Regarding Area Rendering, here is a link to the ‘official’ feature request (please add supporting note if you’d like it too): https://bugs.daz3d.com/view.php?id=36684
Regarding dynamic hair, Alessandro’s LAMH plug-in will bring that to DS 4.5. It won’t support physics in its first version, but that’s on the list for the subsequent version.
Wishlist for DS5 features:
Lighting: the option for lights to affect only selected surfaces (useful for example to add a point light in front of the face of a character and have it only add a glint on the eyes instead of lighting the whole face).
Shaders: - user-friendly caustics (like, a workflow that doesn’t necessitate to create a special camera plus special lights plus special materials in the shader mixer)
- faster-rendering indirect lighting
More rendering optimizations (DS’s renderer is s-l-o-w)
Multi-pass rendering (or update and integration of the ReLight plug-in into the main DS Advanced app) Support for instancing (Alessandro said that it’s on his to-do list, but he’s alone so could surely use helping heads *hint, Daz, hint*)
DS4.5 already has instancing.
Kendall
did you test it? the above list is created a while ago… so yes it’s possible it’s done in 4.5
daz is working on different features from the list and more.
some features have already been made, some are still possible future opportunities.
Yup. Tested many times. I can easily create over 100 Genesis instances in DS4.5 32bit. Things start to bog down a little on the screen updates at that point
The ability to edit poly and edit mesh like Hexagon or 3Ds Max, it would make morphing in daz sooooo much superior! Also an added feature to select only rotations in saving a preset pose. It takes ages to save a generic genesis pose for all genesis characters cos you gotta select all then deselect all scaleing (If you dont and save it, then use that saved pose on another Gn character they turn into some monster of a morph!)
...first and foremost.: a fully finished, fully functioning, reasonably stable application out of the box with the basic Daz based plugins intact and with an updated SDK supplied to third party plugin developers before release. No more paying to be beta testers please.
...the ability to create cloth dynamics, be it “built in” or through a bridge plugin to Marvelous Designer.
...an option for a more streamlined UI for those who have used older versions of Studio and/or do not have multiple display setups. It shouldn’t take much to provide a “retro UI” skin that displays runtime & content in the standard vertical folder tree format.
...installing all application components, files, and modules to one single parent folder (preferably in the C:/Programme Files tree where other applications reside) instead of spreading it among several different locations. There should be no reason for having content or application modules folders in places like “My Documents” (which is supposed to be for productivity software such as text editors, word processing and spreadsheet programmes) or any other location on the HDD than the parent directory. This only makes the application more cumbersome and content/files more difficult to map.
...tick boxes in the setup that allow one to bypass installation of the CMS, any other background/automatic process manager, or website links.
...better yet, how about an option (e.g. an Install Wizard) in the application set up routine that lets advanced users to fully “configure” the application to one’s needs and workflow prior to final installation (a basic version of this already exists in the .exe installers)? This would allow one to determine which features to include and which to not include as well as setting up the directory/runtime mapping and make any changes before the actual installation process is launched.
...a simpler method for mapping existing runtimes/directories particularly for those who have custom runtime setups (which would be included in the above)
...ongoing compatibility with the .daz file format instead of just the new .duf one.
...a background render queue/batch process. This would work similar to the render to .RIB option, allowing one to set up the render process to be executed outside the application at a later time as can be done with the standalone version of 3Delight.
...the capability to brew the perfect cup of coffee (one of the Advanced User options).
I would have to say i concur with Kyoto Kid on all of these.
I would also add:
-A Metadata editor: I want to be able to, while in the DAZ Studio environment, assign metadata to a file and organize the files as I see fit (not necessarily sticking with the alphabetical regime but organize according to how I think and flow when working.)
- An easier system for posing, one where I can tick mark Pin Rotation and what-not on the side in a pane structured like a tree and not have to exactly touch the right body part then click on the pin…. oh crap, I touched the leg instead… now I have to back to the… crap, touched the leg again…
-Morph Stack: Basically make it so when you make a morph on TOP of other morphs used, you can edit a “stack” with tick marks by it of morphs used and remove them one by one or all at once MINUS the morph you just made to isolate EXACTLY the morph you just made without all the other morphs. I would be like Zero Shape…. except for these morphs which i want to stick around.
- I would like to reiterate the morph brush option much like the weight mapping system where you paint what you want to change first, can apply a blur to indicate falloff, then paint on OR use a dform magnet. Then save as an independent morph.
...installing all application components, files, and modules to one single parent folder (preferably in the C:/Programme Files tree where other applications reside) instead of spreading it among several different locations. There should be no reason for having content or application modules folders in places like “My Documents” (which is supposed to be for productivity software such as text editors, word processing and spreadsheet programmes) or any other location on the HDD than the parent directory. This only makes the application more cumbersome and content/files more difficult to map.
It’s standard nowadays to separate applications (which go in Program Files under Windows), application configuration information (AppData), and user data (My Documents). You don’t have to put your content in My Documents, but that IS the standard. Putting everything in one folder hasn’t been considered “best practice” for over a decade, and putting user data in the Program Files hierarchy is very unwise in Windows after XP.
Kyoto Kid - 03 September 2012 12:57 PM
...a simpler method for mapping existing runtimes/directories particularly for those who have custom runtime setups (which would be included in the above)
-A Metadata editor: I want to be able to, while in the DAZ Studio environment, assign metadata to a file and organize the files as I see fit (not necessarily sticking with the alphabetical regime but organize according to how I think and flow when working.)
It’s already there, although I personally think it could be made easier to use.
RKane_1 - 03 September 2012 01:31 PM
- An easier system for posing, one where I can tick mark Pin Rotation and what-not on the side in a pane structured like a tree and not have to exactly touch the right body part then click on the pin…. oh crap, I touched the leg instead… now I have to back to the… crap, touched the leg again…
-A Metadata editor: I want to be able to, while in the DAZ Studio environment, assign metadata to a file and organize the files as I see fit (not necessarily sticking with the alphabetical regime but organize according to how I think and flow when working.)
It’s already there, although I personally think it could be made easier to use.
I had no idea. That’s pretty much what I meant. There are so many things available in DAZ but add lack of documentation on top of not as user friendly as they could have made it and you get double-whammied.
RKane_1 - 03 September 2012 01:31 PM
- An easier system for posing, one where I can tick mark Pin Rotation and what-not on the side in a pane structured like a tree and not have to exactly touch the right body part then click on the pin…. oh crap, I touched the leg instead… now I have to back to the… crap, touched the leg again…
Couldn’t you do this with the Scene tab?
It would be GREAT if, in the scene tab, once you opened it, you had the two pins available to tick off there as well as all the dials for position (xyz rotation) all in one collapsed list RIGHT THERE…. but i digress.
...the thing is Daz installers put stuff all over the place. As some have mentioned, to remove all traces of the Studio application from one’s system (as when getting ready to do a clean re-install due to file corruption) almost requires wiping the HD and reinstalling the OS and everything else from backups or restore disks because files for the Studio application are buried everywhere and simply uninstalling the application doesn’t always remove them.
As you were aware of, yesterday evening I was struggling with the whole directory mapping issue and which directory path had to go where so that things were “seen” correctly by the application. I never had this difficulty with past updates, including going from 2.x to 3A. Were it not for your assistance, I would have probably just given up out of total frustration like some have and uninstalled 4 altogether.
As to the .duf format, what happens with older content should the next version of Studio only support that format?
There have been so many changes occurring since the release of Studio4 that I am concerned the investment I currently have in all this could become useless.
...ongoing compatibility with the .daz file format instead of just the new .duf one.
To what purpose? DS still reads .daz files, but they have never been backwards compatible, and have many disadvantages relative to .duf files.
Thanks for weighing in, fixmypcmike. I have always valued your expertise.
What are some of the advantages to the .duf format and could you perhaps give some insight on why you feel it was chosen?
.daz files could never be opened in earlier versions of DS. Going forward, .duf files in DS4.6 will be able to be opened in DS4.5
.daz files are binary which can’t be read by anything other than DS and can’t be edited if they fail to open. .duf are plain text in a standard format (JSON) so they can be read, edited manually if necessary, and importers can be written for other applications.
.daz files fail if the data-folder files aren’t found. .duf will go back to the Poser files to recreate the data files if necessary.
...the thing is Daz installers put stuff all over the place. As some have mentioned, to remove all traces of the Studio application from one’s system (as when getting ready to do a clean re-install due to file corruption) almost requires wiping the HD and reinstalling the OS and everything else from backups or restore disks because files for the Studio application are buried everywhere and simply uninstalling the application doesn’t always remove them.
I do agree, although this isn’t a DS issue as a more general problem with pretty much all software these days. It would be useful to have an option in the installers for whether you want to remove all user preferences (serial number, mapped runtimes, etc.) for when you want a clean install.
Kyoto Kid - 03 September 2012 03:27 PM
As you were aware of, yesterday evening I was struggling with the whole directory mapping issue and which directory path had to go where so that things were “seen” correctly by the application. I never had this difficulty with past updates, including going from 2.x to 3A. Were it not for your assistance, I would have probably just given up out of total frustration like some have and uninstalled 4 altogether.
I know we’ve discussed this before (and as I recall you DID have similar difficulties with the transition to DS3), but I still don’t understand why you’ve had these difficulties. Installers that use different default install paths can cause troubles, and some people use literally hundreds of content folders and get into trouble because of that, or because they relied on using “Other Formats” to get around the directory structure, but your problem could have easily been solved by using the “Import Mapped Content Folders” feature.
Kyoto Kid - 03 September 2012 03:27 PM
As to the .duf format, what happens with older content should the next version of Studio only support that format? There have been so many changes occurring since the release of Studio4 that I am concerned the investment I currently have in all this could become useless.
That is a valid point, I agree, although as DS4.5 still supports the .ds format from DS 0-2 as well as older Poser formats, I think that DAZ 3D development understands the need to retain that compatibility. And as we saw with .daz files from the DS 0-1period no longer working properly in DS3+, sticking with the .daz format doesn’t ensure that past .daz files will work anyway—quite the opposite, they are prone to becoming unusable even if they are ostensibly the same format.
...ongoing compatibility with the .daz file format instead of just the new .duf one.
To what purpose? DS still reads .daz files, but they have never been backwards compatible, and have many disadvantages relative to .duf files.
Thanks for weighing in, fixmypcmike. I have always valued your expertise.
What are some of the advantages to the .duf format and could you perhaps give some insight on why you feel it was chosen?
.daz files could never be opened in earlier versions of DS. Going forward, .duf files in DS4.6 will be able to be opened in DS4.5
.daz files are binary which can’t be read by anything other than DS and can’t be edited if they fail to open. .duf are plain text in a standard format (JSON) so they can be read, edited manually if necessary, and importers can be written for other applications.
.daz files fail if the data-folder files aren’t found. .duf will go back to the Poser files to recreate the data files if necessary.
