Xatren posted at 8:03PM Sun, 15 November 2015 - #4238748

Zev0 posted at 11:58AM Sun, 15 November 2015 - #4238744

This was done in 2008 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYgLFt5wfP4#t=13

I've seen that before, and yes, it's very good. You have to admit though, it's light years beyond what Poser and DAZ Studio are capable of.

Well for the price you pay and what you get, I say it's still damn impressive. And I bet in the hands of a high end CG artist specialist, they can squeeze those realistic details out of what we currently have. Hell, I have seen some current users get very close. All depends on your skill level. CG realism in general is still an ongoing process. I believe it will eventually get to a stage that is accessable to most were people won't be able to tell the difference anymore. I for one find an impression of realism more artistically appealing than actual realism. Actual realism is so boring, you see it everyday around you:) Eg if somebody posts an actual photo in the galleries, 100% real, nobody cares:)

Zev0, of course it can be very good. I said in the post you disagreed with that it can be very good. It still can't be completely realistic. Look into the Uncanny Valley effect. CG may be beginning to scale the far side of that valley, but it hasn't gotten back out of it yet.

As for your reply being to my saying that CG can't be completely realistic yet, that's not what you specifically quoted out of my initial post to disagree with. In the future, perhaps you can say what you're disagreeing with, rather than expecting people to know that you meant something other than what you said?

There's a good thread over at DAZ pointing out that Photorealism isn't really that important - if you want a picture of somebody there really isn't any scarcity of them of any type, pose, or costume. The point of 3D rendering is not to take photos, that's what camera's are for. At least for 99.99% of us, realistic is all we are looking for, not photo-realism. Which half the time someone removes with Photoshop editing anyway.

My point is, from a technical standpoint, regarding the software and figures and PBR engines we have access to, realistic results is possible eg same results that can be achieved with those high end examples. Somebody just has to create the skin and character. But that is not to say the figures are not capable of doing so. That is the part I disagree with.

diogenese19348 posted at 12:19PM Sun, 15 November 2015 - #4238759

There's a good thread over at DAZ pointing out that Photorealism isn't really that important - if you want a picture of somebody there really isn't any scarcity of them of any type, pose, or costume. The point of 3D rendering is not to take photos, that's what camera's are for. At least for 99.99% of us, realistic is all we are looking for, not photo-realism. Which half the time someone removes with Photoshop editing anyway.

This is exactly what I am saying, if you change the word 'realistic' to the word 'believable'. For what it's worth, I think we are using the two words to mean the same thing, dio. Cameras made photo realism in portrait painting redundant, and if I want completely real documentation of what is, I'll still go with a camera, as will pretty much everyone else. I used CG when I want something that reality can't give me, and that includes Poser & DAZ Studio. They give me an idealized representation of reality, something prettier than what is, and that's very cool.

To reiterate, I love Poser and the DAZ figures. They let artists of all skill levels or with steep time constraints make some very cool stuff. I love working with them personally (in fact, I am planning a game using pre-rendered sprites made with the generation 6 stuff). I just think it's silly to pretend that they actually look like real people, when what they look like is more akin to classical Greek sculpture with believable skins. It's stylized a bit (minor anatomical detail removed as was pointed out when talking about Scarlett's face), idealized (nothing wrong with that), and just accurate enough to be believable, which is what they need to be for the customer base they are aimed at.

Zev0 posted at 12:31PM Sun, 15 November 2015 - #4238760

But that is not to say the figures are not capable of doing so. That is the part I disagree with.

You should re-read the post then. I said at the outset that they are completely capable of doing much higher levels of realism, but that such things don't sell, because all those added and admittedly minor details just tend to age a character (particularly a female) whereas the vast majority of DAZ's customers seem to want an idealized sort of pretty.

I read that thread and while I appreciate the sentiment I tend to disagree. Billions and billions of dollars are generated annually through Photorealistic renders and render capabilities. There is a strong industry for both stylistic and realistic rendering capability globally, which grows strongly each year in many, many forms of media. And just to add photography never truly did kill out photoreal artists either. The concepts discussed seem familiar from what I was taught at art school, that photography freed an artist into a realm of expressionism as the tedium of recreating "real" life was now taken over by the amazing "Camera Obscura". And while the concept did create a lot of shit modern art (mostly from my teachers), realism is still very alive in commercial art and even in arty art. And a lot of the reason is that art is a manipulation of what's possible in reality, so taking reality as a base you can move forward to a super reality, such as like you would see in Jurassic World or Furious 7. Stylised imagery influences a viewer in an entirely different way.

And as far as DS/Poser photo real characters you can definitely see a rapid progression since these programs were founded. Especially with Daz3D figures. And while things are not 100% perfect yet they are definitely progressing in the right direction. And I would expect the uncanny valley to be closed further and further in the coming years.

The concept that realism doesn't sell is not very solid. I believe what you're getting into is the concept of idealised beauty which is not restricted to just CG.

Thought I'd put V4 through it's paces to see what it could do. The morph shown hasn't come within a mile of a Vendor. It's all mine. I do not have access to Zbrush. Few people can afford it anyway.

The lighting isn't the same so features are more washed out. Even with the higher density mesh fine detail is not possible ( at least until Poser 11 comes out). However you can get the main bumps with V4 I am saying V7 is too low res to produce this sort of stuff. Scarlett is a popular character - show me a Genesis version.

qaz posted at 4:36AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238829

Thought I'd put V4 through it's paces to see what it could do. The morph shown hasn't come within a mile of a Vendor. It's all mine. I do not have access to Zbrush. Few people can afford it anyway.

The lighting isn't the same so features are more washed out. Even with the higher density mesh fine detail is not possible ( at least until Poser 11 comes out). However you can get the main bumps with V4 I am saying V7 is too low res to produce this sort of stuff. Scarlett is a popular character - show me a Genesis version.

Once again, all you did was move mesh without making actual detail. It's not necessary to show a genesis version, because it still wouldn't convince you that learning how manipulating the low poly mesh would produce the same morph. That's what the industry is doing and really a waste of time to convince people that already have their mind set. That's why I feel people will get these HD tools and make morphs that don't require high amounts of polygons and make scenes much larger than actually required.

You could have easily made that detail bump in v4 as a MCM of the smile with the standard brush, pinch, then smoothing the crease; the polygons were there to do it. The issue would be to link that correction in which the best way would have been to make ExP to link it in without overwriting existing channels. But that's one of the major advantages of using Genesis over v4, adding morphs, MCMs, and JCMs to the figure (activated with a particular morph) without making channels.

Of course I've added detail. Check the area around the eyes where it matters. I cannot as yet apply fine details with the tools I have (other than a displacement map) I couldn't care less what the industry is doing. I do care what is available in Daz and Poser. It seems to me your contention is that the tools are available but all the Daz Studio users are either too ignorant or too talent less to exploit them. I find that hard to believe. Put up or shut up. Show me the evidence. Show me a tutorial on how to do it. Show me all these V7s that look like something other than a V7.

qaz posted at 6:31AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238859

Of course I've added detail. Check the area around the eyes where it matters. I cannot as yet apply fine details with the tools I have (other than a displacement map) I couldn't care less what the industry is doing. I do care what is available in Daz and Poser. It seems to me your contention is that the tools are available but all the Daz Studio users are either too ignorant or too talent less to exploit them. I find that hard to believe. Put up or shut up. Show me the evidence. Show me a tutorial on how to do it. Show me all these V7s that look like something other than a V7.

The move brush is not detail. Sorry. You've moved mesh that's all. I stand by what I've said.

Razor42 posted at 5:44AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238792

The concept that realism doesn't sell is not very solid.

I meant to the Poser & DAZ Studio ecosystem. Nothing offered to that market has been truly realistic as of yet. Sorry if that was not clear.

I believe what you're getting into is the concept of idealised beauty which is not restricted to just CG.

Not really, no.

Xatren posted at 6:49AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238862

Not really, no.

Well, perhaps it's tangentially related. I just want to make sure that it is clear that it's not only about feminine ideal beauty. It effects all of the Poser and DAZ living creature models, human, dragon, or whatever else they may be. My personal opinion is that it's done to increase their appeal.

"Thought I'd put V4 through it's paces to see what it could do. The morph shown hasn't come within a mile of a Vendor. It's all mine. I do not have access to Zbrush. Few people can afford it anyway."

Hi sorry.. but no amount of HD morphing or polygons would have helped the V4 "Scarlet J" you posted because you are still SORELY missing: sub surface Scattering. You have eyes that have an obvious painted on highlight You have 1990's era transmapped hair with no stray strands and that is clearly intersecting her ear and I doubt that was rendered in a properly used PBR with an IBL light source.

All this Nerdy Mcnerd technobabble about HD morphs mean Nothing as Long as people keep ignoring the items I just mentioned in their quest for "realism" or "believability" in poser/Daz.

Xatren posted at 8:37AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238748

Zev0 posted at 11:58AM Sun, 15 November 2015 - #4238744

This was done in 2008 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYgLFt5wfP4#t=13

I've seen that before, and yes, it's very good. You have to admit though, it's light years beyond what Poser and DAZ Studio are capable of.

Not since DS added Iray it isn't.

wolf359 posted at 9:24AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238882

"Thought I'd put V4 through it's paces to see what it could do. The morph shown hasn't come within a mile of a Vendor. It's all mine. I do not have access to Zbrush. Few people can afford it anyway."

Hi sorry.. but no amount of HD morphing or polygons would have helped the V4 "Scarlet J" you posted because you are still SORELY missing: sub surface Scattering. You have eyes that have an obvious painted on highlight You have 1990's era transmapped hair with no stray strands and that is clearly intersecting her ear and I doubt that was rendered in a properly used PBR with an IBL light source.

All this Nerdy Mcnerd technobabble about HD morphs mean Nothing as Long as people keep ignoring the items I just mentioned in their quest for "realism" or "believability" in poser/Daz.

You lot are so sensitive here. This was a discussion about figures not lighting. I note that you lot are are high on verbosity and very low on actual examples. If you can do better then lets see it - show us all. Talk is cheap.

And for the record it WAS done in a PBR with SSS. The "obvious painted on highlight" your 'trained eye' has spotted is a reflection of a mesh light. So now come on SHOW ME WHAT YOU CAN DO !!!!

First of all your example lacks the eye for fine detail. Your pupils are way to big compared to the photo reference. Your nose isn't even the same. Neither is the ears. Neither is the center gap of the lips. Neither is the teeth. If you cannot pick up on simple things like that, you will never be able to mimic a realistic face structure. HD won't help you in this regard if the basics are overlooked, basics that can be resolved without HD. Now can we drop this argument please? This thread discussion is between Genesis and new Poser figures. Want to talk about hyper realism, start a new thread. Thanks.

Zev0 posted at 11:55AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238925

First of all your example lacks the eye for fine detail. Your pupils are way to big compared to the photo reference. Your nose isn't even the same. Neither is the ears. Neither is the center gap of the lips. Neither is the teeth. If you cannot pick up on simple things like that, you will never be able to mimic a realistic face structure. HD won't help you in this regard if the basics are overlooked, basics that can be resolved without HD. Now can we drop this argument please? This thread discussion is between Genesis and new Poser figures. Want to talk about hyper realism, start a new thread. Thanks.

I was in a rush to try it out. Don't disagree on your comments re details. Again put up or shut up. Either show me you can do better with V7 or go away. You are just hot air. And I am on topic. The point I was making was that all the figures have issues. The question is whether Low res figures such as V7 and indeed the new Pauline by all accounts have problems in this area. As far as criticizing my eye for detail - I've seen your products and all I can say is "People in glass houses ....."

How about you actually get the G3F Base yourself which is free, and see for yourself. V7 is just a shape for the base.

When designing characters it is important to use the right tools for the right job. HD morphs are great, they can add alot of details. But they are wasted for things like fine bumps and skin and small wrinkles. For that the right tools are bump/displacement/normal maps. Those types of details should not be modeled into the figure. It will not add any realism to the render to have them modeled. Those are skin details which are part of the skin texture.

The new capacities for HD morphs are exciting in what they can add to a character, but like all things, they should be used wisely, where they have the proper impact.

qaz posted at 2:57PM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238929

Zev0 posted at 11:55AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238925

First of all your example lacks the eye for fine detail. Your pupils are way to big compared to the photo reference. Your nose isn't even the same. Neither is the ears. Neither is the center gap of the lips. Neither is the teeth. If you cannot pick up on simple things like that, you will never be able to mimic a realistic face structure. HD won't help you in this regard if the basics are overlooked, basics that can be resolved without HD. Now can we drop this argument please? This thread discussion is between Genesis and new Poser figures. Want to talk about hyper realism, start a new thread. Thanks.

I was in a rush to try it out. Don't disagree on your comments re details. Again put up or shut up. Either show me you can do better with V7 or go away. You are just hot air. And I am on topic. The point I was making was that all the figures have issues. The question is whether Low res figures such as V7 and indeed the new Pauline by all accounts have problems in this area. As far as criticizing my eye for detail - I've seen your products and all I can say is "People in glass houses ....."

Before you start trying to say V4 can give realistic renders better than V7 you might try rendering with final render settings for your GI calculations, decent lights, and decent hair. All those artifacts on the face detract from everything.

qaz posted at 11:04AM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4238929

Zev0 posted at 11:55AM Mon, 16 November 2015 - #4238925

First of all your example lacks the eye for fine detail. Your pupils are way to big compared to the photo reference. Your nose isn't even the same. Neither is the ears. Neither is the center gap of the lips. Neither is the teeth. If you cannot pick up on simple things like that, you will never be able to mimic a realistic face structure. HD won't help you in this regard if the basics are overlooked, basics that can be resolved without HD. Now can we drop this argument please? This thread discussion is between Genesis and new Poser figures. Want to talk about hyper realism, start a new thread. Thanks.

I was in a rush to try it out. Don't disagree on your comments re details. Again put up or shut up. Either show me you can do better with V7 or go away. You are just hot air. And I am on topic. The point I was making was that all the figures have issues. The question is whether Low res figures such as V7 and indeed the new Pauline by all accounts have problems in this area. As far as criticizing my eye for detail - I've seen your products and all I can say is "People in glass houses ....."

Qaz, what are you asking for? If you have some kind of personal point you need to make, then do so. But so far I can't make out what that point is exactly. Strangely the only people who think V7 has no advantages over V4 are the people still using V4. The best use for HD is not creating skin pores or imperfection unless you like super dense meshes that bring the average system to it's knees. It would be the equivalent of using mesh to define the threads in clothing. I would hardly describe G3F or Pauline as low res meshes anyway. You're coming across as an ardent Poser user who has been listening to all of the people talking down G3F and taking their criticism at face value without looking at the other side or the actual people who use and love the figures. If everything you're saying is true let me ask why do you think G3F has had one of the highest take up rates for a figure from both customers and vendors in this segment.

You want to see variation in the G3F/V7 mesh try some of these: Example 01 Example 2 Example 3 Example 4 Example 5 Example 6 Example 7 Example 8 Example 9 and there are 100s more.

All my thoughts of Pauline went out the window when somebody can morph her into Matthew McConaughey she is a credit to SM.

Anyway good to see you all getting along :-) unless of course I have missed something.

bhoins posted at 9:22AM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4238892

Not since DS added Iray it isn't.

iRay is very good. It's not Renderman though.

"iRay is very good. It's not Renderman though."

For the usual & expected purposes in a free program like Daz studio ( Stills), Iray does not need to be RenderMan. renderman is a professional CG production pipeline tool used in movies such as: Ant-Man, Avengers: Age of Ultron,
Cinderella, Ex Machina, Fantastic Four, Fast and Furious 7, Good Dinosaur, The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part 2, Inside Out, Jupiter Ascending, Jurassic World, Mad Max: Fury Road, Man From U.N.C.L.E., The Martian, Seventh Son, Ted 2, Terminator Genisys, Tomorrowland,

just to name a few.

for the Price ,Iray in DS is a Great Value.

Certainly cheaper than hiring Industrial Light & magic.

or even paying $175 USD to upgrade from poser pro 2014 to poser 11. Just to get access to a "poserized" version of another free render engine that I have been using for Daz/poser content for the past year ( Blender s Cycles).

So if Poser 11 is available now I guess we will see the final Pauline. From the image the lips are lookin better in the SuperFly render :-) The peak is back

@wolf359 You can get Renderman 20 the current flagship free on a noncommercial basis. Same price as Daz Iray. Research, education or just a ordinary hobbyist minding his own business. Full version No limits in software, no watermark either. Of course I got it a few months before they extended such a generous offer which is the story of my life, I was a little ticked at first, although I would come unstuck anyway as would be using commercial. There is quite a few companies doing this now some of the best software in the world for free on the grounds if you master it and turn it to income you agreed will do the right thing and throw them a few bucks for the paid version in some cases quite a few bucks. Seems the more complex the software like node based compositing and editing the 30 trial days are over they give it free to learn and dabble.

wolf359 posted at 10:14AM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239064

For the usual & expected purposes in a free program like Daz studio ( Stills), Iray does not need to be RenderMan.

I'm well aware of what Renderman is. We learned a good bit about it when I was getting my degree. It's also available for free for anyone to use for personal or educational purposes these days.

All that being said, nobody implied that DAZ Studio level stuff needs access to Renderman. All I said was that iRay is not Renderman, in response to someone's assertion that work like this isn't light years beyond what is possible in DAZ Studio.

Once again, for the record, I like Poser and DAZ figures,and I think iRay produces some very nice visuals, but pretending the limitations aren't there doesn't make those limitations go away.

I'm going to keep my mouth shut about Pauline. Maybe it's just me. Let's see, what others think.

Well G3F she definitely ain't. SM figures still suffer from rubber bends. I mean come on now. It's 2015. Is this supposed to showcase Posers figure tech? I actually feel sorry for users who have been waiting for the next best thing, because these figures are not them. Also where the is the content? I thought content is king yet there is not one product on sale. Great launch. At this point I feel SM are simply incapable of delivering a mainstream quality figure for their users. This was their chance to prove they could and they f#@! it up as usual. How are developers supposed to get excited about this? Rant over....

If DAZ could finally decide to offer their SubD morph tool to everybody, not only to certifyed vendors, i'd be ready to join the "daz" side of the force now.

Who knows, maybe they might change their minds now that SM is distributing their version of it.

Zev0 posted at 11:12AM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239088

Who knows, maybe they might change their minds now that SM is distributing their version of it.

I'm thinking along the same lines.

I've been quiet during this whole thing, I'm just a lowly DAZ studio user with no real horse in the race. But I keep hoping to God, Poser users get a truly usable new figure they can enjoy. Then maybe DAZ would stop being seen as the evil empire and DAZ Studio users as mindless minions. I have nothing but respect for most Poser users and see many great renders from that side. However, not one render of the new Poser figures shows any real promise in my eyes.

With a lot !!! of effort, you can get something of Pauline. But why do I allways have to put so much effort in it to get something decent? But why isn't it there right from the start? -Pauline looked better if you scale down her chest to 95%. -Remorph her arms along the z-axis. Her arms are to thin in z-axis. -Genitals have to be reshaped completley new. -Soften her Frankenstein chin. Then someone has to do a re-rigging of her shoulders and her arms. She suffers from the notorious SmithMicro elbows. That elbow problem has been on since the release of Miki1020, went on to Sydney, Alyson, Roxie and now finally Pauline.

The face handles are nice and the mesh topography looks all right to me. I miss the Pelvis group, that became so usefull with Roxie. She is no empty canvas and she will not be a V4 killer at all. Darn !!! Now I've said something.

Well, speaking as someone that just bought back in to Poser with a deeply discounted Poser Pro 2012 ($103), I am happy that I bought that instead of shelling out for Poser Pro 11. I am very disappointed with Pauline. The elbow in the posted pic is unforgivable, and they should fix it asap. The shoulder is a little ballooned as well, but that's not as urgent a thing to fix. How bad is Paul?

I truly hope that the issue with the elbow in that pic is just due to some hidden option Zev0 didn't see (maybe that dynamic joint recentering thing could help?), but I think that's very unlikely. He knows what he's doing. I'm beginning to think it's Smith Micro that doesn't.

The elbow in the posted pic is unforgivable, and they should fix it asap. The shoulder is a little ballooned as well, but that's not as urgent a thing to fix. How bad is Paul?

Agree. Things like this should have been resolved within the base before release. Now all content creators will have to fix these issues themselves before focusing on what they want to create, if they want to support the figure. SM lacks decent quality control. Simple as that. Hell if users can pick up these things and they can't, then there is something seriously wrong here. With regards to Paul, he isn't released yet so maybe with enough complaining they will fix him, but it's females people really want, and it's Pauline that should have been addressed. And that pic I posted is Pauline out of the box.

@LPR001 yes I have known about The free license of PR renderman for years. But as is the case with it As well as other paid engines, Like mental ray or Vray from Chaos group.

They are only truly relevant to end users who can either create their engine specific Shaders themselves or have a competent third party create a bridge that converts materials for them. Daz has done this with its implementation of IRay for DS

@Zevo I agree.. but to be fair SM has now officially stated that the new figures are a “merchant resource” so the plan is to have the content “crowd sourced” by the various members of the user community. Lets wait and how this will differ from Sydney,simon, Alison ,Ryan etc. etc. etc.

Really a V4 killer?

-Timberwolf- posted at 10:39PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239119

Really a V4 killer?

It's supposed to be a G3 killer:) But yes, it is sad they are still trying to compete with a 10 year old figure. I am just extremely frustrated at the effort involved with these new figures.

There are 9 just released products for Pauline in Rendo marketplace, many of them developer's oriented. For the first time, I see third party traction on SM figures. Apparently, the nightmare of a market completely monopolized by DAZ and captive in the cloud is spurring content providers to action. "The more you tighten your grip...".

Ah so content finally showed up. Let's see how well they do.

chaecuna posted at 3:30PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239123

captive in the cloud

There's no "cloud" in DS.

chaecuna posted at 3:27PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239123

There are 9 just released products for Pauline in Rendo marketplace, many of them developer's oriented. For the first time, I see third party traction on SM figures. Apparently, the nightmare of a market completely monopolized by DAZ and captive in the cloud is spurring content providers to action. "The more you tighten your grip...".

Now my boss wants to know what's so funny that I'm cracking up at my desk.

Seriously. Let's see this hot list tomorrow of those 9 items before you do the rallying cry and see if the public will pony up for Pauline-oriented goods or will Vickie 7 continue to toss her head into the wind cooing "If you're going to do a competition, you have actually show you want to compete."

Ye this will blow over..Everybody was so anti Daz when Dawn content showed up at launch, screaming V4 Killer!!! and well, end result is always the same......Also I wouldn't even call this traction. Let's see how long this "traction" lasts. My bet is I give it 4 months at most. After that, the usual will happen.....When you do this long enough you never read into these initial signs too deeply. Always look at the trend over a longer period of time to see how sustainable a figure is. In 4 months if there is still around 5-8 products released daily I will call it traction. And no, freebies do not count:)

chaecuna posted at 5:31PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239123

There are 9 just released products for Pauline in Rendo marketplace, many of them developer's oriented. For the first time, I see third party traction on SM figures. Apparently, the nightmare of a market completely monopolized by DAZ and captive in the cloud is spurring content providers to action. "The more you tighten your grip...".

You made a funny!

RHaseltine posted at 11:40PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239139

chaecuna posted at 3:30PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239123

captive in the cloud

There's no "cloud" in DS.

My DAZ 3D Library\data\cloud\SKUNUMBER\runtime\textures\ARTISTNAME\PRODUCTNAME notice the "CLOUD" directory name.

Come on, a document tagged "Evil Plans for World Domination" is what I would expect in a "Pinky and the Brain" episode, not in real life; for further info, see "freudian slip". Next time you are looking for a name of a directory that does not give away your plans use a GUID.

Ameesa posted at 11:47PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239089

Zev0 posted at 11:12AM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239088

Who knows, maybe they might change their minds now that SM is distributing their version of it.

I'm thinking along the same lines.

I've been quiet during this whole thing, I'm just a lowly DAZ studio user with no real horse in the race. But I keep hoping to God, Poser users get a truly usable new figure they can enjoy. **Then maybe DAZ would stop being seen as the evil empire and DAZ Studio users as mindless minions. ** I have nothing but respect for most Poser users and see many great renders from that side. However, not one render of the new Poser figures shows any real promise in my eyes.

Thats only on the forums. I know loads of poser users, even some vendors and they dont give a dime what program I render in. Well I'm not upgrading my poser this time. I dont use it anymore so...Instead I picked up M7 pro and he rocks!!

chaecuna posted at 11:09AM Wed, 18 November 2015 - #4239160

RHaseltine posted at 11:40PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239139

chaecuna posted at 3:30PM Tue, 17 November 2015 - #4239123

captive in the cloud

There's no "cloud" in DS.

My DAZ 3D LibrarydatacloudSKUNUMBERruntimetexturesARTISTNAMEPRODUCTNAME notice the "CLOUD" directory name.

Come on, a document tagged "Evil Plans for World Domination" is what I would expect in a "Pinky and the Brain" episode, not in real life; for further info, see "freudian slip". Next time you are looking for a name of a directory that does not give away your plans use a GUID.

Lol, gawd you make me laugh sometimes. Don't put your hands in a Dyson AirBlade you might lose them chaecuna!

Well, for what it's worth, I too believe DAZ will go cloud based for their content, just not with the model everyone seems to be thinking. All software companies are trying since Adobe proved it was viable, and the CG world is at the center of it. My company now pays for Autodesk entertainment creation suite subs and Adobe CC subs for the people that deal with the creative end (yay for me).

I personally think they are planning subscription based content, letting people pay a flat fee per month for X dollars (or ikely, points) worth of downloads, and pay extra for more. Maybe tiered subscriptions, with more points for higher levels of monthly fee, etc. That's just my speculation though.

However, anyone saying the cloud isn't coming in one form or another is just being willfully blind. It's too profitable and skewed in favor of the vendor for software companies not to try (and yes, assets are software).

Xatren posted at 12:00PM Wed, 18 November 2015 - #4239190

Well, for what it's worth, I too believe DAZ will go cloud based for their content, just not with the model everyone seems to be thinking. All software companies are trying since Adobe proved it was viable, and the CG world is at the center of it. My company now pays for Autodesk entertainment creation suite subs and Adobe CC subs for the people that deal with the creative end (yay for me).

I personally think they are planning subscription based content, letting people pay a flat fee per month for X dollars (or ikely, points) worth of downloads, and pay extra for more. Maybe tiered subscriptions, with more points for higher levels of monthly fee, etc. That's just my speculation though.

However, anyone saying the cloud isn't coming in one form or another is just being willfully blind. It's too profitable and skewed in favor of the vendor for software companies not to try (and yes, assets are software).

Lol, I think you're broadly generalising, without enough research to understand what that kind of change would mean to Daz3D and it's customer base. Have you heard of Daz3D Platinum Club+ btw?

Daz Studio 4.9 Big Changes Incoming!!

I think you want this thread for speculation that starts with "I think..." ----->Insert random sky is falling or Evil Daz Empire speculation or what Daz3D are "going to do in the future" with nothing but intuition to guide you, type of statement <-----