No problems here. I can access the my purchases and all otyher parts of the site without any issue. That is from Canada on Windows using Firefox.

Ciao

TD

I use the version 1 when I need a unique terrain fast. It is important to realize that this package is basically a very well made user interface that controls a powerful and complex node network inside the meta node. Everything it does you can do with Vue. For example I usually start a new terrain with a terrain fractal, mix it with perlin noise and maybe add a turbulence node. This and more is already inside the metanode and you do not need to worry about the details. Plus he clearly added a bunch of math nodes to make everything internally consistent and stable across a wide range of input values. The nodes are typlically locked, so you won't be able to see inside (and learn how it is made).

It is a time saver for terrain making and  if you have limited success/experience with making terrains it can give you much better results than you can achieve on your own. It can't compete with a Vue/Worldmachine workflow, but that is a different beast.

Ciao

TD

Quote - I saw this advertised in the latest Yurdigital newsletter and am toying with the idea of buying a copy.  As I understand it, the program generates Metanodes to be used in Vue.  I really have no experience working with separate Metanodes but a PDF comes with it as well as some videos so maybe I dare be adventurous.

Has anyone used this program and if so, what are your thoughts?

Are you referring to "Easy Terrain v2" which is made by Cesium55 ? If so, it does not generate metanodes. It IS a metanode for procedural terrain generation. It is not a separate program. It is used inside of Vue. The node is simply placed between the position input and altitude output in the function editor.  I have the previous version and it is very good. It makes terrain generation faster and easier in Vue because it allows you to just play with a few parameters to produce a variety of terrain forms. The new version has more options. If you get your money's worth out of it will depend on how often you make complex procedural terrains from scratch. If you do that frequently it will be worth it.

Ciao

TD

Quote - Also, Smith Micro is NOT a content developer.

I am not even sure, that Smith Micro the company even knows that they own Poser... The Company is about: "Connect. Control. Capitalize. Helping you survive in a mobile world." (from their website www.smithmicro.com). If you check their last financial report/conference call, you can see that ALL of their consumer software and graphics stuff combined accounts for only ~19% of their revenue (on the bright side it is the only part that did not crash and burn last quarter...). Poser is only a small item in that category. 

TD

Quote - Sure. As long as Poser were up for sale. (AFAIK we have no reason to believe it will be.) 

Well, Smith Micro is in financial dire straights. Stock is below one dollar (~78c today, that's down from a stock price of ~$16 in the beginning of 2011). This is mostly due to the poor performance of their wireless and mobility solutions section which is by far the largest part of their business (SM is not primarily a graphics company). The software section which includes all graphics software and things like StuffIt is not doing badly, but it is a small part of their business. You can find the numbers in their last financial report that sent the stock down by 50% or so in a day. What does this mean for Poser? Who knows, we will see.

TD

To add some actual information: I use the Studio edition of Plant Factory, mostly to make plants for use in Vue. I use Poser for posing, so what you want is going in the opposite direction of what I usually do (i.e. pose in Poser or DS and then export to Vue or Octane for rendering). But I have tried it. TPF is a procedural modeler and can make models at any detail level. No matter if you want 1000 or 1 million polys. When used with Vue or integrated software (maya, max) you can adjust the detail level on the fly and generate variations of your plant with the click of a button or swish of a slider. You can also export static models as .obj or .lwo among others (fbx). The former two can be imported to Poser and the geometry comes in nicely. Most textures in TPF are generated with procedurals and will of course not translate. If you prepare your model with image based textures, you can use those in Poser. I had some issues with  trans maps that got lsot and did not apply correctly but that can most likely be solved if one wants to put the effort in. I personally don't think it is worth the effort because one looses everything that makes TPF so great. But it can be done.

Ciao

TD

Quote - I'm looking for something that will let me create realistic outdoor environments without having to model each individual blade of grass, tree, or cloud layer. 

For example, I want to be able to create a dense patch of forest, add a couple of Poser figures to the scene, and then render a Friday the 13th-esque image that depicts one of them impaling the other against a tree.

From what I've read of Vue and Blender's feature lists, Blender wasn't designed for that.  Vue was.  I just wasn't sure if a Poser > Vue workflow was worth $600 for a copy of 2014 Complete, so I thought I'd ask.

That is definitely the type of scenario that Vue was made for. There will be a learning curve (check out the excellent, free tutorials at Geekatplay.com), but once you grasp the basics you can set up scenes like that in minutes.

With respect to the app discussion, in my opinion 3D apps are like shoes, you use/wear the ones that are most comfortable and get the job done and that's it.

Have fun!

TD

Quote - And from the other side, [...] There is no one true way, so having multiple pipelines isn't a sign of anything except being more flexible in your tool choice.

Very solid advice. I agree on all points! 

TD

I have 8 differnt Runtimes folders on two disks. Vue can read any .pz3 that is saved from Poser without any issue (Currently using Vue 2014, but this has been working fine for me since Vue 10) even if it contsains items from different Runtimes. Just make sure that all Runtimes are listed in Poser and use the lastest Poser SDK in Vue. If you run into problems, the collect scene inventory script is a good solution.

Ciao

TD

Regarding materials: Vue does not convert materials from Poser or DAZ Studio. It simply imports the texture maps (plus bump etc.) and sets some basic values for highlghts and so on. All procedural Poser materials are lost that way. One has the option to "render with Poser shader tree". This means Vue will pass handling of surfaces with Poser shaders to the Poser SDK during rendering (they are essentially handled by Poser and cannot be modified in Vue). This requires more memory. The same is possible for Poser animations. I rarely use this approach as I find the Vue materials far better. 

With advanced versions I was referring to the "Professional" versions of Vue (Infinite and Xstream). The artist versions lack some of these features but Complete comes close. The main thing I would be missing in Complete compared to Infinite would be the possibility to render out the different passes for postwork (ambient occlusion, shadows, object masks, clouds,...).

Yes, the Vue render engine is a biased renderer with a number of additions that allow physically accurate rendering where it matters (atmospherics, caustics, photometric lighting, ...).

Using both Vue and Lux in an outdoor/indoor workflow is definietly a possible workflow that might be good for what you what to achieve.

Ciao

TD

With that computer you won't have any issues with Vue.

I would not base a descision on the free Pioneer version. It is severely limited with respect to import, export, rendering and more. It gives you a flavor of the interface but other than that it is not much use. Too limited. The free PLE ( http://www.e-onsoftware.com/try/vue_2014_ple/ ) is based on Infinite (Which I use) and has all features. It gives you a better impression about what can be done.

The kind of scenes you are looking at are doable with Vue. They will require some serious work with materials (which you can buy or learn how to do yourself in the function editor).

Vue is typically much faster than Lux Render once you learn how to set up your scene and render options. Vue gives you full control over every aspect of lighting and rendering (in the advanced versions). A fully optimized Vue scene can give you the same quality as a Lux Render in a signifcantly shorter time for many scenes (there are things where Lux or any non-biased render engine are superior (complex caustics with accurate dispersion for example).

Vue can definitely do decent indoor renders (there are some examples in my gallery). However it was originally designed as a landscape modelling and render app and one has to jump through some hoops sometimes for a pure indoor render. It is getting better though. Several features were added in the last addition that help a lot and there are more changes planned in the next version.

Hope this helps

TD

Quote - I've never used Vue, and recently discovered I'm $250 away from a copy of Vue 2014 Complete.  As a burgeoning artist, one of my interests is hyper-realism.  Vue looks like it could help me explore that, far beyond what Reality 3 offers.

Is the bridge from Poser worth the investment?

Depends what you are after. I am using Vue for many years now (since Vue 4 in ~2006). If you have never used it before you are looking at a significant learning curve in order to take advantage of all its features. Vue is now my primary scene setup and render app. I set up my figures in Poser and DAZ Studio and export as .obj or .pz3. All material are set up in Vue. All I need are the textures for diffuse and bump. I rarely render in any other app. However, it will depend on the type of scenes you are planning to do. Vue truly shines in large scale outdoor setups. It is also getting better at indoor and small scale scenes, but that was never its primary focus. With respect to "Hyper-realism" (what is that anyway? something more than realistic?), Vue can get you there in the right kind of scene. This will also come at a price in render time (For example Vue can calculate accurate caustics and in the latest version also photometric lighting, but this will add to render time. If you are used to Poser, the Vue interface might be a shock. I would strongly recommend to download the PLE. It will allow you to try the features and Poser import to see if it is what you want. If you get along with it (and have a good solid machine with fast processor and lots of ram, I am using 32Gb with an i7 hex core) then Vue will put a lot of power in your hands. You can see many examples of Poser/DS to Vue workflow in my gallery here or at dA.

If you have specific questions, feel free to ask!

Ciao

TD

Just did a quick test. Poser can indeed import the Fibermesh obj from LAMH that I prepared in DS. That was with Poser Pro 2014 on a 64bit machine with 32 Gb of memory. I used a fur preset from one of RawArts characters. The file was not too large. One needs of course to adjust the materials and the hair is static. If you need to repose the figure , you need to go back to DS and re-export.

TD

Quote - > Quote - i don't own it so i can't test it, the Look at my hair for the DS can export it's dynamic hair as a mesh.

Export to use in Poser? Because if that's the case... wow.

LAMH can export plain .obj hair or Fiberhair in .obj format. I have used both in Vue via the import Wavefront OBJ funtion. I see no reason why Poser should not be able to import it as long as you have enough memory and for complex hair a 64 bit install. The hair objects can be very large.

Ciao

TD

Well the answer is "yes, but..."

First what you want is displacement not bump. Depending on how your bump map is made it might or might not give you good results for displacement. This also depends on the application. 

If you have a suitable bump map you can use many of the higher end 3D apps to"bake" the displacement  into geometery. I use Vue Infinite for this purpose. Some things to keep in mind: 

• You will typlically end up with very high polygon counts depending on the amount of detail.  In Vue one can control this to some degree.

• The polygon flow/topology will be usually quite bad. This can make UV mapping difficult and if you want to rig the figure you will need to redo the mesh most likely.

Ciao

TD