Quote - I just got a note that the mods removed the phrase "It's good to see Chris Creek back in The Game" from a post of mine where I responded to another post (also edited)  because it violated rules against off-site advertising, so tread carefully...

The censorship on their forums pretty much reduced my interest in doing business with them... and it was very lopsided in how they approached their "rules".    When I raised the issue in a private conversation when their higher ups, it was made clear they view their forums as vehical for advertising, not a community site.  Even discussing some things they have said (e.g. quoting previous posts of months before) became forbidden in some cases.

I don't think they get that the more they censor, the less valuable their forums become and lower traffic from those who might dain to spend money with them.

-K

Quote - I'm not yet sure what really happens if PML is used with new skinning.  With a bit luck the check is just overreacting. But its not easy to check. Many parts of the program are using the functions in question. My theory is that the figure skinning doesnt change the content of the figure, at least not morph-wise. You could make the morphs on a classic-skinned copy of your figures, and use the injection pose writer (and the new injection pose loader) script to copy the morph data into the figure with the unimesh skinning. Then you do not have to switch.

Hi Col,

I've been using a similar flow for PML in 2014 for Roxie (actually it was part of a flow I developed in the early days of PML so we didn't have to worry about .CR2 issues).

• Revert the figure to classic skinning.
• Do my PML work
• If I like the results, export the figure as a .obj use the "as morph" and "include body part names in polygon groups"
• Reload the .obj as morph with Netherwork's impressive "Morph Imp"

I'm probably being paranoid, but the same flow allows me consolidate multiple morphing sessions as well, which let's me create a "clean" morph.

Hopefully SM can get you fixed up so the "unimesh" skinning method doesn't present a barrier.

-K

For me, as a character creator, I initially liked:

1. Single mesh for morphing and manipulation.    No longer an issue with Colorcurvature's scripts and GoZ in PP2012.

2. Weight mapped rig.    I like PP2012's rigging better than DS4 because I can easily go between parametric and Weight mapping on a per joint basis.   (Makes rig testing and modificaition easier.)

3. Autofitting of clothes to new morphs.    This had promise, but I've begun to feel that it makes clothing too rubbery.   Can be patially achieved with Morphing Clothes plus a little morph brush action in Poser.

4. Multiple SubD levels.   This adds smoothing without adding density to mesh.   Currently can't be done well in Poser.

5. Cross blending of forms.    Because the vision for Genesis was to have a lot of shape "DNA", content developers are likely to respect existing shapes and test their shape blends with the core shapes.    Poser figures have been a little more hit and miss when it comes to blending all shapes.    Where Genesis will go along this line remains to be seen.

Despite these developments technically, Poser has matched a number of these in PP2012 product, so I no longer feel the need for Genesis, given that it largely trapped in DAZ studio.    (I find Genesis ported to Poser as it currently stands very unsatisfying.)

-K

Been using PML with ZBrush 4R3 and Modo 501/601.   No issues to report--it's been working as smooth as silk for me.   (Huge timersaver!)

-K

Quote - Actually they never promised DS4 wouldn't be offered at a lower price.

True--and I wouldn't argue that point.  Their marketing did suggest that DS4Pro at the price offered last fall was an outstanding value at its discounted price.  Some might consider this 100% off sale as pushing that value to zero.    There was no literal "lie" to point to (or at least I have never seen convincing evidence of such), but I can understand how some consumers feel decieved that the "value" (e.g. the price they paid last fall) is now somewhat less than advertised.   It's the difference between perception of misdeed and the breaking of a law or contract.

My advice to DAZ would have been to quickly and quietly address that perception.   Instead they took some time fumbling around after the free offer announcement to start handling it through customer support.   Smart marketing might have planned for this reaction a little better than letting 40+ page thread of disatisfaction spread in their forum.

I agree with Jan that it will be a tough sell for DS5 after the price volatility we saw in DS4--that's just consumer behavior (I've hear it called the "once bitten, twice shy rule of upsells".)

-K
 

Quote - ... he considers them [Provo Craft] and DAZ to be content companies.

That is how I read his welcome message as well, which tends to make me think they will tilt away from software and emphasize content; software really being a means to consume that content.

In my view, DAZ had three principle business' going: 1) A content provider  2) A software maker 3) A content broker.

I sense that the focus will be strongly on #1--content provider.   I also get the impression they want to better with #3--broker, perhaps as part of the web site overhaul.   My fear is that #2 (software maker) will suffer except where it very directly supports business #1.   The current moves are to attract more tyros (given the free price tag) rather than professionals who are both more demanding and expect to pay for their tools (as they make money from using those tools--it's seen as an investment expense.)   With the proportion of tyros to pros shifting, the logical conclusion is the emphasis in #2 will very much move to what the tyros need to consume more content (as they will vastly outnumber professionals).  This does change the game, IMHO, but not necessarily where the more expert users would desire.

Time will tell, last summer there was much talk of Genesis in "other systems" with an inference that some professional systems were the target.   Today, I hear very little about that.   

(BTW: I do not mean "tyro" in any derrogatory sense.  I really mean "new user" in Product Manager speak but "tyro" is a lot easier to type . . . in the software industry, we discuss endlessly how to balance the needs of new users--tyros--with our "power users"--usually professionals.)

-K

I also buy a lot of stuff there still.   I really like the set pieces they sell and I see no reason not to buy them from DAZ even if the price is a little high.

-K

Quote - Daz is under new management and is not necessarily going to adhere to previous schedules and strategies. They're certainly not adhering to promises made by previous management to the customer base. They're doing what they think they must do for the good of the company and it's affiliated vendors, to heck with what the previous management did or said . . .

They're ignoring requests for bug fixes in DS4? Well, maybe they're saving those fixes and other improvements for the next, paid version.

Yep, they're definitely under new management (and some posts which are still filtering into the public light.)   They have definitely wanted to increase the base for DS4 and hence sell more DS4 content.   They get a 50% cut of the affiliated vendors, so that will work for them.  I do see a lot of the same 'ol DAZ though . . . shifting price policies & packages, excessive marketing hype, uneven forum moderation (for example, they're now hosting a thread on SM's latest earnings to promote the FUD that Poser is in financial trouble again), and the usual lack of attention to product quality and documentation.   I say this as one of the early adopters of Genesis and among the early independent developers to release morphs for the Genesis product.

Their new CEO comes from and Art & Craft store background, not a software background (as far as his CV on LinkedIn would indicate) so I don't know what to make of the new moves.   

I would welcome an announcement of a DS5 strategy.  I had orginally banked on a DS4 strategy, which told me I could develop for Genesis, and then through a magic "CR2 Exporter" my customers could just "dial up" my figure and load to use in Poser 9/PP2012.   To date, that has remained unfullfilled and left Genesis developers without a clean Poser strategy; and if I read the posts by the product managers at both DAZ and SM correctly, it will continue to be unfullfilled.  I had asked their team to comment on this, instead I got a list of what SM has to do to make their product work in Poser.  Maybe DS5 will have the promised Poser bridge?  Somehow I doubt it.  :lol:

-K

(P.S. To be clear, I'm not criticizing your thesis--DAZ's new management may have a good plan and I'm not seeing it.   I'm probably just suffering from "broken trust" syndrome when it comes to DAZ announcements these days.  ;)  )

Quote - But on the other hand, maybe one of the goals of giving away DS4 Pro (aside from trying to keep their vendors on the Genesis bandwagon) is to build up a customer base for DS5, which will not be a free upgrade.

Not to disagree with you, as you may very well be right, but I've given that angle some thought.   It is, of course, a common and successful  method to building up customer base by lowering or giving away the current version of a piece of software.   However, this is more commonly done at the end of a version's life, not the beginning (DS4 had been in market less than 6 months.)   Given that major versions of DS have been running longer than the industry average of 18 months, this would be massively deferring software revenues unless they were speeding up the development cycle so that they could start recouping that investment in six to nine months.   More than that, and you risk the base melting away as maintenace the current version is defferred into the new release.

Given the bug level and lack of attention to the bugs in DS4, (as well as documentation), I'm not sure the investment in the software supports a thesis that DAZ is accelerating the development cycle so they can see a release so soon (such as this fall.)  I'm pretty sure (from a financial calculus) that this is "give-them-the-core-and-sell-them-the-options" play, where the main option is content.

Of course, DAZ isn't saying.   I do know that they will face an uphill on DS5 as a paid upgrade if it doesn't contain some pretty astounding technology that users can't live without.   The history of the hobby 3D market tends to show that customers really lag in upgrading as long as their current product and system work well.  This would make a "give you 4 now, buy 5 strategy" even more problematic from a revenue standpoint.

Based on DAZ past public statements about Genesis and DS4, I suspect this play will work for them as long as 1) The free content availablity remains small  2) Other content outlets keep pace with DAZ's pricing model  and 3) Alternative core figures such as V4WM, M4WM, etc. don't absorb other segments of the market.

My reasoning goes like this.   Free content, is of course a threat, since content sales will need to sustain DAZ's core business in the absense of any software revenues.  Other content outlets also threaten their model as a purchase at another site does not generate any revenue to support innovation in DS.   If these other outlets also keep price down (by compressing their broker fee's, for example) then the new users might seek them out, even if not of the same quality.   (This is a well documentated effect of "free" software--it compresses what people are willing to pay to add accessories/options to that software.)   The last, element is what hapens with the "base" of V4/M4/K4 users.   If the alternatives of staying with their current investments work, or other products come onto the market at a lower price-point than the Genesis purchases, then revenue in that core base may be turned away from DAZ and further reduce revenues to invest in further development of DS.

To me, it looks like DAZ is swinging for the fences.   If they can lock enough new users into the Genesis/DS4 system, then they will have a strong financial stream to continue to a DS5 and make other strategic investments.   If they cannot sustain the core, and it disspates to other vendors and technologies, they have virtually no direct revenues for the DS software to fall back on as they have convinced the market that correct price is "Free."

-K

Quote - Or maybe this was always the plan, regardless how successfully it was working. After this extension perhaps a game-changing announcement that, due to incredible response, this stuff will be free for the foreseeable future, or marked down like 80% from previous prices.

Once a company devalue's its own software, it's hard to argue the price back up again.  In this case, DAZ has probably collected those on the fence to try DS4, and with little prospect to sell the software, they might as well sweep up the last interested groups they can collect.   The will likely find that they will need to run giveaway or near-giveaway sales every few months as anyone new coming in isn't going to pay $100, $200 or even $400 for something that was priced at 100% off just a few weeks earlier.

Their most direct revenue stream to support ongoing development of DS4 will now be the Genesis product line, so it will be interesting to see how well the market tolerates the somewhat elevated prices.  I suspect we'll be seeing (as we have begun to see) lots of bundling to populate the new user's library.

The problem I have with this so-called game-changing direction is that it somewhat demotivates them from working on "Pro" features (or even fixing the bugs in their current offering) while they absorb a influx of new users.   The profit motivation would push them towards selling these new users introductory content--not enabling them to make their own content.

-K

I appreciate seeing what 220 users (approx. 2/3rds PC members) had to say. Thanks for running the survey and publishing results. -K

Quote - I finished modeling and UVMapping this set.  I'm going to work on the firearm before I get it into Poser though.  It'll still be a while.  :-(

It looks liike it will be worth the wait.

-K

Quote -  help give customers back their CHOICE in what figure to use. 

I appreciate this, especially with such a spetacular sculpt!

-K

Dan wrote:

Quote - Our plan is to trap unsuspecting Poser users and poke at them with a stick but please don't tell anyone ;)

Well, I'm glad we cleared the air on that.   :D :lol:

Quote - > Quote - - A more general question for DAZ: A a broker, technology provider, and content maker, what is DAZ doing to reduce the risks for brokered artists who may be venturing into Genesis technology?   [That's a softball, Rand.   Hit it out of the park!  ;)  ] 

---I dont know about it being a softball per se. I dont know that we can reduce the risk for anyone. Free markets are risky, you pick your lane, come up with something you think people will like and roll the dice. We do feel like we have made it easier than ever before to create quality content... no more rigging clothes, for example.... so hopefully there is less time investment to have risked in the first place.  beyond that... As you well know, Kerwin, my friend, We do our best to help our PAs succeed. We offer suggestions on how to make products more successful based on our experience. We provide some guidance an instruction on everything from texturing techniques to Promo imagery, shader support to Naming.  We feature products in the newsletter and on our front page. Of course none of this is a promise of success.

We cannot guarantee a broker will make any money, let alone a profit. there is hearty competition on our store and some creators just arent going to be able to quit their day jobs. I know its the same thing here at Rendo.

But here ive gone and let you pull me into a topic Ive promised to steer clear of out of respect for the venue. Ill leave it at what Ive said. 

I can name a couple more for you (it was really intended as softball since is pretty open question which I was fairly certain you had good answers to.)

• Excellent QA (IMHO):  Your QA people are very helpful at catching things my own testers missed.
• Significant effort promotiong Genesis and accessories for Genesis which creates market demand.
• Ongoing efforts with the CR2 Exporter; you could say more about where this going from a content creator's perspective if you wanted to assure the community how easily their new creaqtions will transport to your the poser market (which is part of who you're addressing.)
• And, of course, a host of internal things for brokered artists, which you have decided to censor yourself on.

DAZ has multiple business functions.  Primarily they appear to be:

  1) A content provider

  2) A software maker

  3) A content broker

These are intimately related, as all three are wrapped up in the offer of Genesis.

You could have saved the response part about the common risk to the business model (phrased in the negative, starting with statements, "We cannont guarentee . . .") The question did not ask DAZ about gurarentee, it asked about reduction of risk.

You also countered your own reply.  :)  You started out with "I don't know we can reduce the risk for anyone."   Of course you can!  And you cited a couple, such as counceling and promotion (newsletter.)

A lot of the discussion about Genesis/DS4 I've observed for the past few months revolves around risks (which are a continuum) not guarentees (which are typically binary in nature.)  DAZ through it's three functions above can modify how much risk is involved.

From the users, a few of the risks raised included:

• Will it run well (or at all) on my current equipment?
• Will it support advanced functions like inter-object dependency (like DP's in poser or network rendering or realistic light fall off?
• Will my existing content (which may be a large investment in the case of some users) work well with Genesis?
• Will more (and the kind of content desired) be available for Genesis at a price I can afford?

From brokers, the risks raised include:

• This compliated new stuff, can I afford the invest the time needed, especially with many functions in beta or in flux?
• How will I price and justify delivering content when the market right now is poitentially small copmpared to the more general, more broadly supported market.
• Will my content need more support or maintence due fluxuations in the platform?
• When will this technology that my content is built for be available on other platforms, thus give me ongoing opportunity to make more money with my creative effort?
• And may others we won't discuss here.

So, the opening statement in your reply, "I dont know that we can reduce the risk for anyone" appears to significantly underestimate DAZ's role here.   (It's not uncommon--small creative companies have the "build a better moustrap syndrome" where they focus on the moustrap assume the world will beat a path to their door, and miss the bigger picture.)  DAZ needs to feel its own power.  Awakern the giant within!  Stop the insanity! :D  (No prizes for guessing which 80's motivational speakers I'm referencing.  ;)  )

Not phrasing as a question, I will summarize my own POV: DAZ can and does reduce the risk for users and brokers around Genesis/DS4 tech by the examples above and even more than what we discussed is this thread.  There are other risks that DAZ could (and in my own opinion, should) address.  You know, because I told you personally back in the beta days, that I believe that Genesis can be a game changer in this market segment.   DAZ perhaps needs to focus more (now that Genesis and DS4 technology is reasonably feature complete) on these concerns and perhaps be slightly less dimissive of the risks (expressed as concerns) by a portion of your user base.

I want to believe in DAZ (referencing your earlier post addressing me by proper name), but it's hard when I feel that my concerns (and concerns you're hearing voiced by others) are dismissed.  The means that some DAZ personnel have used to cope with those raised concerns leaves a bad taste.   (I could reiterate a number of observations about those means, but I think you get the point.)

-K