I know more or less how Genesis works), the thing I mean is that, if daz3d  wanted, they had made a new Poser figure, adapted to Poser, with more or less functions than Genesis, but a Poser figure, call it Poser genesis, call it Poser V5 or whatever.

 Genesis is not a figure it is a system, so less it is.  > Quote - Or just, as they do in the past, wait till Poser take a way in Wheight mapping thing  and make their figures (genesis) and their software adapted to that rigging system. The question is, why didn't they do?, why wasting the Poser user base that love daz3d figures but love Poser too, just simple, their plans was atract that Poser user base to Daz Studio with Genesis, and take the entire control over "poser" market.

Poser did not include Weight Mapping until after Genesis was released. Customers have been asking for Poser to include weight mapping since before 2005, when I started with my 3D Hobby, and long before I turned it into a career, yet it didn't happen until Genesis came out. Granted, in all likelyhood Poser was working on weight mapping before Genesis was released, but Genesis did not suddenly spring into existence either.

As an example of going that route, Michael 4's shoulders were much better before release than after, they were downgraded because of Poser compatibility. Freak 4 didn't work in Poser and couldn't be made to work in Poser until after it was released and Poser fixed some bugs in response to that release. 

Customers want better figures, not the same technology, and definitely not broken figures. 

Quote - Did they do it?, I think the answer is DSON, or easier, no. DSON was a bungler attempt to try to solve the problem they created in their own bussines.

Bungler attempt? Or answer to customer requests after Smith Micro refused to listen?  > Quote - Note:bhoins Daz3d was a content company in the past, now they are an content and a software company, just take a look to their website  They are not making content for other software today, they are making content for their own software, and Dson is only a trying to solve a lost of clients because the "genesis" way.

It is an opinion and you are entitled to your opinion, it isn't a valid one. DAZ is a content company, that is where their money is. Yes, they do software work, but that is not where their money is. 

DAZ3d is a content company that make content for only its application ,DAZ studio, so for me, today, it is not only a content company.

A company that sells Bryce, Carrara, DAz studio, hexagon... it is a software company, and this is not a bad thing, but it is the real thing.

About DSON, really you are saying that a software company has to change its own application because one of its competitors make a figure that is not compatible with their software, really?, that would mean than SM would be indirectly controlled by DAZ3d

About DSON is or not a Bungler attempt, well just use it  and tell me.

Dson is a customer answer, but not becase SM refused to listen, but because DAZ3d notice that their decision to put aside Poser with genesis, would not have control of the entire market, as they surely wanted,  but rather lose part of it, the part of Poser user that want and love use Poser and didn't want to use DAz studio.

Anyway, I want to make clear that I am not against Daz Studio or Poser, Genesis or Poser figures, I have my own preferences, but in my opinion, people must use they want to use, there is several options, just choose what you want and enjoy it.

Quote -
Anyway, if y'all want to discuss positive aspects of what might make Poser or its content more appealing that's fine but this thread isn't going to become another Poser vs DAZ argument or I'll just lock it. The OP's question has pretty much been satisfied so most anything else regarding DAZ is just tempting fate. Just throwing that out there as fair warning

lol I see we are there once again.

Hey guys, you're heading toward a locked thread with the Genesis talk. Got anything else to add, take it to sitemail.

Quote - DAZ3d is a content company that make content for only its application ,DAZ studio, so for me, today, it is not onlya content company. A company that sells Bryce, Carrara, DAz studio, hexagon... it is a software company, and this is not a bad thing, but it is the real thing.

I did not say they don't sell software, technically Content is software, non-content Software is not their primary source of revenue, after all DAZ Studio costs how much? Are you sure it is only for DAZ Studio? Not Poser, not Carrara, not 3DS MAX, not Maya, not Lightwave, not C4D, not Vue, etc.

Quote - About DSON, really you are saying that a software company has to change its own application because one of its competitors make a figure that is not compatible with their software, really?, that would mean than SM would be indirectly controlled by DAZ3d

No it means it is answering to its customers' (to include yours) desires. If being able to use DAZ 3D Figures means that Poser is controlled by DAZ 3D then they have been controlled by DAZ3D since Poser 4, so much so that Poser 5 had Victoria and Michael on the box. As for SM changing its software to support a DAZ 3D release, they have done it many times before. > Quote - About DSON is or not a Bungler attempt, well just use it  and tell me.

I have done much more than just use it.  > Quote - Dson is a customer answer, but not becase SM refused to listen, but because DAZ3d notice that their decision to put aside Poser with genesis, would not have control of the entire market, as they surely wanted,  but rather lose part of it, the part of Poser user that want and love use Poser and didn't want to use DAz studio.

You are stating a poorly formed personal opinion as fact, and you are not even close to correct. 

Seriously... you're going to get this thread locked.