So I'm not sure why something is, but I'll ask anyway...

A vendor puts out a new product, say a prop of some kind, made for Poser. Vendor notes that the Studio user has to change a few material settings, but otherwise, said product works in DS.

But if a prop (not a character, folks, a prop) is made for Studio, apparently it's damn near impossible to use in Poser without massive changes requiring an additional week's work on the part of the vendor and blah blah blah...

Guys, if it's easier to convert from Poser to Studio just by making a few minor material changes, why do vendors create things as Studio only? Why not double your market share, build it in Poser, and provide whatever apparently minor tweaks are needed for it to work in Studio? One vendor does this all the time, and the results are great. So why is this so difficult? Do you vendors not want my money?

Seems like a simple fix. Some folks are pretty dedicated to their chosen program ... and may have personal reasons for not making for the other. Your best solution is to ask the vendor directly. That way you have a fair idea of their stand on this situation. Some vendors ONLY use one program.

I did once — one of Rendo's biggest, who's now pretty much Studio only. I put the question in much the same way as I did above, and the response was "Oh, it takes weeks to move from Studio to Poser! Sure, we'd love the sales, but we cant invest that amount of time!" — which kinda begs the question: if it's easier to move from Poser to Studio, why not just build it in that? And I know this particular vendor has Poser — they've made Poser stuff before; this Studio only thing is a recent wrinkle.

Sorry, just seems really short sighted.

There could be unspoken software politics involved too. Sad but true.

Funny how stupid politics can get in the way of everyone's enjoyment.

While i am not sure what is meant by "unspoken software politics"? Perhaps you would care to elaborate on what that means Boni?

It's natural that the best products for Daz Studio will be built in Daz Studio to take advantage of Daz Studios specific feature set. And the same with Poser. After the fact ports are always a non direct translation and with the differences between the two platforms becoming greater, the effort to port either way is becoming more substantial for the vendor. This paired with the discrepancy in platform capability and end render result, is seeing more vendors choosing to focus support on the platform with the largest market share and in turn buyer base. It boils down to the extra work involved to include Poser in the support base of a product, rarely sees a good ROI for the vendor at this point in time. Making a Poser specific product and doing a port over to DS would still see higher workloads for the vendor and possibly substandard DS product ports that fail to capitalise on the strengths of Daz Studio simply because the vendor is more familar with Poser and its product pipelines. As an end result this could make the product less desirable to the larger Daz Studio market segment, simply to cater to the smaller Poser segment, which doesn't make a great deal of sense tbh. Many vendors report only seeing a slight increase in sales for a DS product that includes support for Poser compared to products that do not. it's through this stat that most vendors are choosing to target a specfic buyer group or platform rather then spread their resources more thinly, for a broader capability product. Whether the the sales numbers are a reflection of the platform user base size or just that the DS user base is more hungry for ready made content is debatable, but really either way it changes the trend little.

Of course this is just my 2 cents.

Razor42 posted at 12:16PM Tue, 16 May 2017 - #4305341

While i am not sure what is meant by "unspoken software politics"? Perhaps you would care to elaborate on what that means Boni?

It's natural that the best products for Daz Studio will be built in Daz Studio to take advantage of Daz Studios specific feature set. And the same with Poser. After the fact ports are always a non direct translation and with the differences between the two platforms becoming greater, the effort to port either way is becoming more substantial for the vendor. This paired with the discrepancy in platform capability and end render result, is seeing more vendors choosing to focus support on the platform with the largest market share and in turn buyer base. It boils down to the extra work involved to include Poser in the support base of a product, rarely sees a good ROI for the vendor at this point in time. Making a Poser specific product and doing a port over to DS would still see higher workloads for the vendor and possibly substandard DS product ports that fail to capitalise on the strengths of Daz Studio simply because the vendor is more familar with Poser and its product pipelines. As an end result this could make the product less desirable to the larger Daz Studio market segment, simply to cater to the smaller Poser segment, which doesn't make a great deal of sense tbh. Many vendors report only seeing a slight increase in sales for a DS product that includes support for Poser compared to products that do not. it's through this stat that most vendors are choosing to target a specfic buyer group or platform rather then spread their resources more thinly, for a broader capability product. Whether the the sales numbers are a reflection of the platform user base size or just that the DS user base is more hungry for ready made content is debatable, but really either way it changes the trend little.

Of course this is just my 2 cents.

As a Poser user I do see the lack of support for Poser but I also understand that vendors are going to use the software they are most comfortable with. Elsewhere there has been instances where a vendor that knows DS has worked in conjunction with a Poser vendor to do the conversion. This seems to be a solution that benefits everyone but it will only happen with vendors who are above the 'unspoken software politics'.

Boni posted at 12:56PM Tue, 16 May 2017 - #4305357

I was afraid some of you would come in to elaborate on the "politics" ... let's just drop that right now. I'm not baiting you and I'm not letting you bait anyone else. Check the TOS.

I wasn't trying to troll, bait or start a war I was just suggesting that some vendors not that entrenched on one particular software, for whatever reason, have worked together and I would love to see more of it.

hornet3d posted at 11:35PM Tue, 16 May 2017 - #4305355

Razor42 posted at 12:16PM Tue, 16 May 2017 - #4305341

While i am not sure what is meant by "unspoken software politics"? Perhaps you would care to elaborate on what that means Boni?

It's natural that the best products for Daz Studio will be built in Daz Studio to take advantage of Daz Studios specific feature set. And the same with Poser. After the fact ports are always a non direct translation and with the differences between the two platforms becoming greater, the effort to port either way is becoming more substantial for the vendor. This paired with the discrepancy in platform capability and end render result, is seeing more vendors choosing to focus support on the platform with the largest market share and in turn buyer base. It boils down to the extra work involved to include Poser in the support base of a product, rarely sees a good ROI for the vendor at this point in time. Making a Poser specific product and doing a port over to DS would still see higher workloads for the vendor and possibly substandard DS product ports that fail to capitalise on the strengths of Daz Studio simply because the vendor is more familar with Poser and its product pipelines. As an end result this could make the product less desirable to the larger Daz Studio market segment, simply to cater to the smaller Poser segment, which doesn't make a great deal of sense tbh. Many vendors report only seeing a slight increase in sales for a DS product that includes support for Poser compared to products that do not. it's through this stat that most vendors are choosing to target a specfic buyer group or platform rather then spread their resources more thinly, for a broader capability product. Whether the the sales numbers are a reflection of the platform user base size or just that the DS user base is more hungry for ready made content is debatable, but really either way it changes the trend little.

Of course this is just my 2 cents.

As a Poser user I do see the lack of support for Poser but I also understand that vendors are going to use the software they are most comfortable with. Elsewhere there has been instances where a vendor that knows DS has worked in conjunction with a Poser vendor to do the conversion. This seems to be a solution that benefits everyone but it will only happen with vendors who are above the 'unspoken software politics'.

Nothing is stopping vendors making a poser resource pack that provides poser support to a prop pack for ds or anything else. Making the original product a requirment to the poser expansion pack is not overtley hard to do and may be worthwhile for a vendor ready to spend the time converting it for poser users. It is definiteley a niche worth exploring.

As far as "unspoken softwate politics" i couldn't say, as i have no idea what is you are referring to? ....

@Boni asking someone to clarify what they mean by a statement or comment is in no way baiting....unless the original statement itself is bait. I'm just asking you to further explain what it is you mean by "unspoken software politics"? Or are you just going to bully me with the tos for asking what you meant? If asking is against the tos, well....

Your initial comparison isn't really valid - the vendor of the Poser product may blithely say the item is easy to use in DS, "simply tweak the materials", but they don't provide a DS native version to double their market any more than the makers of DS products provide a Poser version. The trip from DS to Poser requires DS or the DSON Importer for Poser (and probably Dimension3D's script to browse for a file to load), so it can't be offered as airily, but export and OBJ/use the DSON Importer and tweak the materials would be just as valid as the advice with respect to taking Poser versions to DS. In either case there is a gulf between such quick conversions (which are pretty much limited to Poser 4/ProPack level materials) and a native product for either application that will satisfy store QA.

To be honest.. Sometimes it just isn't worth it (as in the time used to create a proper version for the other programs also) when that time can be used on starting a completely new item. I do it sometimes create a Poser and daz versions of the same item (Only because sometimes I feel kind of bad and don't want to exclude any artist and not because of money). But not everyone is like that and that's their right I guess.

Khai-J-Bach posted at 1:41PM Wed, 17 May 2017 - #4305385

she meant, soon as anyone asks a poser question or why something like a converter can't be done,they get told to shut up by certain ppl (yes, you as one, above. you'll draw that conclusion, and please, learnt to use paragraph breaks...!) will storm in and basically shut it down.

why do you think things go quiet? cos once it starts, whats the point in carrying on?

I'll defend your right to say things. but, there comes a point when after so many times of being shutdown, a halfbrick in a sock becomes very very attractive....

This is just not true. Nobody told anyone to shutup or attacked their preferred software platform above, which would be against the TOS. The OP was aking about why more vendors do not simply use Poser for creating their products as the OP perceived the process as easier to make a DS version from that start point.

I just gave my own perspective on why that doesn't happen and why as a vendor and PA imyself, I can see issues with that kind of workflow. I didnt attack the OP or even his idea. I calmy and non-personally explained my POV. The issue is that some simply do not like that POV and choose to offer personal attacks in return rather than a rational conversation.

I didn't personally attack anyones text formatting, nor threaten anyone with violence as you have in the post above. Actually how does your comment even relate in slightest to the OPs question? Are you not doing right there, exactly what it is you are attempting to condemn in the same comment?

There is no evil DS empire to fight against, No-one is maliciously undermining the Poser platform (which is what your comment alludes to Boni)... People pushing that idea are simply seeking to divide people for their own motives. A community isn't about an us and them atittude and keeping people divided. It's about everyone getting along as well as possible, united together with a common interest which is creating art in this case. Once again it's been demonstrated that attacking perceived DS users (even if they do use both platforms) is quite alright around here. Even in the community forum. I'm truly tired of the games here,over something as silly as software preference.

Funny how you are more worried about me inciting someone to say something bad, then you are about direct threats of pyschical violence from other commenters here. Could it be that I am perceived as a DS user so should expect that the rules are different for myself.... Expect to be threatened with half bricks in socks simply for making a statement. Maybe that is why it's so quite around here... ...

KristiS posted at 10:50AM Wed, 17 May 2017 - #4305411

Alright all, I do not want to see and will not tolerate any baiting, trolling, arguing, etc.

I will lock this thread down if I need to. Vendors are just as entitled to create in whatever program they'd like to just as you or I are entitled to create in whichever program we'd like.

This will not turn into a "which is better than which" thread. If so, I will lock it down immediately.

Let's keep it civil...

Thank you in advance,

Some moons ago I was disappointed with the almost total lack of moderation in Renderosity forums and what that led to, so I am in total agreement with your intervention and the timing of such. The only other requirement is for the rules to be applied fairly and only time will tell if this is the case.

Of course the vendor has a total right to work with the software that they want to work with. I am not a vendor, and never likely to be one, but I think I would see it as a compliment if a customer said 'I like this item, if only it would work in the software that I choose to use', irrespective to the software being used. The decision of whether they have the time, the skills, or if the conversion effort is a good use of their time is completely down to them.

I think the main reason some vendors stopped creating for Poser after moving on to DS is that they probably stopped buying Poser altogether. They would have to have the latest version and provide support if they wanted to continue creating for Poser. Let's face it, DAZ sales probably are much greater than the vendor would get at other stores so they seem to be satisfied (stonemason pretty much said so in a thread where he explained why he stopped creating for Poser).
Don't forget DS is free so many new vendors came into the 3d market via DS and didn't even bother with Poser as the Pro version is quite pricey and they would have to learn a whole new program.

I highly doubt it's software politics because money talks and if a vendor is not making enough supporting just DS then they would create for the Poser market too, I don't think long-time vendors are that naïve as to be coerced to settle for less income.

Kalypso posted at 3:37PM Wed, 17 May 2017 - #4305449

I think the main reason some vendors stopped creating for Poser after moving on to DS is that they probably stopped buying Poser altogether. They would have to have the latest version and provide support if they wanted to continue creating for Poser. Let's face it, DAZ sales probably are much greater than the vendor would get at other stores so they seem to be satisfied (stonemason pretty much said so in a thread where he explained why he stopped creating for Poser).
Don't forget DS is free so many new vendors came into the 3d market via DS and didn't even bother with Poser as the Pro version is quite pricey and they would have to learn a whole new program.

I highly doubt it's software politics because money talks and if a vendor is not making enough supporting just DS then they would create for the Poser market too, I don't think long-time vendors are that naïve as to be coerced to settle for less income.

I can certainly relate to that as I did not upgrade to the latest version of Poser either, even though I have upgraded every time from Poser 5 to Game Dev. On the other hand it is another reason why a DS vendor and Poser vendor working together could be the answer, providing both parties are willing there is not the same financial impact.

I don't think it was really suggested the reason was politics, it was more a fear of where this thread would go rather than a reason not to have two versions

Let's leave the "politics" statement alone as it was deleted.

Vendors create products in a software because:

a. This is the program they use and it's the only one they have so they cannot do anything in another software nor test their items in another software so they cannot support it in another one

b. They feel more comfortable in a certain software

c. Sales are better for them in a certain software so instead of them putting a lot of time into multiple options, they do the one and then move on to create more items

The debates between Poser and Daz/Studio HAVE to stop! Vendors create products using the software they choose and we cannot control that nor can we make them create items to use in multiple softwares.

I am locking this thread only because I will not have anyone getting attacked, baited, etc.