edited

linvanchenelinvanchene Posts: 617
edited April 2013 in The Commons

Edited to prevent further derailing of a contest in progress.

The hosts have considered what was said and made their decision.

Post edited by frank0314 on
«1

Comments

  • MattymanxMattymanx Posts: 3,482
    edited December 1969

    Those who make up the contest have a right to make up any rules they wish. The render engine restriction is just a part of the creative challenge.

  • Herald of FireHerald of Fire Posts: 3,384
    edited December 1969

    Different render engines give different overall effects, this much I agree with. But it's also makes things more interesting when you level the playing field and ask individuals to use the same engine. By placing certain restrictions, it teases your knowledge of the engine and how to squeeze the best out of it, which ultimately makes for a more fun contest.

    By your own admission you use the three major engines already, so it's not exactly a restriction so much as a challenge. If you're not very good at using 3Delight, look at it as a way to learn new skills and improve existing ones. That's my take on it at least.

  • linvanchenelinvanchene Posts: 617
    edited April 2013

    edited

    Post edited by linvanchene on
  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited April 2013

    I understand your frustration linvanchene, But part of the reason for this decision was because the shaders were designed for Studio. We want to see how people utilize it in the primary app. Call it partially market research, but it helps us understand how to develope and improve things natively. Yes sure it will look much better in alternative render engines, I fully agree on that, but also take into account the majority of customers here use Daz as their primary render app. And this competition is to cater for the masses. If you are skilled enough to use apps like Lux, Octane and other render engines, surely you shouldn't have an issue generating stunning results with Daz? This shader was made for Daz, so we want to see what can be done with it in Daz. In future where the product is not shader specific, we will have a more open policy, but for now this is the desicion we are sticking with. Again I apologize if this has upset you, but we have to take the majority of users into account over the few who use advanced render methods. We want this comp to be as fair as possible. Not everybody has Lux and Octane, but all have Daz:)

    Post edited by Zev0 on
  • MattymanxMattymanx Posts: 3,482
    edited April 2013

    edited in favor of Zev's reply.

    Post edited by Mattymanx on
  • SimonJMSimonJM Posts: 2,956
    edited December 1969

    I have no qualms and no concerns whatsoever about the rules and restrictions of this (or pretty much any other) contest.

    Not wishing to add more fuel to the fire (since I seem to have been the one who added the high Octane content ... ;)) I would feel an element of discrimination if a contest were to be restricted to ONLY using something that needed additional expense or ridiculous hardware to make use of. Stating that a contest entry can only be accepted if created using the "available to anyone who has Daz Studio" which just happens to be the product the showcase item was designed for is hardly a restriction or act of discrimination (IMHO).

  • linvanchenelinvanchene Posts: 617
    edited April 2013

    edited

    Post edited by linvanchene on
  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited December 1969

    No harm Done:) I perfectly understand your frustration. There have been plenty of comps I used to enter where I was not allowed to do certain things. But I took it as a challenge and ended up doing one based on the rules and one where I did it my way just for personal satisfaction:)

  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 19,899
    edited December 1969

    Yes, that is a good way of doing things. In the freebie challenge we have a no postwork rule. But we do say that people can then postwork the image and add it as an NAE. They go into separate galleries so the judges are only working on the original images for judging.

  • icprncssicprncss Posts: 3,485
    edited December 1969

    Since the vendors products do list DSON, why is limited to DS only? Maybe the restriction should be more to the effect of biased render engines only rather than simply DS only.

  • LycanthropeXLycanthropeX Posts: 2,202
    edited December 1969

    Zev0 said:
    ... I fully agree on that, but also take into account the majority of customers here use Daz as their primary render app. ...

    actually this is not true. In all the polls i have seen there has been a near 50/50 split between Studio and Poser with only a slight advantage to Studio, at any rate, no where near a "majority"

    As all the required products state on the product pages that they include DSON support there seems no reason they could not be used in Poser. Making the contest Studio only excludes nearly half the community from entering.

  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited April 2013

    The product and its shaders are for Daz only. By customers I was specifically speaking of those who purchased the product since it was our product being used as reference.

    Post edited by Zev0 on
  • LycanthropeXLycanthropeX Posts: 2,202
    edited December 1969

    if its a Studio only product then why does it include a DSON installer? When I see DSON on a product page I assume it can be used in Poser as well.

  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited April 2013

    http://www.daz3d.com/sheer-greatness I do not see Dson support for Poser...

    Post edited by Zev0 on
  • LycanthropeXLycanthropeX Posts: 2,202
    edited December 1969

    all 3 products list a DSON installer

  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited April 2013

    Yes but Compatable software only lists Daz studio..The DSON Core files are the Daz files. If it works in Poser it will list DSON Importer for Poser as well. http://www.daz3d.com/glute-and-breast-movement-for-genesis

    Post edited by Zev0 on
  • LycanthropeXLycanthropeX Posts: 2,202
    edited December 1969

    it was my understanding that only Poser needed DSON, so when I see DSON on a product page I assume the product can be used in Poser as well

  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited April 2013

    I think DSON is the universal name for the new files. It can be confusing, but to make sure always check the compatable software tab. That should indicate if it is indeed for Both apps or not. If it has support for Poser it will list DSON Importer for Poser.

    Post edited by Zev0 on
  • Male-M3diaMale-M3dia Posts: 2,013
    edited December 1969

    it was my understanding that only Poser needed DSON, so when I see DSON on a product page I assume the product can be used in Poser as well

    DSON does not equal poser compatible. DSON is just a portable format specification for DS that also replaced the old ".DAZ files and data directory" method that ds-only product had to use.

    Things that can be used with the Poser DSON importer needs to be tested and have their own Poser-specific materials before it can be designated as Poser compatible. If you don't see the Poser companion file installers, it may not work in Poser (the exception would be morphs, but some may not work as well)

  • larsmidnattlarsmidnatt Posts: 3,458
    edited December 1969

    Zev0 said:
    If you are skilled enough to use apps like Lux, Octane and other render engines, surely you shouldn't have an issue generating stunning results with Daz?

    Sounds like a misguided taunts which isn't needed. If it were directed at me I would send you a PM with an earful :)

    Don't do that again :)

  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited December 1969

    Was not meant to sound like that in anyway. Maybe my wording was incorrect. I apologize:)

  • ValandarValandar Posts: 662
    edited December 1969

    Zev0 said:
    If you are skilled enough to use apps like Lux, Octane and other render engines, surely you shouldn't have an issue generating stunning results with Daz?

    Sounds like a misguided taunts which isn't needed. If it were directed at me I would send you a PM with an earful :)

    Don't do that again :)

    Speaking as someone who just saw this thread... say what? Doesn't sound like a taunt to me at all.

  • DaWaterRatDaWaterRat Posts: 1,641
    edited December 1969

    I did a contest (I want to say two years ago) where the idea was to use the basics. No fancy shaders, no external to the program render engines. No post work. I simply ruled that you had to set up and render in the same program. I have no regrets and have been thinking about doing it again, with the same restrictions. Sometimes I think people get used to using advanced and external options, and forget how powerful the base programs can be.

  • linvanchenelinvanchene Posts: 617
    edited April 2013

    edited

    Post edited by linvanchene on
  • larsmidnattlarsmidnatt Posts: 3,458
    edited April 2013

    To be clear I don't have an issue with contest restrictions. I don't do contests myself. So I have no vote in that area.

    But when talking about art creation, would anyone challenge Bob Ross and say "Well if you can paint so well, surely you can make something stunning with X"

    That was my point. I hated painting, but was decent with a pencil. And almost good even with charcoal. But they are different beasts, and people have preferences.

    Same with photographers, had old school guys who love film and hate digital. Ask them the same "your so good with film, surely you can make something stunning with a digital SLR". The photographer may actually be driven mad at that point. I've seen it happen.

    Post edited by larsmidnatt on
  • Zev0Zev0 Posts: 3,641
    edited April 2013

    Say I choose a winner who used an external un-biased render system to create his entry and it is so great that no other daz render comes close because it has features the Daz render system does not. Now say I choose that guy's render as the winner. Have you ever thought of all those who did not use an advanced render method are gonna complain and say he only won because he used render engine A or B and that it was unfair to the rest? I will rather take complaints from a few than upset the majority. You cannot please everybody, but best you can do is try to make things as fair as possible.

    Post edited by Zev0 on
  • GeddGedd Posts: 2,473
    edited December 1969

    Zev0 said:
    I understand your frustration linvanchene, But part of the reason for this decision was because the shaders were designed for Studio. We want to see how people utilize it in the primary app. Call it partially market research, but it helps us understand how to develope and improve things natively. Yes sure it will look much better in alternative render engines, I fully agree on that, but also take into account the majority of customers here use Daz as their primary render app. And this competition is to cater for the masses. If you are skilled enough to use apps like Lux, Octane and other render engines, surely you shouldn't have an issue generating stunning results with Daz? This shader was made for Daz, so we want to see what can be done with it in Daz. In future where the product is not shader specific, we will have a more open policy, but for now this is the desicion we are sticking with. Again I apologize if this has upset you, but we have to take the majority of users into account over the few who use advanced render methods. We want this comp to be as fair as possible. Not everybody has Lux and Octane, but all have Daz:)

    Not to quibble but DAZ isn't a renderer, it 'uses' 3DLight natively. The reason I mention this isn't to be petty but when talking about different render engines it doesn't help new people to dumb down certain things imo as it only contributes to a sense of ignorance rather then understanding.

  • Canary3dCanary3d Posts: 1,469
    edited December 1969

    I'm gonna jump in and try to clarify a couple of general things & terminology (not specific to Zev0's product, but related-ish)--if I'm wrong about any of this please correct me!

    We tend to use the terms "shader" and "shader preset" interchangeably around here, and most shader presets that are sold are placed in the "shaders" folder just to be confusing. But when someone is selling a new shader like Sheer Greatness or PW Toon or HSS Human Surface Shader, that is about which channels are available to apply to a surface - like, opacity, diffuse, specular, specular 2, velvet, refraction - not every shader has all the channels.

    If you set up all the channels in a shader - blue diffuse, green specular, 50% opaque etc - and apply it to a surface, you can then save that in DS as a "shader preset." If you save it in the shaders folder somewhere (like most of us vendors do!) it's still a preset. (Confusing, I know!!!) It will apply the actual shader plus whatever you set on the channels. You can then apply that to any surface that you select, of anything. If your surface setting uses texture maps in any of the channels, it's still a shader preset, but it won't work without having the textures in the right locations.

    A material preset saves some or all of the channels of your shaders specific to the material zones of a particular object, so it's not quite the same as a shader preset. It can include multiple different shaders if they are applied to different mat zones.

    DSON is the new file format that is used by DS that allows it to be read by plug-ins for other apps. In order to be read by Poser, there have to be "Poser companion files" and also you need the DSON importer on the poser side. So if a product says "1 DSON core installer" it just means it has the files in the new DSON format; if it says "1 Poser companion files installer," that's what tells you Poser can use it.

  • GeddGedd Posts: 2,473
    edited December 1969

    Thank you Canary3d, I think that tidbit should be stickied and bolded in a section titled something like *Basic information on product compatibility* or some such.

  • linvanchenelinvanchene Posts: 617
    edited April 2013

    edited

    Post edited by linvanchene on
This discussion has been closed.
Rocket Fuel