Hello

You know that you can apply .mt5 and .mc6 files without ever entering the material room?

Prerequisite is, of course, that you've selected the correct figure/prop to which it should be applied!

**One big difference is that **

• in case of an .mt5 file applied from the pose room, to any figure/prop, you'll be asked to which material zone of your currently selected figure/prop it shall be applied.
• in case of an .mc6 file applied to a non-matching figure/prop anytime, you'll be alerted that the material zones as contained in the file don't exist, and asked whether they should be created - which is a bad idea and should thus be answered by "NO".

Another big difference is flexibility: With .mt5 files, you can replace a material completely, or just add a certain node set while leaving the current material as is. This gives you the option of adding "features" to any existing material... Granted, you'll have to know your way in the Advanced Material Room to wire them up correctly, but I wouldn't want to miss this feature.

PLUS, as it has already been mentioned, an .mt5 file can be applied to any material zone, be it figure or prop. You can't ever do this with a .pz2 set because the material zone are "carved in stone"! (Also note the other limitation - a figure must always be present in the scene. A nuissance if you just want to try out materials on a prop...)

All that said, and to sum it up:

If I find a material (collection) in .pz2 format which is really good and worth keeping, I convert it to an .mt5 or .mc6 file when I install it, to benefit from the advantages described above.

If the material is bad (no matter what file format), I don't use it. I make a mark in my Little Red Book instead, to be cautious before buying more from this vendor...

... which brings us back to the "quality" issue as brought up by the OP.

**Let's keep this discussion going, because it's interesting. But please let's stay civil. ** Regards,

Peter