DAZ Studio viewport needs a major upgrade, right? How average does it look compared to real-time vid
deepsix
Posts: 62
Hi All,
I'm not sure if this has been talked about before and sorry if it has but....
=*= DAZ Studio viewport needs a major upgrade, right? =*=
I'm talking about things like SSAO, real-time (and soft) shadows, good alpha (transparent) rendering, DOF, accurate UV/image texture display...
Does anyone feel the same?
Can it be done?
If so, Let's go!
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
It's not a video game it's a tool.
It's primary function is organising files, which it does very well with Smart Content - If you were asking that all content be Smart I'd be with you.
Other than that, a more complex interface would just rob scene real estate and slow down performance.
Ok, I'm going to go ahead and almost completely disagree with you sorry John.
I never said DAZ was a video game. But a File Manager? Is DAZ a file manager? Not for me. I make art with it! Maybe I'm doing it wrong?
Visualisation is everything when it comes to constructing a scene. Dynamic viewport is the artists eye and render comes later.
Complex interface? No. I just promote a viewport that looks better. Way better.
Yes. Performance will be affected, so users must be able to toggle and tune viewport effects.
Hm, a viewport driven by a game engine would completely rock!!! :-)
Real time preview of shadows, displacement working in the viewport, better preview of lightning, textures and materials. That would speed up scene creating a lot. But I think it is not easy to do with all the shader based stuff going on in DAZ Studio.
And I do not think that it would slow down performance a lot. You do not need 60 fps and there is no Ki in the background or whatever. Just a still image of a scene. I dare to say that every computer or notebok, sold in the last 5 years is able manage this. Of course it depends on the engine and how it is optimized for DAZ Studio.
All in all, the general idea is great!
Yep you nailed it :
- shaders are tough to realise in real-time but that's ok - lighting and alpha and textures are great
- games do it at massive frame rates
- we only need it at low frame rates
With a great viewport you are more immersed in the scene - creativity flows on from that and then amazing results.
Plus its way, way more fun!
Sounds like a great way to eat up available memory and CPU or GPU. The 4.8 beta with Iray now offers real-time previewing, IF your computer can handle it without slow...ing to... a... cra...w...l.
Considering the twenty pages of people moaning and groaning with assumptions that including Iray meant currently or eventually removing other render options, I'd be very hesitant if I was DAZ, to make so drastic a change to the viewport rendering as you're suggesting.
Something to consider regarding the display is that most video games cheat like crazy by combining as many parts of surfaces as possible and simplifying meshes to make speed the priority. Sprites (flat images) are still even used, though they've become much more dynamic than their basic 2D ancestors. The environments look awesome when you're busy shooting at something, but when things are still, you can generally find lots of blurry textures and blocky objects. (i.e., the road in a racing game often still looks motion-blurred when you're stopped, because it's a tiny strip of an image repeated.) To include the volume of parts and layered textures we're used to working with in Studio or any other 3D art program with gaming surface processing, would alienate most users due to processing slowdown when moving objects or the camera. (It's effectively locked some users out of using Iray preview...I'm one of them.) This will get better over time, but it won't be so drastic all at once.
If you know a specific render engine that fits what you're suggesting, then let DAZ know and they might take a look, if they haven't already.
Errr... not to be a party pooper, but DAZ 4.7 already has that feature, out of the box:
http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/new_features/4_7/start#aux_viewport_pane
OK I'm now fully regretting my flipant referance to "vid games" in the subject line.
I know, you are so right @VoltisArt - cheats abound, abound in games. And they do a fantastic job of it no mistake.
Yep point noted. I'm not talking at all about simulating Iray or 3Delight output.
I'm talking about a better viewport that maybe only needs a few basic features (like I mentioned in the intro) that really help visualisation.
@VoltisArt - in terms of DAZ getting a whole new engine? I think no. Just cherry pick a few fun features and make it look great.
lee, thanks. I wasn't sure if I remembered something else being around...too many programs swimming about my head.
Deepsix -- unfortunately I don't think handpicking is an option. They can turn features off and on, adjust numbers, or allow the users to do so for the purposes of speed vs. quality, but the capabilities of a render engine are a package deal. Everything in the same viewport is exclusive to one selected engine; OpenGL seems to be the common selection for working viewports and any deficiencies lie with that, moreso than what DAZ is able to change without switching to another engine. Overlays like Spot Render will also only use one engine within the selected box.
It would be pretty cool if we could layer more than one engine in one screen, though. One of the current limitations with Iray is that it doesn't handle the curve system exclusive to 3Delight, which LAMH and Garibaldi use to simulate hair.
Added: Iray and OGL both have issues with transparent objects like mesh hair and plants, when polygons intersect. If only we could delegate particular objects to 3DL, lots of people would be really happy.
Heh, no worry. It is the easiest way to describe a quick-but-realistic(ish) image simulation.
We all want the daz unreal 4 realtime engine :) viewport and a workable IK where you can manipulate hip without horrible feet slides and just animate.
If we need a file manager, then we can just use windows explorer!
I thought about that during my previous post, but I don't know the technical details involved well enough, nor the fine print on the UR4 license. I suppose it's a possibility with the new free licensing, but I'm not sure if said license becomes a paid thing if distributed through this kind of software en masse, as opposed to a game or phone app.
Sneaksy DAZ could already be working on it, secretively. It would be far from the first surprise they've sprung upon us.
You guys are amazing, anyone reading this thread please scroll up and take note.
I thought about that during my previous post, but I don't know the technical details involved well enough, nor the fine print on the UR4 license. I suppose it's a possibility with the new free licensing, but I'm not sure if said license becomes a paid thing if distributed through this kind of software en masse, as opposed to a game or phone app.
Sneaksy DAZ could already be working on it, secretively. It would be far from the first surprise they've sprung upon us.
The UT engine isn't realtime until you compile the base assets. Most of the DAZ content would be too poly heavy to handle that engine without having a good video card or two in your system.
Of course it would slow down performance. A lot.
Just look at the options we have now. Tons of people, even with the limited "rendering" (if you want to call it that) done in realtime by the viewport, have to turn the settings all the way down in the options just to get usable performance.
It is not reasonable to argue "video games can do it." Video games cannot -- can not -- do it. They character and prop figures in video games do not have the insane number of polygons that DAZ figures and props do, especially the Gen 6 stuff. They do not have the texture realism. They don't need the options. Simple example: genitals. In most video games, the user can never, ever see things like nipples and other private parts. So the game creators don't built them in, because they are always covered by some kind of simple underwear even if you "undress" your character. So all the textures and surface undulations that come with those body parts do not need to exist and never have to be calculated. But in DAZ, they have to exist because the user might want them. And that leads to calculations.
Also in terms of lighting and shadows -- video game creators design a simple but effect type of lighting that is generically useful for outside and inside. Usually, one primary light source that generates shadows. One intensity for shadows. That's it. DAZ has to account for the fact that you might (probably wouldn't, but might) put 18 lights into a scene, all with shadows of different intensities. No video game engine could compute this, and yes it would make the DAZ renderer slow, but DAZ could still render it (eventually). A video game engine would not be able to (and attempting to make it do so would quickly bring it to its knees). Trying to make a realtime editor that could allow for this would be crazy.
Also, FPS does matter in DAZ. If you are dragging stuff around, and the viewport is not showing it at ~20-30 fps minimum, it will make the editing process feel "hitchy" and you will get stutter. Enough of that and at least for me, I want to stop using the editor at all.
No, the viewport editor window is not for rendering. It is for setup. It needs to be "rough" so you can quickly set your objects and poses and then get about lighting/rendering. You can easily speed up your renders by making the window the right aspect ratio but a small size (I often use 400 px wide). This will make it go fast but give you a quick preview. Then when you think you are getting close, bump it up to 1200x1800 or whatever your true rez is.
Mine has one, its called Octane render for DAZ studio viewport
I could see, at some point in the future, the Iray progressive mode becoming an option for a real-time preview, but its definitely not there yet, and not just in DS, Even in high-end programs, they are still modeling and setting up in a viewport that looks none too different from what DS has.
Daz may not just be a file browser, but it is first and foremost a tool, while it can be nice for a tool to look pretty, if it comes at the expense of functionality (the memory usage, lagging when posing, etc.) I don't think it would be a step that pleases many people. It certainly wouldn't please me, and I'm pretty easily satisfied.
That said Daz had made strides in terms of better real-time previews, with the aux viewport in 4.7 and now Iray in 4.8 I'm do most of my light setup and material tweaking with Iray rendering in an (admittedly small) aux viewport. Has anyone noticed how Iray doesn't take any time to optimize textures the way 3delight did? its making it super easy for me to test a bunch of textures quickly. Since my computer is not a supercomputer I have to work and optimize: when setting up the lighting I hide hair and other non-essential objects, for tiling materials I modify them on a sphere rather than the object they end up on.
Would it be nice to be able to pose the figure with all the pretty lights and textures? Sure. Is it what I want Daz focusing on? Personally I'd rather them focus on Softbodies, Dynamics, and the like.
No love for the Interactive Progressive Rendering option? I just discovered it a couple days ago and i think it's amazing. Completely transformed my workflow. What more could you ask for?
yep, some of us better try the engine on first hand than waiting for a similar solution inside DazStudio.
What is not to love about real time rendering on the fly to keep track of all of changes you make? Admittedly it is best left small or not on the main camera if you don't have a pretty good computer.
Yep you nailed it :
- shaders are tough to realise in real-time but that's ok - lighting and alpha and textures are great
- games do it at massive frame rates
- we only need it at low frame rates
...only if you have the hardware to support it. Many of us don't. My GPU has only 1GB of memory. My system only has12 GB of memory. My CPU is an older generation i7. Put a Stonemason set in with a couple Genesis characters and items with transmaps (like hair or foliage) and the viewport already becomes sluggish. I don't deal with animation save for motion blur or cloth dynamics in Poser and that pretty much chokes on my system. The last motion blur rendering I did (only five frames) took sixteen and a half hours to complete.
Crikey, there are people here still working on duo core systems with Intel graphic chipsets.
You keep complaining about your system, but its really not that bad? I use a laptop with 2 GB GPU and 8 GB of memory, also a older i7. I manage to use the aux view with ipr/iray 30 percent of the time. Hell, I usually am browsing the internet at the same time too.
...turned off the IPR window as it just brought things to a crawl having only 1GB video memory. Video memory is what controls viewport response in OpenGL. I tend to work on fairly large and complex scenes with multiple characters, large sets, many props, and detailed textures that really tax the memory limits of the GPU. I've actually had the application crash while working in OpenGL mode because I exceeded the GPU's memory. There are times I have to go to lower quality veiwport settings just so I can move items and cameras around in the scene.
...and that is without running any other processes at the same time like being online, image editors, or even image viewers.
To deal with a game engine driven realtime viewport would bring everything to a standstill.
I tend to push the system pretty hard as I am not very good with postwork, and therefore must get most of the work done in a single render pass.
Don't have the funds for a newer more powerful GPU at this time.
Wait - did this just now happen already with the new "Filament" viewport?
I haven't tried it out but maybe we need to mark this thread as "Solved" !!!!
Apologies for the bump of a very old thread :O
@kyotokid I really hope you have more than 1GB on your GPU now ?!
..well I do a Maxwell Titan X, but it is dedicated to Iray redering only, not connected to the displays as I have older ones that don't use the newer USB-like HDMI connection (the Titan-X only has one older HDMI port). I do have a Maxwell 750 Ti (4 GB) in the second assembly system for doing test as well as proof renders of characters or scene elements.