3D Models
3D Print Models
3D Scans
Animation & MoCap
Textures
Materials
Skin Textures
2D Game Assets
Sound Effects
Brushes & Tools
Reference Photos
Stock Images
HDR Images
3ds Max
Maya
Blender
Unreal Engine
Unity
ZBrush
Cinema 4D
LightWave
Marmoset
SketchUp
FBX
DAE
DXF
GLBRenderHub - Home of the V4 and M4 Revival?
280Thread Activity
COMIXIANTTue, Dec 24, 2024
COMIXIANTTue, Dec 24, 2024
AnabranTue, Dec 24, 2024
guy91600Tue, Dec 24, 2024
terrancew_hodMon, Dec 23, 2024
terrancew_hodMon, Dec 23, 2024
PinspotterMon, Dec 23, 2024
COMIXIANTFri, Dec 20, 2024
Since RenderHub are up for suggestions I just wanted to throw this one out there:
Why not officially support V4 and M4?
What I mean by "officially" is the inclusion of V4 and M4 check-boxes on the Marketplace search bar just as you do for Genesis 8 and 8.1 etc. I've lost count the amount of times I see threads about the usage of these (extremely popular) figures, and I have to say it's reflected in a heck of a lot of artist galleries I see online, whether it be DAZ Studio-based art or 3D Comics and Comix in general.
Places like DAZ, Renderosity and Renderotica still sell V4 and M4 stuff (which is great to see) but they're not exactly promoting it. There's a lot of V4 and M4 die-hards out there and for very good reason. They're very good quality, highly-detailed and well-supported figures that remain popular.
I cannot help thinking that by adding a V4 and M4 check-box to the search bar for the Marketplace on here, that by spreading the word that RenderHub officially support V4 and M4 and that new content is being made for these figures., that it would surely become the goto place!
Considering such potential is at the mercy of two check-boxes missing from the Marketplace search bar, I personaly think that RenderHub should not only try it, but thoroughly embrace it, especially as RenderHub has a presence on so many Social Media platforms. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing a potentially HUGE userbase grab is up for the taking here, and I can imagine the biggest smile creeping across the faces of those who love V4 and M4 if they were to read that there's a place in 2024 that not only officially supports these figures, but offers brand new content for them!
Ask yourself, are RenderHub and its vendors missing out due to V4 and M4 check-boxes missing from the Marketplace search bar?
Personally I think the answer is yes!
And ultimately, could RenderHub become the home of a V4 and M4 revival?
! REPORT
RenderHub does "officially" support V4 and M4.
The categories are there, and vendors can select that figure compatibility when they upload products.
But... It seems that vendors aren't too interested in uploading V4 and M4 content.
As of right now, there are 18 Victoria 4 products and five Michael 4 products in the marketplace.
https://www.renderhub.com/3d-figures-and-assets/victoria-4
https://www.renderhub.com/3d-figures-and-assets/michael-4
As you can probably imagine, it wouldn't make much sense to have dedicated buttons for so few products.
If the content situation changes, we would certainly add the buttons.
Maybe your thread could help start the revival!
The categories are there, and vendors can select that figure compatibility when they upload products.
But... It seems that vendors aren't too interested in uploading V4 and M4 content.
As of right now, there are 18 Victoria 4 products and five Michael 4 products in the marketplace.
https://www.renderhub.com/3d-figures-and-assets/victoria-4
https://www.renderhub.com/3d-figures-and-assets/michael-4
As you can probably imagine, it wouldn't make much sense to have dedicated buttons for so few products.
If the content situation changes, we would certainly add the buttons.
Maybe your thread could help start the revival!
REPLY
! REPORT
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Sun, Dec 15, 2024I can't imagine having two more digital buttons to add any cost at all. For as long as you support the figures, you should extend the same basic courtesy the other categories get by default. They're not going to "steal" sales away from other categories. Someone looking to buy something for V4 isn't going to use Genesis anyway.
RenderHub Admin 1
Admin: 13,838
Mon, Dec 16, 2024@Pinspotter - Nobody is worried about "stealing" sales. It doesn't matter to RenderHub *what* people buy. And the "cost" is this:
Cluttering up the user interface with something that is rarely used. That's a big expense to ask everyone to pay for the benefit of a few.
As I tried to explain earlier, RenderHub would have no problem accommodating the supply and demand if it were there.
Cluttering up the user interface with something that is rarely used. That's a big expense to ask everyone to pay for the benefit of a few.
As I tried to explain earlier, RenderHub would have no problem accommodating the supply and demand if it were there.
COMIXIANT
My apologies if it looked that way but I wasn't suggesting that sales are being stolen in any way. The only reason I mention the check-boxes is because they're not just a convenience, they're a very powerful way to entice and give an impression.
Say, for example, that a person visits the Markletplace on here for the first time. They might have a whole bunch of their own V4 products on some obscure personal webite out there that isn't getting much traffic. They could upload to the Marketplace here (in bulk even), but I think they would very likely be put-off doing that because unless they see a check-box for V4 and M4, it could give the impression that it would be a waste of time doing it.
All of that said, you do make a good point about keeping clutter to a minimum, and in fact it's one of the things I really like about the design of this website; it does feel very clean and logical.
Karma: 1,781
Mon, Dec 16, 2024My apologies if it looked that way but I wasn't suggesting that sales are being stolen in any way. The only reason I mention the check-boxes is because they're not just a convenience, they're a very powerful way to entice and give an impression.
Say, for example, that a person visits the Markletplace on here for the first time. They might have a whole bunch of their own V4 products on some obscure personal webite out there that isn't getting much traffic. They could upload to the Marketplace here (in bulk even), but I think they would very likely be put-off doing that because unless they see a check-box for V4 and M4, it could give the impression that it would be a waste of time doing it.
All of that said, you do make a good point about keeping clutter to a minimum, and in fact it's one of the things I really like about the design of this website; it does feel very clean and logical.
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Tue, Dec 17, 2024"Cluttering up the user interface with something that is rarely used. That's a big expense to ask everyone to pay for the benefit of a few"
It's not "clutter". Suggesting that an additional button on a website somehow costs everyone actual money or something. That's a very big ask. If you're worried about UI, maybe you should start with something like the gallery upload interface. It's atrocious.
Yep, I went there. I'm not "just a user". You have no idea how close I have come to leaving this service right now. I've been talked down to regarding every suggestion and bit of input I have made here.
It's not "clutter". Suggesting that an additional button on a website somehow costs everyone actual money or something. That's a very big ask. If you're worried about UI, maybe you should start with something like the gallery upload interface. It's atrocious.
Yep, I went there. I'm not "just a user". You have no idea how close I have come to leaving this service right now. I've been talked down to regarding every suggestion and bit of input I have made here.
Yeah I doubt it though, not without V4 and M4 check-boxes anyway.
After seeing that thread from dim35 regards older figures compared to newer ones, I couldn't help but think about V4 and M4 due to the sheer amount of content out there for those figures. It just seems really weird because even Genesis 3 has a check-box on the search bar, and as far as I can tell, Genesis 3 was one of those figures that didn't do so well.
And just in case there's anyone out there might think I'm crazy, well you'd be right, but consider this:
- V4 and M4 have a nice dense mesh
- V4 and M4 can take the latest shaders
- V4 and M4 can take the latest Strand Based hair
- V4 and M4 can wear the latest dForce clothing
- V4 and M4 are both Poser and DAZ Studio compatible
This means that a revival could not only sell legacy content, but also bring a whole new level of realism to the V4 and M4 figures, remembering also that these figures work in both programs, and that is something the latest figures do not do.
So without the check-boxes I cannot see a revival on the horizon. But I might put at least one V4 and M4 character into the store, something up to date that uses the latest shader as well as a legacy shader for those who prefer it for the look (and I know for a fact that a heck of a lot do), just to see if they sell. If they sell reasonably well even without a check-box, then I would create more.
I'm thinking now that maybe I should have kept the idea to myself and quietly cornered the market in brand new V4 and M4 content, lol!
REPLY
! REPORT
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Sun, Dec 15, 2024They're not interested in all that. We're dealing with literally a new generation of Studio users. They were "brought up" with Genesis and we can't change that. They were also "brought up" on Iray, which is in my opinion an atrocious render engine. Give me Cycles, Eevee, Octane or even Lux. While a few peers like to tell me that I am inferior and obsolete for still using V4 and 3Delight, more than 95% of people who see my work can even tell.
Most of them won't even touch static props if it doesn't say "Genesis" on it. Remember when DAZ released the "easy" button prop? That's where we are at now. I used to steer peers towards making their own stuff, even if it's just poses and textures. I gave up. I just make what I need, myself, and if I can't then like nature "I find a way".
One of the great things about V4 is that it technically not a unimesh. The joint issues were solved by third parties and has less memory overhead. And despite what we hear from peers, nobody really needs 8k textures and renders at 4k. 1080p is still the standard, and I can print my own work in 16x20 poster size without resolution loss. "Work smart not hard" is a motto I have lived by since the mid 90s but somehow that gets lost intranslation when someone builds a 3k machine to render bad porn.....
Eh I've probably said too much but very few people listen anyway. I don't expect others to make V4 stuff for me. It saves me money anyway. I just can't see myself spending another 10k worth of assets just to do something with Genesis inferiorly to what I currently do with V4.
Most of them won't even touch static props if it doesn't say "Genesis" on it. Remember when DAZ released the "easy" button prop? That's where we are at now. I used to steer peers towards making their own stuff, even if it's just poses and textures. I gave up. I just make what I need, myself, and if I can't then like nature "I find a way".
One of the great things about V4 is that it technically not a unimesh. The joint issues were solved by third parties and has less memory overhead. And despite what we hear from peers, nobody really needs 8k textures and renders at 4k. 1080p is still the standard, and I can print my own work in 16x20 poster size without resolution loss. "Work smart not hard" is a motto I have lived by since the mid 90s but somehow that gets lost intranslation when someone builds a 3k machine to render bad porn.....
Eh I've probably said too much but very few people listen anyway. I don't expect others to make V4 stuff for me. It saves me money anyway. I just can't see myself spending another 10k worth of assets just to do something with Genesis inferiorly to what I currently do with V4.
RenderHub Admin 1
Admin: 13,838
Mon, Dec 16, 2024@COMIXIANT - "...without the check-boxes I cannot see a revival on the horizon..."
I'm sorry, but the "lack of check-boxes" isn't the problem. The "check-box" filtering was added to the site just two months ago. Prior to that, vendors were still uploading Genesis 8 content when Genesis 9 had been out for two years already - and customers were having no problem finding it.
As I mentioned above, RenderHub would be happy to accommodate the supply and demand if it were there.
I'm sorry, but the "lack of check-boxes" isn't the problem. The "check-box" filtering was added to the site just two months ago. Prior to that, vendors were still uploading Genesis 8 content when Genesis 9 had been out for two years already - and customers were having no problem finding it.
As I mentioned above, RenderHub would be happy to accommodate the supply and demand if it were there.
COMIXIANT
@Pinspotter
I actually quite liked you little rant, although to be honest if I told you the real reason I personally want to see V4 revived, you'd probably think I'm nuts!
The reason (for me anyway) is that I'm not a fan of PBR and Unbiased Rendering when it comes to comics, I just don't like the look or aesthetic or whatever you want to call it. Sometimes photoreal works and looks like it was the right choice to run with, but often I'm far more drawn towards stuff done in 3Delight and Firefly when it comes to comics because it just looks better suited somehow.
And let's face it, V4 and M4 are the undisputed legends in that sense because the're by far the most popular figures ever to have their content produced with shaders designed for those renderers.
@RenderHub Admin 1:
I get what you're saying but please see my other reply about that. I appreciate that V4 and M4 are sellable here and that you'd add the check-boxes if they became popular enough. It's great to hear and like I said, I might do at least one V4 and one M4 character just to see how it goes. They certainly won't cause a revival (they might not even sell.). But if they do sell at least reasonably well, I suppose I would keep it up even without the check-boxes.
Karma: 1,781
Mon, Dec 16, 2024@Pinspotter
I actually quite liked you little rant, although to be honest if I told you the real reason I personally want to see V4 revived, you'd probably think I'm nuts!
The reason (for me anyway) is that I'm not a fan of PBR and Unbiased Rendering when it comes to comics, I just don't like the look or aesthetic or whatever you want to call it. Sometimes photoreal works and looks like it was the right choice to run with, but often I'm far more drawn towards stuff done in 3Delight and Firefly when it comes to comics because it just looks better suited somehow.
And let's face it, V4 and M4 are the undisputed legends in that sense because the're by far the most popular figures ever to have their content produced with shaders designed for those renderers.
@RenderHub Admin 1:
I get what you're saying but please see my other reply about that. I appreciate that V4 and M4 are sellable here and that you'd add the check-boxes if they became popular enough. It's great to hear and like I said, I might do at least one V4 and one M4 character just to see how it goes. They certainly won't cause a revival (they might not even sell.). But if they do sell at least reasonably well, I suppose I would keep it up even without the check-boxes.
@COMIXIANT - "...without the check-boxes I cannot see a revival on the horizon..."
Without the sales there is no revival on the horizon
I have yet to see this thread explode with V4/M4 users clamoring for new products, showing the makers that there is a hidden market waiting anxiously for a product to fulfill their needs and desires.
Without the sales there is no revival on the horizon
I have yet to see this thread explode with V4/M4 users clamoring for new products, showing the makers that there is a hidden market waiting anxiously for a product to fulfill their needs and desires.
REPLY
! REPORT
COMIXIANT
You could be right, but surely it can't hurt to test the waters, right?
Fair enough, V4 and M4 aren't so big on here right now. I have to say though, that Kaos3D is totally killing it with this M4 character so far generating a whopping 37 ratings!
https://www.renderhub.com/kaos3d/bodybuilder-for-michael-4
Sure, it's been up a while but even so, I don't think I've ever seen any character for any figure on here coming even close to that in so far as the amount of ratings. Surely the amount of ratings are a measure, at least to some extent, of popularity?
Remember also that M4 is male, and we all know that males sell a lot less than females, so who knows what V4 could pull-off these days!
Karma: 1,781
Mon, Dec 16, 2024You could be right, but surely it can't hurt to test the waters, right?
Fair enough, V4 and M4 aren't so big on here right now. I have to say though, that Kaos3D is totally killing it with this M4 character so far generating a whopping 37 ratings!
https://www.renderhub.com/kaos3d/bodybuilder-for-michael-4
Sure, it's been up a while but even so, I don't think I've ever seen any character for any figure on here coming even close to that in so far as the amount of ratings. Surely the amount of ratings are a measure, at least to some extent, of popularity?
Remember also that M4 is male, and we all know that males sell a lot less than females, so who knows what V4 could pull-off these days!
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Tue, Dec 17, 2024I'd already have had several of my characters up for "sale" but no storefront wants them. And it's not like they look bad or anything. Their renders are still featured on different websites and forums. The main thing is that this issue is a DAZ thing. Meaning a walled garden model that relies on a perpetual upgrade track of a 3-D figure and subsequent dump of assets to sell along with the figure. When the assets reach saturation, a new figure comes out. And the process starts over again. I completely understand the business model, and it's why some people at DAZ jumped ship a long time ago.
But this business model can't keep going.
But this business model can't keep going.
COMIXIANT
@bikdingle
That's the spirit, although I just realised a potentially off-putting thing about the idea (depending on which audience you're targeting). While I previously pointed out that V4 and M4 can take the latest shaders, but I think that would actually be a pretty bad idea now that I think about it a bit more, because people specifically wanting to continue with V4 and M4 are likely doing so because of the legacy shaders (me included).
So personally, if I do get around to producing any new V4 and M4 content then I'll be sticking strictly to the legacy shaders that are expected of them.
@Pinspotter
In the early days DAZ always came across as a very wholesome company. I don't know how many of the original team remain, but these days they appear to be hell-bent on driving-off their user-base to Blender and third party websites.
Mark my words, that what they did with Mesh Grabber will come back to haunt them on an epic scale. Not least because there's nothing to stop another vendor releasing a plugin that does exactly the same thing, and selling it exclusively on another site (like on here for instance).
Now there's an idea RenderHub would be wise to look into. Commission a quality coder to write a Mesh Grabber alternative and release it exclusively on RenderHub. Publicise it on YouTube etc and there you go, you'd have just about every DAZ Studio user making an account here in order to buy it.
Moves such as the one DAZ pulled over Mesh Grabber are actually very easy to deal with as long as there's the will to do so. I'd code it myserlf if I were a coder, and I'd do so secure in the knowledge that it would sell extremely well.
Unfortunately I'm not a coder.or I'd have released such a plugin already!
Karma: 1,781
Tue, Dec 17, 2024@bikdingle
That's the spirit, although I just realised a potentially off-putting thing about the idea (depending on which audience you're targeting). While I previously pointed out that V4 and M4 can take the latest shaders, but I think that would actually be a pretty bad idea now that I think about it a bit more, because people specifically wanting to continue with V4 and M4 are likely doing so because of the legacy shaders (me included).
So personally, if I do get around to producing any new V4 and M4 content then I'll be sticking strictly to the legacy shaders that are expected of them.
@Pinspotter
In the early days DAZ always came across as a very wholesome company. I don't know how many of the original team remain, but these days they appear to be hell-bent on driving-off their user-base to Blender and third party websites.
Mark my words, that what they did with Mesh Grabber will come back to haunt them on an epic scale. Not least because there's nothing to stop another vendor releasing a plugin that does exactly the same thing, and selling it exclusively on another site (like on here for instance).
Now there's an idea RenderHub would be wise to look into. Commission a quality coder to write a Mesh Grabber alternative and release it exclusively on RenderHub. Publicise it on YouTube etc and there you go, you'd have just about every DAZ Studio user making an account here in order to buy it.
Moves such as the one DAZ pulled over Mesh Grabber are actually very easy to deal with as long as there's the will to do so. I'd code it myserlf if I were a coder, and I'd do so secure in the knowledge that it would sell extremely well.
Unfortunately I'm not a coder.or I'd have released such a plugin already!
bikdingle
Karma: 35,071
Tue, Dec 17, 2024When I sell my characters they are just the shape morphs. I'm not good at skins so I create the character with the best skins I can find by other people. I include a PDF with each character that lets the user know what skin/eyes/hair I used and I provide links to the product. From what I've seen of how people use my characters I'm stimulating sales of other people's characters as a result. So any V4 character I make will use an existing skin and eyes from someone else.
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Tue, Dec 17, 2024You know, I tried MeshGrabber. In essence it's just an alternative D-Form. Makes it somewhat easier to select the geo you want to push or pull. With an actual D-Form you get move, rotate, and scale. And it handles falloff a lot better than MeshGrabber. I've been using the D-Form tool since it was a separate plugin you had to buy. Still use it.
The MeshGrabber thing is a nothingburger. If I want control that somewhat matches the plugin, I just drop the geo into Blender. At that point I already have the other elements in place. Before cloth sims were a thing I dropped a character and the dress she wore into Blender. She was sitting on a throne and the skirt portions of her dress needed to drape. So I did it manually in Blender. Most DAZ artists run the other way when faced with such a problem. I also made, and manipulated a long ribbon that was to be wrapped and tied around a character's two wrists and neck. No cloth sims. Did it all by hand. Impossible with D-Formers and MeshGrabber. Both of those really just tweak parts of geo. So they're good for clipping and basic character morphs, or maybe to "blow out" a pocket on a pair of pants or something.
As for packaging characters, many years ago I found the perfect texture base for my most popular characters. Unfortunately it's a part of a character available exclusively at DAZ, and the artist who made the character disappeared many years ago. I wanted to buy a license to use the base textures for my own characters so I could put them to market. Constructing my own the usual way isn't going to work, due to the "realism" problem. My characters can't have ultra-realistic skin, it has to be doll-like. Anyway, nobody wants that so I continue to use what I settled on many years ago.
As for the shader thing and V4, I used to render in Lux and the characters looked great. Iray doesn't impress me.
The MeshGrabber thing is a nothingburger. If I want control that somewhat matches the plugin, I just drop the geo into Blender. At that point I already have the other elements in place. Before cloth sims were a thing I dropped a character and the dress she wore into Blender. She was sitting on a throne and the skirt portions of her dress needed to drape. So I did it manually in Blender. Most DAZ artists run the other way when faced with such a problem. I also made, and manipulated a long ribbon that was to be wrapped and tied around a character's two wrists and neck. No cloth sims. Did it all by hand. Impossible with D-Formers and MeshGrabber. Both of those really just tweak parts of geo. So they're good for clipping and basic character morphs, or maybe to "blow out" a pocket on a pair of pants or something.
As for packaging characters, many years ago I found the perfect texture base for my most popular characters. Unfortunately it's a part of a character available exclusively at DAZ, and the artist who made the character disappeared many years ago. I wanted to buy a license to use the base textures for my own characters so I could put them to market. Constructing my own the usual way isn't going to work, due to the "realism" problem. My characters can't have ultra-realistic skin, it has to be doll-like. Anyway, nobody wants that so I continue to use what I settled on many years ago.
As for the shader thing and V4, I used to render in Lux and the characters looked great. Iray doesn't impress me.
COMIXIANT
@bikdingle
It's good that you include a PDF but to be honest something that really frustrates me about morph vendors is that they often never point out which textures they used in the product listing.
@Pinspotter
I don't agree on that one. What Mesh Grabber is doing (the new version) is something that DAZ Studio has needed since its inception. It will not effect their sales of morphs at all (and I reckon that's what they're afraid of). Mesh Grabber is really needed to correct awkward joints, reposition strands of hair and correct poke-through. If a customer sees a morph or character they like, they're still going to buy it, they're not going to spend weeks or months trying to replicate it with Mesh Grabber.
Karma: 1,781
Wed, Dec 18, 2024@bikdingle
It's good that you include a PDF but to be honest something that really frustrates me about morph vendors is that they often never point out which textures they used in the product listing.
@Pinspotter
I don't agree on that one. What Mesh Grabber is doing (the new version) is something that DAZ Studio has needed since its inception. It will not effect their sales of morphs at all (and I reckon that's what they're afraid of). Mesh Grabber is really needed to correct awkward joints, reposition strands of hair and correct poke-through. If a customer sees a morph or character they like, they're still going to buy it, they're not going to spend weeks or months trying to replicate it with Mesh Grabber.
terrancew_hod
Karma: 143
Wed, Dec 18, 2024After looking at the thread, I went back to look at last month's sales to see my M4/V4 sales. Yes I got sales, **but** I made about $1 each from them. But that's why I keep them in the store; there are still people that look for them and use them but they really don't make the vendor money. And unless a person is releasing something for fun, they're looking to get money for their items to make it worth it. And really the active target for M4/V4 is going to be Poser users, though the process for making characters isn't as straightforward as it is in Daz Studio. I've done both, so you have to be careful how you export and import the mesh when working on morphs.
The newer stuff is always going to sell more but a lot of times people don't know where they can get older items.
The newer stuff is always going to sell more but a lot of times people don't know where they can get older items.
COMIXIANT
Thanks for the info, and actually I hadn't considered the differences between creating for different programs other than the obvious differences in material settings.
Back in the day when those older renderers were the norm, we were all complining due to the render times. And now we're at a stage where the renders are almost instant even though the calculations used to produce them are massively increased. You would think that by now, someone would have the initiative to understand that if such complex renders are pretty much instantaneous these days, then how fast would an older style render be if it were to use the GPU tech that is being used for the more modern renderers.
I know there's stuff like cell shaders etc, but I really just want the old style renderer and shading to make use of modern GPU technology so that we get a retro look wiht nodern instanteneous render times. It amazes me why the developers of these renderers would assume that the only thing we want to render is photorealism all the time.
It's not, certainly not me anyway, but then again I'm a bit 'out there' in my opinions compared to the wider audience I suppose, lol!
To me, everything just seems so clinical and boring with those photoreal renderers. Sometimes it works for comics, but they just don't have the same look and cosy character suited to comics as the old renderers surface shaders and lighting models do. I really wish they would do something to fix that by developing retro surfacing, shader and lighting techniques for the modern renderers.
It feels as if creativty has bee stolen to an extent, as weird as that might sound.
Karma: 1,781
Wed, Dec 18, 2024Thanks for the info, and actually I hadn't considered the differences between creating for different programs other than the obvious differences in material settings.
Back in the day when those older renderers were the norm, we were all complining due to the render times. And now we're at a stage where the renders are almost instant even though the calculations used to produce them are massively increased. You would think that by now, someone would have the initiative to understand that if such complex renders are pretty much instantaneous these days, then how fast would an older style render be if it were to use the GPU tech that is being used for the more modern renderers.
I know there's stuff like cell shaders etc, but I really just want the old style renderer and shading to make use of modern GPU technology so that we get a retro look wiht nodern instanteneous render times. It amazes me why the developers of these renderers would assume that the only thing we want to render is photorealism all the time.
It's not, certainly not me anyway, but then again I'm a bit 'out there' in my opinions compared to the wider audience I suppose, lol!
To me, everything just seems so clinical and boring with those photoreal renderers. Sometimes it works for comics, but they just don't have the same look and cosy character suited to comics as the old renderers surface shaders and lighting models do. I really wish they would do something to fix that by developing retro surfacing, shader and lighting techniques for the modern renderers.
It feels as if creativty has bee stolen to an extent, as weird as that might sound.
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Wed, Dec 18, 2024Ok, here's the thing about MeshGrabber. It really is just an alternate way to use the D-Form technology. Guess what happens when I reset the MeshGrabber data? All the D-Forms also get wiped. The only advantage MeshGrabber has is that you can select individual faces. While we can't do that with a D-Former, we can adjust the falloff range merely by scaling the field in all three axes. It's a lot more "fluent". I can scale the falloff on the fly with a set of dials. You can't rotate with MeshGrabber. You can't scale with MeshGrabber. D-Forms are free, they have been for quite a while now. I've been using them to great effect for a very long time. And when you compare MeshGrabber features to what you can do in Blender, it's no contest. I'll use Blender every single time.
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Wed, Dec 18, 2024Comixiant, there's actually a legit reason for the lack of an updated 3Delight engine. We call it "spaghetti code". 3Delight is very capable, and can utilize GPU cores. But the version built into Studio is very, very old. Updating the engine would probably break Studio. When it comes to software, devs can do a number of things with old programs and old code. They can attempt to reverse engineer and update the code. They can start from scratch and write a new program. Or they can do what DAZ has done; add half-assed features on top of the old base. Makes the program very top-heavy, and with every new feature added, there adds a risk of something breaking. Remember when DAZ recently updated the Iray engine? Remember all the stuff that broke?
As a software dev I would not have chosen Iray as a built-in unbiased engine. I would have chosen another one, and improved the ability for people to use standalone engines. They almost had it with Lux. But they threw the Reality bridge dev under the bus. That guy was also a Blenderhead. I bet he could have written the best Blender bridge out there. To have direct access to just the Cycles engine would have been chef's kiss. But I digress. DAZ used to have a fantastic programming team. Basing the UI on the QT framework was a master stroke. I assume that they left. I know that a lot of the old staff left quite some time ago.
As a software dev I would not have chosen Iray as a built-in unbiased engine. I would have chosen another one, and improved the ability for people to use standalone engines. They almost had it with Lux. But they threw the Reality bridge dev under the bus. That guy was also a Blenderhead. I bet he could have written the best Blender bridge out there. To have direct access to just the Cycles engine would have been chef's kiss. But I digress. DAZ used to have a fantastic programming team. Basing the UI on the QT framework was a master stroke. I assume that they left. I know that a lot of the old staff left quite some time ago.
terrancew_hod
Karma: 143
Wed, Dec 18, 2024" But they threw the Reality bridge dev under the bus"
No they didn't. Any damage the Reality dev did was self inflicted. He pretty much burned the bridge when demanded a bigger vendor cut than the others, then when that didn't happen, he sucked customers away by making new users of the upgraded version go to his site. I'm sure you remembered that. But the nail in the coffin was him trying to charge the DAZ vendors a licensing fee to use his software after we made a bunch of products to support reality. You can imagine how that went over... that's when all the supporting stuff disappeared from the store. At time I did a bunch of promos in Reality as well as do renders for other vendors since I could afford to rent server space, in exchange for a copy of the product. So really a lot of vendor's hard work disappeared in a day and they weren't happy about the situation. Then later was when Nvidia came in with iray. There was also a different plugin that used Luxrender directly, but it didn't catch on.
No they didn't. Any damage the Reality dev did was self inflicted. He pretty much burned the bridge when demanded a bigger vendor cut than the others, then when that didn't happen, he sucked customers away by making new users of the upgraded version go to his site. I'm sure you remembered that. But the nail in the coffin was him trying to charge the DAZ vendors a licensing fee to use his software after we made a bunch of products to support reality. You can imagine how that went over... that's when all the supporting stuff disappeared from the store. At time I did a bunch of promos in Reality as well as do renders for other vendors since I could afford to rent server space, in exchange for a copy of the product. So really a lot of vendor's hard work disappeared in a day and they weren't happy about the situation. Then later was when Nvidia came in with iray. There was also a different plugin that used Luxrender directly, but it didn't catch on.
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Wed, Dec 18, 2024It's likely that DAZ lowballed Paolo in the first place. That's what he told me, anyway. And DAZ wanted complete ownership power over the usage of render engines. There's a reason why Lux was chosen, it's because of something we call FOSS. In the end it's Paolo's plugin, not DAZ's. DAZ already had plans for an unbiased render engine so it had leverage power over Paolo. I don't blame him for having to move his stuff off the DAZ storefront.
People have to eat, you know?
Yes, there was another Lux plugin, and it was free. Surely you remember that.....
Do you also remember that Paolo ended up open sourcing Reality? Surely you remember that!
People have to eat, you know?
Yes, there was another Lux plugin, and it was free. Surely you remember that.....
Do you also remember that Paolo ended up open sourcing Reality? Surely you remember that!
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Wed, Dec 18, 2024And I should add that if I were Paolo, I'd feel incredibly insulted by DAZ introducing Iray while my own plugin for LuxRender was still active. According to DAZ, why sell a plugin for a PBR engine when they have a PBR engine baked-in?
You can't buy Octane on the DAZ website, gee I wonder why.....
And Octane is much, much better than Iray but that's another story.
You can't buy Octane on the DAZ website, gee I wonder why.....
And Octane is much, much better than Iray but that's another story.
terrancew_hod
Karma: 143
Wed, Dec 18, 2024Understand the agreement he sold his PLUGIN just like any other PA that sells plugins. No one was lowballed when HE sets the price of what it should be sold. Not sure how you're speculating like he came to the table as a partner.. he was selling a plugin as a vendor.
He set the price, not DAZ. He just wanted a bigger percent of the profit that was different than any other PA that sells items through the store. I mean he could have charged more if he wanted more money, right? But then no one would have bought it... hence the change in what he wanted in profit percents from sales. And no DAZ didn't have any plans... Paolo was first, but he just abused his position with daz and PAs. There's NO love lost for his plugin... after the licensing stunt, PAs stopped supporting his plugin regardless of what DAZ did.
The free plugin would have been 3 plugs then
Luxus was the product I was talking about and I paid $8.99 ($19.99 regular price) for it in 2013. It's nice you're defending him, BUT what he showed to the PAs and DAZ was FAR different than what you got. I'm glad he got booted because he got greedy with the terms of the PA agreement. Also Octane wasn't in the store because they didn't want to follow the agreement for plugins but wanted daz to support them for free.. yeah. Nvidia actually had a mutual agreement with DAZ and they worked together, so it was mutually beneficial for both. So that's how Iray got in the mix. If Paolo actually played his cards right, it could have been an official plugin.. but his antics and lack of support to PAs (there was some bugs we found in certain figures and he blew us off) basically killed support for luxrender.
And Paolo made it open source because no one wanted to buy it.. in either poser or DAZ. I'm sure he tried the same licensing deal with Poser but you know they ended up using a modified version of Cycles.
He set the price, not DAZ. He just wanted a bigger percent of the profit that was different than any other PA that sells items through the store. I mean he could have charged more if he wanted more money, right? But then no one would have bought it... hence the change in what he wanted in profit percents from sales. And no DAZ didn't have any plans... Paolo was first, but he just abused his position with daz and PAs. There's NO love lost for his plugin... after the licensing stunt, PAs stopped supporting his plugin regardless of what DAZ did.
The free plugin would have been 3 plugs then
Luxus was the product I was talking about and I paid $8.99 ($19.99 regular price) for it in 2013. It's nice you're defending him, BUT what he showed to the PAs and DAZ was FAR different than what you got. I'm glad he got booted because he got greedy with the terms of the PA agreement. Also Octane wasn't in the store because they didn't want to follow the agreement for plugins but wanted daz to support them for free.. yeah. Nvidia actually had a mutual agreement with DAZ and they worked together, so it was mutually beneficial for both. So that's how Iray got in the mix. If Paolo actually played his cards right, it could have been an official plugin.. but his antics and lack of support to PAs (there was some bugs we found in certain figures and he blew us off) basically killed support for luxrender. And Paolo made it open source because no one wanted to buy it.. in either poser or DAZ. I'm sure he tried the same licensing deal with Poser but you know they ended up using a modified version of Cycles.
COMIXIANT
@Pinspotter
I had no idea 3Delight could harness the power of the GPU, and wow, what a shame they didn't implement it!
Karma: 1,781
Thu, Dec 19, 2024@Pinspotter
I had no idea 3Delight could harness the power of the GPU, and wow, what a shame they didn't implement it!
Since I can't insert images in replies, this is what I briefly mentioned regarding shaders. The first image was rendered in 3Delight using Uber lighting. The second was rendered in Lux using lighting from the dead Reality plugin. The first was rendered in late February of 2011. The second was rendered in March of 2011.
The point is, you can use whatever shader, lighting or engine you want. But you have to work if you want to step outside the DAZ walled garden. Iray is atrocious when compared to other unbiased engines. And the new toon/anime shaders DAZ put out look atrocious. PW Toon does a better job and that shader came out like 2 decades ago. And the figure you see? That's Girl3. 15 years ago. I didn't even know you could subdivide a mesh in Studio then. I had no idea what UberShaders were then, you had to buy it separately. I wanted a little more "punch" to my renders and was studying photography at the time. I figured the answer was to use a different engine. And that's where I learned how unbiased engines work, and how shaders work.
V4 doesn't "expect" a legacy shader. At the end of the day, it's a mesh just like any 3D mesh. 15 years in and I'm still having to explain that to peers. I'm about to give up.
The point is, you can use whatever shader, lighting or engine you want. But you have to work if you want to step outside the DAZ walled garden. Iray is atrocious when compared to other unbiased engines. And the new toon/anime shaders DAZ put out look atrocious. PW Toon does a better job and that shader came out like 2 decades ago. And the figure you see? That's Girl3. 15 years ago. I didn't even know you could subdivide a mesh in Studio then. I had no idea what UberShaders were then, you had to buy it separately. I wanted a little more "punch" to my renders and was studying photography at the time. I figured the answer was to use a different engine. And that's where I learned how unbiased engines work, and how shaders work.
V4 doesn't "expect" a legacy shader. At the end of the day, it's a mesh just like any 3D mesh. 15 years in and I'm still having to explain that to peers. I'm about to give up.
REPLY
! REPORT
COMIXIANT
Like I said I just prefer the look of the 3Delight and Firefly renderers for comics/comix. Photoreal does have a place in such things when it feels well placed, but personally I mostly gravitate towards the more cosy and creative look of the other renderers and their associated shaders for such things.
Karma: 1,781
Wed, Dec 18, 2024Like I said I just prefer the look of the 3Delight and Firefly renderers for comics/comix. Photoreal does have a place in such things when it feels well placed, but personally I mostly gravitate towards the more cosy and creative look of the other renderers and their associated shaders for such things.
COMIXIANT
PS: You mention Lux, and actually I think Lux is the most photorealistic renderer out there. iRay is nice but I hate the bokeh in iRay, it tends to make everything look like miniatures although I suppose it could be down to some setting I'm not aware of.
Even a lot of the product promotion renders I see on DAZ, they often look like miniatures due to iRay's bokeh.
Karma: 1,781
Wed, Dec 18, 2024PS: You mention Lux, and actually I think Lux is the most photorealistic renderer out there. iRay is nice but I hate the bokeh in iRay, it tends to make everything look like miniatures although I suppose it could be down to some setting I'm not aware of.
Even a lot of the product promotion renders I see on DAZ, they often look like miniatures due to iRay's bokeh.
Well, I can definitely tell you one thing that is is gonna prevent content creation for m4/v4: No transfer utility in Daz for m4/v4. I just spent some time whipping something for the fun of it, but bringing it back into Daz and finding Daz doesn't support Michael 4 in the transfer utility stopped me dead in my tracks from completing this 
REPLY
! REPORT
Anabran
Karma: 2,550
Thu, Dec 19, 2024@ SnarlTheWerewolf
Which means you have to create conformers in poser and while I do not have the latest poser
( version 13),I do have poser 12 and it’s clothing content creation tools are not nearly as robust as the native transfer utility is for Genesis inside Daz studio.
V4/M4 are CR2 based Poser figures,
anyone still making new clothing content for the vestigial V4/M4 is likely doing so with legacy techniques drawn from the fading pre-genesis knowledge base of the forgotten past.
I see no chance of those nearly 20 year old figures being “revivedhere or anywhere else as demand for them is virtually nonexistent outside of the few loyalists lingering at the renderosity forums.
Which means you have to create conformers in poser and while I do not have the latest poser
( version 13),I do have poser 12 and it’s clothing content creation tools are not nearly as robust as the native transfer utility is for Genesis inside Daz studio.
V4/M4 are CR2 based Poser figures,
anyone still making new clothing content for the vestigial V4/M4 is likely doing so with legacy techniques drawn from the fading pre-genesis knowledge base of the forgotten past.
I see no chance of those nearly 20 year old figures being “revivedhere or anywhere else as demand for them is virtually nonexistent outside of the few loyalists lingering at the renderosity forums.
terrancew_hod
Karma: 143
Fri, Dec 20, 2024You should be able to create clothing in DAZ Studio as well; the process involves grouping the clothing to match V4/M4... and then maybe going to the joint editor to rig... but I had a time trying to find a link to create the clothing. I may have bought a tutorial years ago that's in my library. But the process was complicated, but there were a lot more streamlined tools in DAZ Studio to rig clothing and characters. I did morphs so i used the Exp tool to load multiple custom head morphs to mix and match. Not many people did custom body shapes as that required clothing vendors to make special fits for those shapes.
COMIXIANT
@SnarlTheWerewolf
Nice to hear you give it a go and I'm sorry to hear you were stopped in your tracks. Anabran doesn't sound too keen on the idea but could be right to feel that way, but don't forget that V4 and M4 can have dForce clothes draped over them which flow better anyway, and there is nothing to stop you using the older shader on an item of dForce clothing draped over V4 or M4.
From what terrancew-hod just said, it sounds as if there is a way to do standard clothing, but perhaps more complicated. When I brought it up though I was personally thinking that it would be nice to see dForce clothing for V4 and M4 for the first time, but using the legacy shaders. You'll have to bear with me because I'm clueless about a lot of this stuff at the moment, but as far as I'm aware, all you need to do to create a dForce item of clothing is import it as an obj, give it whatever groups you like and drape away!
As far as I can tell it wouldn't involve the need to transfer anything if you do it that way, and if so, the figure would be irrelevant in that case.
Karma: 1,781
Fri, Dec 20, 2024@SnarlTheWerewolf
Nice to hear you give it a go and I'm sorry to hear you were stopped in your tracks. Anabran doesn't sound too keen on the idea but could be right to feel that way, but don't forget that V4 and M4 can have dForce clothes draped over them which flow better anyway, and there is nothing to stop you using the older shader on an item of dForce clothing draped over V4 or M4.
From what terrancew-hod just said, it sounds as if there is a way to do standard clothing, but perhaps more complicated. When I brought it up though I was personally thinking that it would be nice to see dForce clothing for V4 and M4 for the first time, but using the legacy shaders. You'll have to bear with me because I'm clueless about a lot of this stuff at the moment, but as far as I'm aware, all you need to do to create a dForce item of clothing is import it as an obj, give it whatever groups you like and drape away!
As far as I can tell it wouldn't involve the need to transfer anything if you do it that way, and if so, the figure would be irrelevant in that case.
Pinspotter
Karma: 5,497
Mon, Dec 23, 2024The transfer utility requires TriAx which M4/V4 does not support out-of-the-box. I tried that path years ago. You can "convert" those figures to TriAx but then everything goes pear-shaped. Making clothing for Genesis is cake, but for M4/V4 you have to do conforming clothing and that can only be done in Poser. And it seems that everyone who knew how to do it, has died or joined the witness protection program. If I knew how to do it I'd already have a wardrobe for my characters.
It's not like in other 3D programs where if you model and rig something it's good for your lifetime. With DAZ Studio you're a slave to the tech gods. I'd have been making clothing for Genesis ages ago but there's no point when I already have nearly 100 characters based on V4. I don't model stuff to sell it. It's not a lucrative business to be in.
And don't get me started on D-Force. I have a nickname for it; "D-Farce". It's atrocious outside of carefully modeled cloth items specifically made with D-Force in mind. So if I need gud cloth simming I go to Marvelous or Blender. Studio is a gud character/scene generator and that's about it. If 3D fashion is your thing, just stay in Marvelous. Do your materials elsewhere of course.
It's not like in other 3D programs where if you model and rig something it's good for your lifetime. With DAZ Studio you're a slave to the tech gods. I'd have been making clothing for Genesis ages ago but there's no point when I already have nearly 100 characters based on V4. I don't model stuff to sell it. It's not a lucrative business to be in.
And don't get me started on D-Force. I have a nickname for it; "D-Farce". It's atrocious outside of carefully modeled cloth items specifically made with D-Force in mind. So if I need gud cloth simming I go to Marvelous or Blender. Studio is a gud character/scene generator and that's about it. If 3D fashion is your thing, just stay in Marvelous. Do your materials elsewhere of course.
terrancew_hod
Karma: 143
Mon, Dec 23, 2024You can still create clothing for M4/V4 in DAZ studio, however as you said, the info on how to do it is gone. But it does require grouped objects before you can start to rig it. Actually back then many of the more popular items were made in DS not poser. But since DAZ studio users have moved to genesis, the people that still use M4/V4 would mostly be in Poser.
I lost track of my M4/V4 creation documents once genesis came along once I could make characters in different height and custom body shapes.
I lost track of my M4/V4 creation documents once genesis came along once I could make characters in different height and custom body shapes.
terrancew_hod
Karma: 143
Mon, Dec 23, 2024Also i still have some of those old m4/v4 content creation utilities in my library but i've forgotten howto use them...
guy91600
Karma: 12,744
Tue, Dec 24, 2024@terrancew_hod
Maybe the solution is in a Renderosity forum since it is the 3D site that supports Poser the most
Maybe the solution is in a Renderosity forum since it is the 3D site that supports Poser the most
Anabran
Karma: 2,550
Tue, Dec 24, 2024Renderosity won’t “reviveV4/M4 either
They appear to be mostly focused on the latest “saviourfigure ‘Dawn 2or is it Lafemme 2? who knows ...who cares
And remember V4/M4 are still the property of
Daz and any forum threads you start about them over there will inevitably devolve into
a tribalist hate fest and will be promptly locked by the Poser loyalist volunteers who moderate those forums .
They appear to be mostly focused on the latest “saviourfigure ‘Dawn 2or is it Lafemme 2? who knows ...who cares
And remember V4/M4 are still the property of
Daz and any forum threads you start about them over there will inevitably devolve into
a tribalist hate fest and will be promptly locked by the Poser loyalist volunteers who moderate those forums .
COMIXIANT
Well I've not been here long, but from what I've seen, the moderators are actually very fair, open-minded and tolerant on here. I wouldn't have asked for rumble to be embeddable otherwise, because the less open-minded one is, the less they appreciate feeedom of debate.
I've not seen any sign of that on here.
Karma: 1,781
Tue, Dec 24, 2024Well I've not been here long, but from what I've seen, the moderators are actually very fair, open-minded and tolerant on here. I wouldn't have asked for rumble to be embeddable otherwise, because the less open-minded one is, the less they appreciate feeedom of debate.
I've not seen any sign of that on here.
COMIXIANT
Sorry, I see you were talking about the other forum, not here.
Karma: 1,781
Tue, Dec 24, 2024Sorry, I see you were talking about the other forum, not here.
