while i posted my latest submissions, i just added them to the daz studio gallery, simply because they were created with ds3 - though not rendered. right now i've read the headline of this gallery, and especially one line caught my eye; quote: "Images of DAZ|Studio figures rendered in other applications are still welcome, but what's the challenge in that? See how well you can do using its basic rendering tools!"

huh? what's the challenge in that? just try it, and you will see :D

there is no make-my-daz-scene-most-beautyful-with-a-single-click application out there. renderers like octanerender (which i have choosen) or luxrender - even with the help of reality - just don't give outstanding results by just klicking "render". you need to dig into them, learn how to use them, how to create materials (the most important one) - just how their possibilities could help to make the results look good or even better. to reach a decent level it will take the same countless hours than tweaking daz' own renderer, but having the limits extended by margins.

so what's the point in saying native renders preferred? ds4 has an advanced renderer already, what's the challenge in that 'cause everything rendered in ds4 will just look better than if rendered in ds3 (you may disagree, and i will maybe too ;) - and there are still a lot of ds3 users out there.

i think, everyone who starts creating imagery with daz studio will - at some point - come to the conclusion, that he or she wants better results, and that simply means "choose another renderer". so if the daz studio gallery gives some insight in what will be possible by crossing this border, and using renderes like octane, lux, thea, arion, ... it'll be not the worst thing to have imo ;)