You can even buy Poser 5 on Amazon, take a quick look at the features .... (link: https://www.amazon.com/Curious-Labs-Inc-Poser-5/dp/B00006IXA4)

"Poser 5 is an ideal 3-D character design and animation tool for artists and animators. Create 3-D figures using a diverse collection of ready-to-use 3-D human and animal models. Poser's innovative interface makes figure design, posing, and animating fast and easy. Map facial photos, grow and style dynamic hair, and create dynamic cloth to add extraordinary realism to your figure.

Quickly output movies and images from your posed figures for content in Web, print, and video projects. Add life to your 3-D worlds using exported, posed figures. For those new to 3-D, digital artists, and hobbyists alike, Poser 5 is easy to learn and quickly generates fast and dynamic results.

Poser 5 delivers a stunning host of new tools including Facial Photo-mapping, Dynamic Strand-based Hair, Dynamic Cloth, new Figures, and FireFly, Poser 5's powerful new renderer. Use Morph Putty to directly manipulate facial expressions. Create realistic dynamic cloth and make it flow and drape around any object in your scene. Build powerful node-based material shaders to create any material texture you can imagine. The Poser 5 Content CD contains a host of extras, including props and textures."

Another tutorial for dynamic cloth in Poser 5: http://www.render-lab.com/Dynamic_Clothes.htm

Deecey posted at 10:11PM Sun, 22 November 2020 - #4405554

Sorry, but you are mistaken, the error is the association of "Dynamic Cloth and Strand Based Hair" with Poser 2010.

That might be when they added bullet physics,

That sounds about right.

Sorry, but you are mistaken, the error is the association of "Dynamic Cloth and Strand Based Hair" with Poser 2010. IIRC SM "improved" some of the functions/UI for 2010, but it was there long before that. In fact, I was the first person to develop dynamic clothing for Glamorous Jessie, a Jim Burton re-work of the Jessie figure that came with Poser 5. Here is a render of Glamorous Jessie in the dynamic cloth outfit I created for her: https://www.renderosity.com/rr/mod/gallery/i-wonder-/1386549/ (yes, it's pretty bad, but that was Poser 5). Here is another image done with the same outfit, refitted to V3, and rendered in Carrara Studio 4 Pro using Transposer to move the figure (with dynamic cloth) into Carrara for rendering: https://www.renderosity.com/rr/mod/gallery/eve-wip-/887298/ . If you still have the box, then you probably still have the manual, which will clear up the confusion. Wikipedia is often wrong, or as in this instance, missing some critical information.

Seriously though, you should remember the introduction of dynamic cloth in Poser 5, it was a really big deal. Just incase you still don't believe it, here is a tutorial from 2005 on Dynamic cloth in Poser 5 https://www.renderosity.com/rr/mod/tutorial/?tutorial_id=868 (sorry, live links seem to be broken right now, so you'll need to copy/paste the url's).

Deecey posted at 4:54AM Sun, 22 November 2020 - #4405316

Smith didn't add the cloth sim. Curious Labs did 5 years before SM was in the picture. That's right. The original Poser team, some of who are now working with Bondware.

JAG posted at 1:20PM Sun, 22 November 2020 - #4405465

MY SINCERE APOLOGIES. I DIDN'T REALIZE I WAS TALKING TO AN IDIOT. CLOTHING SIMULATION - NOT CLOTHING. CLOTHING AS IN CONFORMING WAS ADDED BY CURIOUS LABS BUT CLOTH SIMULATION WAS NOT ADDED UNTIL SMITH TOOK OVER AND IT DEBUTED WITH POSER PRO 2010 GO SEE HERE UNINFORMED PERSON: BOTTOM OF THE PAGE. READ AND WEEP OVER YOUR IGNORANCE.

Uummm .... if you re-read the page you linked to, you will see that Curious Labs introduced dynamic hair and cloth (cloth simulation) with Poser 5 in 2003. It was a huge step forward at the time!

I too might be more interested in getting Poser 12 if there was an easy way to import and use Genesis figures/content even though there are no serious new features or innovation in Poser 12. The lack of inspiring promo images for Poser 12 (except for one very nice image) made it clear to me that I am not a part of the target demographic that the new owners and developers are targeting, and that Poser isn't moving in the same direction I want to go. The lack of being able to easily use the Genesis content I have in Poser, it's clear that I'm not who they want as a customer. Yes, I have quite a bit of V3/V4/G4 and some A3 content which I could use. But to be perfectly honest, these old figures are simply a huge pain in the rear to use compared to Genesis (I recently did a quick G4 render, and wow, I had forgotten all the hoop jumping you have to do to use the older figures).

So in general I agree with your assertions that Poser development has grown a bit stagnant, with very little innovation. However, I will continue to watch with great interest to see if the development plan is to eventually redo a bunch of the underlying code to support modern/standard things like a single uni-mesh figure. However, without significant improvements or innovation, I really can't justify purchasing Poser 12 right now.

ssgbryan posted at 1:27PM Sun, 22 November 2020 - #4405418

For a person that doesn't use Poser, you certainly spend a lot of time in the Poser forums.

Neither you nor I care what DS users do.

The OP is whining about using DS content in Poser. I suggested that the OP move to DS, and get ready to spend for scripts to replicate the features that they appear to be used to. Unlike you, I have already been down that rabbit hole, the cost is $750. I already provided you a list of the scripts, the cost, and the Poser feature they duplicate.

And your only retort was that you didn't need those features - which wasn't the issue.

Once again, I feel compelled to dispute your assertions that it costs $750 to make DS do what poser can do. If you have truly spent thousands of dollars at DAZ, then you know that only someone with more money than good sense ever pays full list price for anything at DAZ. We did go over this once before, you provided a list of needed items, I went through it item by item, provided what the items actually cost me, and which items were not really needed because the functionality exists within DS (where the add-ons just provide simple one click solutions, but the functionality is provided within the DS UI), and I think you also included FaceShop?? to give the same functionality as the Face Room in Poser (something I don't need, don't use in either application). IIRC my bottom line total for DS was less than Poser, and IIRC the discussion was before DAZ bought KeyMate and GraphMate, which are now included in DS for free. When you make these claims, you really should inform people that you are using the full list price (not the price that most DS users would pay), that some of the products aren't really needed but make life easier, and some of the items people might not ever use in either application.

DustRider posted at 1:31PM Wed, 04 November 2020 - #4403290

jura11 posted at 12:47PM Wed, 04 November 2020 - #4403141

I still prefer do renders in Poser without the question,I use DAZ3D but only exporting G8 or G3 to Poser and render everything in Poser,I do own props or interiors and putting them here as freebies,I'm still not sure if its worth it to sell them etc

Hope this helps

Thanks,Jura

Really Outstanding work!! I honestly wonder why Bondaware/Rendo simply won't work with you, GhostShip, and others doing amazing things with Poser/Superfly to create their promos. There is some really inspiring work out there, but when the company that owns the software seems unable to produce outstanding work themselves, and unwilling to work with the artists that do to create their promotional art, it makes me wonder if they really understand what they are doing. Of course it may be that I'm not a part of their target demographic, so maybe it's just me expecting them to market Poser to me, when those interested in what I'm interested in aren't a part of their target demographic.

To be fair though, I did see one promo piece on the Poser 12 product purchase page that was rather nice, but it was only one image, and for a rather niche audience (more of a stylistic fantasy art, possibly heavily post worked). While a nice image, it's not what I'm looking for. You guys (and/or gals) are making the stuff that aligns more with what I'm interested in. So the obvious question for me, a potential customer who can't upgrade from Poser "10" Pro (need to buy Poser 12 at full retail), 1) do the development plans for Poser with the new owner align with my interests, 2) what/who is their target user demographic, 3) do they really understand their market, and the potential market well enough to lure new users to Poser and inspire old users who have move on to DS, CC3, Blender, et. to come back to Poser??? (Note: I find it interesting that I even have to wonder about Item 3, since I thought Rendo understood their user/customer base, that's one of the reasons I'm beginning to think they may be trying to take Poser in a different direction, one that mesh with my interests. I have no issues if this is the case, it's their software and should do what they feel is best for the software and it's future. But if this is the case, I don't want to invest in it only to find out it isn't going where I want to go.)

Thanks @sschneew !! It's good to know that they are using the most recent version of Cycles for Superfly. It shows that they are trying to keep up with the development of Cycles which is a really good thing.

@philadam

Glad to know who did the image. That's what I was tring to say in my post above, but I'm pretty much a mess trying to use these forums!!!

philadam posted at 12:45PM Wed, 04 November 2020 - #4403121

DustRider posted at 2:30PM Tue, 03 November 2020 - #4403092

Not My Image!!

That's my image, but I have no idea how it got included with your's. Started to post as an example of firefly, but it was late so I canceled the post. It's great to know who it belongs to! Was it done with P11 or P12? Well done, and IMHO better than the early promos!

That's weird!! My post with the mages above is now showing and image not done by me (the first image), and has a corrupt reference to my second image. However the gallery links are still working properly. I first noticed it yesterday that the links were not working on the first two images. Now somehow the first image link is working, but it's not MY image. I don't want to spam the tread with repeat images, but I don't want someone to think I'm claiming their work!!

So, to make things clear I'll re-post the first two images from my post above again (sorry for the double post should the images magically re-appear above. I did a quick inspection of the post, and the actual links are bad so it doesn't seem to be just a server glitch, even though they were functional when they were first posted). Note: These are examples of the minimum quality images I feel should be used for promotion of Poser 12, see my post/discussion above (on Page 2) for clarity.

Gallery Link

Gallery Link

This image showing in my post above is not my image, I don't know who it belongs to (even tried doing a reverse image search so I could let them know), and I didn't post it (but I am reposting it here in case things get even weirder to make sure it's clear I'm not trying to use or claim anyone else's work). Nice image though, kudos to who ever did it!

Not My Image!!

McGrandpa posted at 9:41AM Tue, 03 November 2020 - #4402991

@Dustrider - those are great renders! But, just to be pedantic: that nocked and drawn arrow should be resting ON the thumb, on the other side of the bow. With the bowstring inside the nock of the arrow (hence the term, nocked!). Yeah I am terrible, I know it. That said I really like the crispness and palette, and the image on the whole!

Hey McG! Thanks!

Hmmm, I never really zoomed in on the final image to make sure it looked right, since I spent quite a bit of time putting it in the "right" place. So, being a little pedantic myself, I had to go back and check the original image and scene set. The alignment on the arrow nock is matched perfectly to the string. Unfortunately, like way too many Poser/DAZ products, the person who made the bow (and the original pose I used for the image) was not an archer, and probably didn't do a lot of research on the subject. The bow draw morph for the bow (and the pose for the figure) was designed for the string to be deformed/bent by the noched arrow, with the archer drawing the bow by pinching the arrow noch between the thumb and fingers, not by placing the arrow between the index and middle fingers and using the fingers on the string to draw the bow. Unfortunately that makes the deformation of the string wrong for proper placement of the fingers, resulting in the fletching for the arrows being way to close to the noch to fully noch the arrow, so you are left with the options of 1) not posing the figure properly to draw a heavy weight bow, 2) posing the fingers properly and having the arrow fully noched which will cause the fletching to intersect (cut through) the fingers, 3) posing the fingers properly with the arrow in the proper location relative to the fingers and the arrow fully noched which will cause the string to cut through the fingers, or 4) pose the fingers properly with the arrow in the proper location relative to the noch but don't noch the arrow so the string does not cut through the fingers. I chose the last option, thinking that it would not be obvious the the arrow was not fully noched given the viewing angle. I obviously didn't do a zoomed inspection to see if I was right (I did just check the original file, and the arrow is in proper alignment), so that is why things look off. Of course the other obvious solution to the problem would be to fix the original morph. Unfortunately that wasn't an option due to the lack of geometry in the bow string. Anyhoo, great catch!! Of course now it's going to bug the heck out of me every time I look at the image now!!

With regard to the placement of the arrow in relation to the bow, she's holding it the way I was taught (and the way I shot for many years with a long bow, left and right handed recurves, and a compound - haven't shot in about 30 years though). She's has the arrow on the proper side of the bow for a lefty, the arrow always goes on the opposite side of the bow from the draw arm. I had a similar discussion with someone at DA, which caused me to double check to make sure it was right back then (but he missed the noching issue). I'm ambidextrous and slightly dyslexic, so I do make mistakes some times. The bow in the scene doesn't have an arrow shelf, but I did noticed that the angle of the image is creating a slight illusion of an arrow shelf on the opposite side from the arrow which makes it "look" like the arrow should be on the other side, plus she is shooting left handed which can add to the confusion. Having bow hunted for several years (always still hunting, stalking the prey) I would hate to try to hold the arrow on the bow with my thumb, much more natural to hold it with the index finger until you are ready to draw the bow. Additionally, when using the two finger draw, if the arrow is placed on the other side of the bow it will tend to move away from (sideways from) the bow when the string/arrow is released, which will adversely affect accuracy.

Here is a quick photo reference on a long bow

Yes, I would really like to enter!!!

ghostship2 posted at 9:23PM Sun, 01 November 2020 - #4402747

@DustRider yeah, those look amazing. When I go to the Daz website I'm always blown away by the promo renders. I want to see that level of images AND web graphics from Rendo. The only thing I hate about Daz's web page is the side scrolling thumbnails that make me dizzy.

Thanks! LOL!! Definitely, the whole side scrolling thing there kind of drive me nuts too.

It would really be nice to see more renders from Poser of your quality!

Great renders!!

What really concerns me is I wonder who their target audience is? If it's people who want to make nice "realistic 3D" images of human figures (meaning images that look like true 3D, and make the potential user want to use the software), then the sample images I've seen so far don't seem to qualify. The excuse that the software developers can't make great images is a poor one, The developers need to understand what all the switches/button/node do and how that results in great shaders/lighting/renders. They may not be able to create artistic renders, but should be able to create great technical render. Besides they should have beta testers that can make great images to be used for product promotion (with credit of course). How can you test the integration of Cycles, and know if it's working well for the end user, if your beta testers can't create great art with it?

At a minimum, I would expect to see renders the quality of those above, or my samples below (and I'm no artist). This is just me personal opinion, but if they can't produce great promo figure renders of at least the quality of my examples, or those by Ghostship, then I begin to question who their intended audience is. It hope it certainly isn't me, as the samples I've seen so far are definitely not anything I'm interested in producing. Yes, I know Superfly can produce images. But if the software producer has no marketing focus on showing off the great images their software can produce, how many people will be interested in buying the software? Maybe with the release of Poser 12 they will release a bunch of awesome images produced with it. I certainly hope so, unfortunately for me though I've lost out on the lower cost upgrade because I didn't upgrade to 11 before the release of 12, simply because with the images they have released so far, I don't feel that their focus for developing the software is the same place I want to go.

Note: These images aren't to promote one software over another. I think Poser is capable of similar quality renders (and I'm not a great artist anyway). It's just to show the relative minimum quality promotional images I want to see for Poser. If the software owner can't, or isn't, willing to invest in the production of promotional materials of at least this quality, then I'm not willing to invest in their product, even if I think it is capable of similar quality.

Gallery Link

Gallery Link

Gallery Link

Galley Link

Gallery Link

EClark1894 posted at 4:21PM Sun, 01 November 2020 - #4402618

Actually, I already went over the manual and pointed out to Jenn Blake several points where the manual was in error or needed to be changed. I did this back when Poser 11 from Bondware first came out. Aside from any new features or figures Bondware adds, mostly all the manual needs is to change or get rid of some links.

Indeed, it's capable of much better. Just look at the work Ghostship2 and some others are producing.

The car they posted in the Poser 12 update here: