What are the differences between Reality and Luxus? Does one offer advantages over the other? My impression is that more people use Reality than Luxus. Since Luxus is cheaper, that would mean that Reality has to be better to have the larger user base, right?

Basically, which should I get? In addition to just opinions, feel free to post your Reality or Luxus renders, as well as any screenshots of the interfaces that might explain the differences.

I could be very wrong on this, but I thought Reality was built on top of Luxus.

Not at all. Reality is the original program that brought PBR (Physically-Based Rendering) to the world of Studio five years ago. It does that by integrating Luxrender into DAZ Studio and Poser. The other plugin mentioned is a rip off of my idea, which was made by one of the DAZ employees after he saw what Reality could do.

Cheers.

I prefer Reality. For me it is easier to use and get the results I want with Reality. Luxus gives you a bit more flexibility if your into command line type tweaking. IMHO the learning curve for reality is much easier.

Here are a couple of Reality 4 renders (4.1 is faster):

https://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/reticent-tranquility/2637997</https:>

https://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/the-dragon-princess/2645391</https:>

Reality 3 renders:

https://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/castle-mage/2440008</https:>

https://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/jungle-queen/2434136</https:>

A Luxus render:

https://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/murielle/2437740</https:>

You can find a lot more Reality renders here:

http://forum.runtimedna.com/gallery/showgallery.php?cat=49

Thank you DustRider.

Well I have to be careful as a moderator in exactly what I have to say. I do look after the REALITY! forum ;-) ;-) I also use Reality in my work and find it great.

Thank you very much Johnny. I appreciate it.

Thanks everyone or your input. It looks like I will be getting Reality. I just wish there was a Reality for Carrara as well, so I could keep things uniform between it and Daz Studio / Poser.

@Xatren maybe if we beg Paolo we get it for Carrara. DustRider is a Carrara user too. The native render engine in Carrara is acceptable but I run external as well. As for your Daz/Poser you won't be regretting Reality :-)

At some point I actually started work on a Carrara version. Unfortunately the fact is that the Carrara market is just too small to sponsor development of any plugin. In addition the program is basically abandoned and so there is no future for it. Sorry, I don't mean to upset anybody, it's just the objective situation. Software e development costs a fortune and if there is no prospect of recovery the costs and then making a living then it's simply not feasible.

I appreciate the support expressed by everybody.

Cheers.

Carrara is still being worked on - this was discussed briefly by Rob Whisenant in one of the DS 4.9 Beta threads on the Daz forums (with respect, in that case, to Genesis 3 and the Daz Connect system).

Yes, they add support for the new figures but there has been no serious development of other features. The modeler is extremely dated and the overall architecture, internally, is obsolete. The program has received no major updates in a very long time.

Regardless, the installed base is very small and it's not expanding, which makes it simply impractical as a platform for commercial software.

Cheers.

I understand about not developing a Reality for Carrara. I still want one though.

Have you considered a Reality for other programs out there, like Modo perhaps? It has a great renderer built in (in use at ILM even), but it's CPU based.

I have, but I cannot comment about future projects.

Thank you for your interest.

I prefer Luxus. It allows much more flexibility in saving presets, and really opens up the parameters tab. Plus, it is nice that you can have the Luxus presets saved in the same DUF file with either the 3Delight or Iray settings, and it will automatically call upon the correct settings when you change render engines. Finally, Luxus, like Iray, will allow you to make a partial surface light emitter, driven by an emission map.

And there is a Luxus for Carrara.

Pret-a-3D posted at 7:47PM Mon, 23 November 2015 - #4240364

Not at all. Reality is the original program that brought PBR (Physically-Based Rendering) to the world of Studio five years ago. It does that by integrating Luxrender into DAZ Studio and Poser. The other plugin mentioned is a rip off of my idea, which was made by one of the DAZ employees after he saw what Reality could do.

Cheers.

I was not aware that Spheric Labs was a former Daz employee, but I also have no proof that he wasn't. Either way, it is completely uncalled for to accuse anyone publicly of a rip-off, as you don't get to own the idea of a plug-in or bridge, and they function so very differently. cheers!

Hi DestinyGarden.

I didn't say "former" employee.

Here is the timeline.

• In 2009 I start development of Reality. At that time not only there was no program connecting Poser or DAZ Studio to LuxRender or any other PBR, there was not even any talk about PBR in the Poser/Studio world. I introduced the idea to this market.
• August 2010, Pret-a-3D, my company, which has a website, email and contact information, in other words a legitimate company, releases Reality 1.0 for DAZ Studio. Physically-Based Rendering is added to DAZ Studio for the first time and the community learns about this possibility.
• For more than two years Prêt-à-3D and DAZ work together. In that period a certain person was the liaison between the two companies.
• In Q1 2012 I close my store at DAZ and move to Renderosity
• In April 2013 I release Reality for Poser.
• In July 2013 the same person who was my contact in DAZ releases Luxus. A rip-off of my idea of connecting DAZ Studio to LuxRender. Not only the concept is plagiarized from my idea which he witnessed for the first time when I submitted Reality to the DAZ Store, but it is positioned and advertised against Reality, showing the clear reference point.

So, yes, I do have the right to call it a rip-off, imitation, knock off, and so on, because I had the original idea to bring PBR to Studio and specifically to use LuxRender. That is very specific. And this is particularly because ldgilman said that in his/her mind "Reality was built on top of Luxus". That is adding insult to injury.

If you have iRay today it is because I spent the past five years demonstrating that there is an interest in using PBR systems in this market. In 2009 it was a total gable, there was no market and no indication that this kind of technology would be adapted by the Poserverse. So, not only I promoted the idea but I took all the risk. Sphericlabs did nothing of that. He just look at somebody's else work and wrote a knock off. At least Studio's integrated PBR uses a different renderer. To use the same rendered was simply an act of plagiarism. Some people lead, other copy the ideas of innovators.

BTW, saving the data together with the scene it's something that Reality did since version 1.0.

All the best.

And then pose2lux was released for poser after Reality too. Though that was free.

There was a free exporter available from DAZ Studio 3.1 to luxrender as well. And that was sitting in DAZ's freebie forum before Reality hit the market.

Pret-a-3D posted at 10:23AM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240626

Hi DestinyGarden.

I didn't say "former" employee.

Here is the timeline.

• In 2009 I start development of Reality. At that time not only there was no program connecting Poser or DAZ Studio to LuxRender or any other PBR, there was not even any talk about PBR in the Poser/Studio world. I introduced the idea to this market.
• August 2010, Pret-a-3D, my company, which has a website, email and contact information, in other words a legitimate company, releases Reality 1.0 for DAZ Studio. Physically-Based Rendering is added to DAZ Studio for the first time and the community learns about this possibility.
• For more than two years Prêt-à-3D and DAZ work together. In that period a certain person was the liaison between the two companies.
• In Q1 2012 I close my store at DAZ and move to Renderosity
• In April 2013 I release Reality for Poser.
• In July 2013 the same person who was my contact in DAZ releases Luxus. A rip-off of my idea of connecting DAZ Studio to LuxRender. Not only the concept is plagiarized from my idea which he witnessed for the first time when I submitted Reality to the DAZ Store, but it is positioned and advertised against Reality, showing the clear reference point.

So, yes, I do have the right to call it a rip-off, imitation, knock off, and so on, because I had the original idea to bring PBR to Studio and specifically to use LuxRender. That is very specific. And this is particularly because ldgilman said that in his/her mind "Reality was built on top of Luxus". That is adding insult to injury.

If you have iRay today it is because I spent the past five years demonstrating that there is an interest in using PBR systems in this market. In 2009 it was a total gable, there was no market and no indication that this kind of technology would be adapted by the Poserverse. So, not only I promoted the idea but I took all the risk. Sphericlabs did nothing of that. He just look at somebody's else work and wrote a knock off. At least Studio's integrated PBR uses a different renderer. To use the same rendered was simply an act of plagiarism. Some people lead, other copy the ideas of innovators.

BTW, saving the data together with the scene it's something that Reality did since version 1.0.

All the best.

You forgot a part.

Why did your store get closed? Also why did luxus need to be created? Could it had been that you created Reality 3 for Poser with no support for DS for years? There is no Reality 3 for DS, correct?

Let's not go through this again. Let it go.

Male_M3dia posted at 7:32AM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240657

There was a free exporter available from DAZ Studio 3.1 to luxrender as well. And that was sitting in DAZ's freebie forum before Reality hit the market. Nope, that is false. That plugin was released more than a years after Reality 1.0. Please get your facts straight.

Pret-a-3D posted at 10:35AM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240659

Male_M3dia posted at 7:32AM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240657

There was a free exporter available from DAZ Studio 3.1 to luxrender as well. And that was sitting in DAZ's freebie forum before Reality hit the market. Nope, that is false. That plugin was released more than a years after Reality 1.0. Please get your facts straight.

No paolo, it was there in the freebie section. Though you would like to think you were the first, there were people playing around with the renderer before you took it commercial.

Besides, the point is, is your mudslinging really helpful if you're trying to get people sold on your product? No one's innocent in this affair; just make your product the best it can be and that will be the determining factor. No one cares who did what years ago. They care about what your product can do now. Unless both your and luxus' code is identical, you really don't have a claim to who makes what for which program.

Male_M3dia posted at 7:33AM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240658

You forgot a part.

Why did your store get closed?

It did not get closed, I left the DAZ market place. Please stop spreading false information about events of which you have no direct knowledge.

About Reality 3, I developed an anrchitecture that makes Reality work in exactly the same way under Studio and under Poser. This is, again, unique and unprecedented. The same exact UI is used for both programs, bringing a consistency of workflow that does not exist in other products. It takes a long time to make this sort of things. I'm a single developer and writing code is time consuming. Reality has about 200,000 lines of C++, Python, And SQL code, among other things. It connects three programs, DAZ Studio, Poser and Luxrenderand all those programs changed continuosly.

Poser and Studio use very different plugin APIs, one using Python (Poser) and the other using C++. It took a lot of design, prototyping, and test to find something that works.

I developed Reality 3 for Poser because Reality had been present for Studio for a couple of years at that time, therefore Studio artists had a PBR solution for quite some time. Reality 2 is so advanced that people are still using it today, even though version 4 has been out for a long time.

After I finished Reality 3 for Poser I was mentally exhausted. I needed time to recover and so I spent a few weeks away from coding. Then I started working on connecting Reality 3 to Studio. During that time I posted detailed descriptions of the progress in my blog, at http://preta3d.com/category/blog/

The job tool a long time because of the complexity of the code. Reality is very complex. It converts materials using complex heuristics used to bring the highest level of automatism possible. It also has the most advanced material editor available in an external renderer, without using nodes. That stuff takes time.

After working on that for months it became clear that new features needed to be added I order to give Studio users the support that they deserved. At the same time I wanted to have one version of Reality that was released simultaneously for Studio and Poser. That led to calling that version 4.0.

Cheers.

I think we have been down this road before. I think it is best if we don't revisit it please.

With all dues respect, what Male_M3dia says about another product providing integration of Luxrender in Studio before Reality is completely, utterly and completel false. Provide proof or stop spreading malicious information.

OK, no need for mudslinging and personal attacks. If you can contribute constructively to the discussion then you're more than welcome to do so, but if not then please refrain. I don't want to have to lock this thread, but I will if I have to.

Well, I certainly didn't mean to rekindle an old argument here. I plead ignorance, since I just returned to Poserland and am only just starting to pick up DAZ Studio.

What I gather from the thread's useful bits is that Reality is easier to use than Luxus. Is that accurate?

Xatren posted at 11:46AM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240704

Well, I certainly didn't mean to rekindle an old argument here. I plead ignorance, since I just returned to Poserland and am only just starting to pick up DAZ Studio.

What I gather from the thread's useful bits is that Reality is easier to use than Luxus. Is that accurate?

Not necessarily. Much depends on your experience with Daz Studio. They are both easy to use, but they both require shader conversion for best results.

They both do the same thing. They both connect Daz Studio with the open source Luxrender engine and they both have advantages and disadvantages.

LuxRender is a Physically based render engine and works very much like Maxwell, Octane and Iray. Is there a particular reason that you wanted to use Luxrender, instead of simply using the built in Nvidia Iray render engine?

I think it's pretty much an individual thing. I find Reality easier to use, and easier to get the results I want. But there are people who prefer Luxus and find it easier to use.

Wow, Paolo, defensive much? In the US, you do not get to own the "idea" of anything. http://copyright.gov/circs/circ31.pdf

20 people could decide tomorrow that they want to make converters from Poser or Daz Studio or Carrara to LuxRender, and there is not a thing anyone can do to stop them. Giving each other ideas is a hazard in this business. There is no way around it. The only thing you can do is make your "thing" the best "thing" and go from there.

I'm going to stand by my statement that publicly accusing someone of a "rip-off," and especially then airing private business details is inappropriate, and unprofessional. That should be dealt with through the appropriate channels, and not by turning a simple request for unbiased and comparative information into a commercial and a crusade. All of that stuff is completely none of my business, and not relevant to the question posed by the original poster.

My apologies to Xatren for derailing the thread.

Is Reality easier to use than Luxus? That is largely a personal choice, and what your end goal is. Quoting from the Reality newsletter, "Reality has been designed from the beginning to hide the complexity of the rendering system." So, easier in that it handles much of the conversion for you. Not easier if you are attempting to do something that hasn't been accounted for, like the ability to turn part of a textured wall into a light emitting object, or if you like to be more "hands on" in your surface settings. It really is a personal choice, and there is no right or wrong answer.

I prefer Luxus. It is less expensive, is easier to get vendor support, and allows me creative freedom in the ability to access the "complexity of the rendering system."

I never claimed that I owned the idea of anything. I did have the idea first and that caused a shift in the whole Poser/DAZ Studio market. If you enjoy a competing product today it is because of Reality. If you enjoy using iRay in Studio, it is because of Reality. If you like the new Superfly in Poser 11, it is because of Reality. While before there was no talk about PBR in this market today there are several solutions, and PBR is expected. That is the result of Reality spearheading the effort.

This is a matter of giving credit where credit is due.

All the best.

PS: settings a portion of the surface to emit light in Reality 4 is simply a matter of enabling one checkbox in the material and adding your texture map.

@DestinysGarden What part of wheatpenny's request did you not understand? Derailing the thread then apologizing is still derailing the thread. If you have something constructive to offer regarding Luxus and it's use then go right ahead and offer your opinion to assist the OP.

The part where I think it is NOT OK, to publicly accuse someone of a rip off, and share private business details, which is none of our business. That should all be handled privately. I thought this forum had rules about that sort of thing. I did report the post, but that didn't work.

Thank you for the information Paolo. I shall search for said checkbox, and start a thread in the Reality forum if I require additional assistance.

Anytime.

Cheers.

@DestinysGarden Your concerns have been noted, to say your report did not work is inaccurate all reports are followed up. If we can move on and turn this thread into something useful it would be appreciated.

bhoins posted at 8:32PM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240710

Not necessarily. Much depends on your experience with Daz Studio. They are both easy to use, but they both require shader conversion for best results.

They both do the same thing. They both connect Daz Studio with the open source Luxrender engine and they both have advantages and disadvantages.

LuxRender is a Physically based render engine and works very much like Maxwell, Octane and Iray. Is there a particular reason that you wanted to use Luxrender, instead of simply using the built in Nvidia Iray render engine?

Yes. I own an upper-end AMD gpu (Sapphire r9 270x 4gb), and would like to take advantage of it, rather than wait for a cpu render in Iray. Imo, it was a mistake to incorporate Iray, since it effectively shuts out half the market from enjoying the speed of gpu rendering, especially since OpenCL is the way everything is going to be going in the next few years. Obviously, I could be wrong about that. It's just how I interpret things.

Xatren posted at 11:08AM Wed, 25 November 2015 - #4240792

bhoins posted at 8:32PM Tue, 24 November 2015 - #4240710

Not necessarily. Much depends on your experience with Daz Studio. They are both easy to use, but they both require shader conversion for best results.

They both do the same thing. They both connect Daz Studio with the open source Luxrender engine and they both have advantages and disadvantages.

LuxRender is a Physically based render engine and works very much like Maxwell, Octane and Iray. Is there a particular reason that you wanted to use Luxrender, instead of simply using the built in Nvidia Iray render engine?

Yes. I own an upper-end AMD gpu (Sapphire r9 270x 4gb), and would like to take advantage of it, rather than wait for a cpu render in Iray. Imo, it was a mistake to incorporate Iray, since it effectively shuts out half the market from enjoying the speed of gpu rendering, especially since OpenCL is the way everything is going to be going in the next few years. Obviously, I could be wrong about that. It's just how I interpret things.

Just a note the GPU version of Luxrender is not feature complete when compared to the CPU version. The OpenCL version of Cycles isn't even close to capabilities of either CPU or CUDA version of that Render engine. Most render engines that support GPU do not support OpenCL. Which render engine are you thinking of to support the idea that OpenCL is the way of the future?

Xatren posted at 8:20PM Wed, 25 November 2015 - #4241001

bhoins posted at 7:56PM Wed, 25 November 2015 - #4240903

Which render engine are you thinking of to support the idea that OpenCL is the way of the future?

None of them. I am considering LuxRender for my personal use. The point about OpenCL being the direction most everything will be going in the coming years is a broader one. Historically, closed proprietary technologies and platforms tend to lose out to those that are more accessible to a wider range of developers. CUDA has had a great run, and will of course continue to be relevant for years to come, largely due to the strengths of nvidia's new GPU render cloud. I just think that as OpenCL continues to be adopted across the wider computing industry, we'll see the ability of nvidia to exert market pressure in the graphics processing sector of that industry diminish. Developers won't feel as compelled to offer specialized support for nvidia's proprietary tech (or nvidia branding), because there will be a viable alternative. Personally, I think that would be a good thing.

WARNING: TIN FOIL HAT REQUIRED BEYOND THIS POINT

Now, I am aware that CUDA tech can use the OpenCL framework. My point, in relation to CG, is that we will see a new alternative to CUDA emerge (perhaps many of them), designed and optimized specifically for OpenCL. We could have devices with benefits similar to CUDA competing with one another and therefore giving us a range of choices and price points. Rendering engines like iRay, open to more than glacially slow CPU rendering or a specific brand of GPU... What a brave new world that would be.

Xatren posted at 7:53PM Wed, 25 November 2015 - #4241009

Xatren posted at 8:20PM Wed, 25 November 2015 - #4241001

bhoins posted at 7:56PM Wed, 25 November 2015 - #4240903

Which render engine are you thinking of to support the idea that OpenCL is the way of the future?

None of them. I am considering LuxRender for my personal use. The point about OpenCL being the direction most everything will be going in the coming years is a broader one. Historically, closed proprietary technologies and platforms tend to lose out to those that are more accessible to a wider range of developers. CUDA has had a great run, and will of course continue to be relevant for years to come, largely due to the strengths of nvidia's new GPU render cloud. I just think that as OpenCL continues to be adopted across the wider computing industry, we'll see the ability of nvidia to exert market pressure in the graphics processing sector of that industry diminish. Developers won't feel as compelled to offer specialized support for nvidia's proprietary tech (or nvidia branding), because there will be a viable alternative. Personally, I think that would be a good thing.

WARNING: TIN FOIL HAT REQUIRED BEYOND THIS POINT

Now, I am aware that CUDA tech can use the OpenCL framework. My point, in relation to CG, is that we will see a new alternative to CUDA emerge (perhaps many of them), designed and optimized specifically for OpenCL. We could have devices with benefits similar to CUDA competing with one another and therefore giving us a range of choices and price points. Rendering engines like iRay, open to more than glacially slow CPU rendering or a specific brand of GPU... What a brave new world that would be.

I wasn't concerned whether it was for personal or commercial use. The license allows for both.

No Problem, you are entitled to your beliefs. I was just wondering what it was based on.