Still waiting

1356712

Comments

  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 1,301
    edited February 2013

    carfor said:
    And you pay $3,500, too! Sheesh! Carrara already does well -- DT's render again:

    Kevin,

    those are very nice renders, those were the group I was talking about.

    But they all look like HDRI cheats to me.

    The new renderers are UNBIASED, or BIASED, more advanced, than the current
    carrara renderer. IMHO.

    I thought people wanted ideas for version 9? If you want to stay in version 8, so be it.

    I missed where anyone was asking for ideas for v9. DAZ already said they could only do a few things a couple years ago and that was it.
    Carrara is already a very nice biased render engine which most users don't know how to use (all biased renderers involve cheats). The few that do are doing other stuff now. I like Octane and I have nothing against unbiased render engines. But what you can do in Carrara is already beyond the abilities of most users.

    As I frequent the Octane forums, too, I read about the limitations. You have to watch your texture count, your polygon count and there are still features like motion blur that are not up to perfection, yet. And the more you add to make something look real, the longer it takes, even for Octane. Most of the studios use cheats when it comes to CG. It's a time saver and gives you more control. I would argue that unbiased is a cheat in a work way as you don't have to know how light works and how to set it up properly to get the effect you want. Many like unbiased because they don't have to learn lighting to get good results, but if they don't learn about lighting, there's a lot they can't do.

    Post edited by Kevin Sanderson on
  • carfor-2225296carfor-2225296 Posts: 0
    edited December 1969


    I missed where anyone was asking for ideas for v9.

    Oh, I went to the Link Holly posted, where people were ranting - it was a good long time ago, surprisingly.

    But what you can do in Carrara is already beyond the abilities of most users.


    Well Id love to see some advanced tutorials for the current Engine! { where they show the results at the end in the 5 % }

  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 1,301
    edited February 2013

    carfor said:

    I missed where anyone was asking for ideas for v9.

    Oh, I went to the Link Holly posted, where people were ranting - it was a good long time ago, surprisingly.

    But what you can do in Carrara is already beyond the abilities of most users.


    Well Id love to see some advanced tutorials for the current Engine! { where they show the results at the end in the 5 % }

    I've been asking forever. Good luck. The people who know how to do it have fled the forum after all the negativity was spewed over the past couple years. 3dcelebrity never hangs out here, Ringo's been gone for a long time, DT rarely shows up anymore and sub7th is long gone and that's only a few. Holly's one of the rare ones still here but she never has been one much for photoreal. Catharina Harders (Mec4D) left the DAZ store and hasn't been back to Carrara in a long while. She once figured out how to approximate unbiased in Carrara and was going to make a tute but never did. I think it basically was raising the photon count to the max with a few other things she had learned experimenting. She was working under the idea that the more you raise the quality, the closer you approach unbiased as the biased render engine are basically cutting the quality or work involved to save render time in speed.

    Post edited by Kevin Sanderson on
  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    carfor said:

    I missed where anyone was asking for ideas for v9.

    Oh, I went to the Link Holly posted, where people were ranting - it was a good long time ago, surprisingly.


    The purpose of linking there wasn't to prove that everyone complains...

    It was a "poll" put together BY DAZ which was a list of the most likely roadmap features for C9.

    That original poll has been deleted from Carrara Cafe. It would have been a useful comparison to the features already added in C8.5, and would be very useful to these discussions where DAZ's plans are rather vague.

    After spending the day in the forum archive, one thing I found funny: Our new icons for the shape lights was originally suggested by Manstan. :)

  • carfor-2225296carfor-2225296 Posts: 0
    edited February 2013

    I've been asking forever. Good luck. The people who know how to do it have fled the forum after all the negativity was spewed over the past couple years. 3dcelebrity never hangs out here, Ringo's been gone for a long time, DT rarely shows up anymore and sub7th is long gone and that's only a few. Holly's one of the rare ones still here but she never has been one much for photoreal.

    Ah..... pity. coke never gave the secret formula away either. I guess we know the engine holds powerful secrets,
    well just have to keep plugging away at it!

    Post edited by carfor-2225296 on
  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 1,301
    edited December 1969

    carfor said:

    I missed where anyone was asking for ideas for v9.

    Oh, I went to the Link Holly posted, where people were ranting - it was a good long time ago, surprisingly.


    The purpose of linking there wasn't to prove that everyone complains...

    It was a "poll" put together BY DAZ which was a list of the most likely roadmap features for C9.

    That original poll has been deleted from Carrara Cafe. It would have been a useful comparison to the features already added in C8.5, and would be very useful to these discussions where DAZ's plans are rather vague.

    After spending the day in the forum archive, one thing I found funny: Our new icons for the shape lights was originally suggested by Manstan. :)

    See, Stanley. They do listen to you! ;)

  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited February 2013

    Holly's one of the rare ones still here but she never has been one much for photoreal.

    Thank you for considering that. It's totally true, I like Carrara because I can control it.... I try to pursue "my eye", but sometimes I think that is a rarity in 3D that no one else wants these days....

    The pursuit of photoreal is endless... :grrr: omg I'd rather have a plugin. LOL!!

    I'd put Carrara's renderer against anything out there. Maybe that is bragging or maybe I am really ignorant to what is out there.... I think I was pretty close to a photoreal human with these pics... what gives it away is the teeth which I didn't finish (needs some kind of SSS or something) and the displacement on the hair...

    Hey LOOK! a PIC!

    Doc12.png
    480 x 640 - 270K
    Doc2.png
    450 x 600 - 230K
    Post edited by wetcircuit on
  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 1,301
    edited December 1969

    Holly's one of the rare ones still here but she never has been one much for photoreal.

    Thank you for considering that. It's totally true, I like Carrara because I can control it.... I try to pursue "my eye", but sometimes I think that is a rarity in 3D that no one else wants these days....

    The pursuit of photoreal is endless... :grrr: omg I'd rather have a plugin. LOL!!

    I'd put Carrara's renderer against anything out there. Maybe that is bragging or maybe I am really ignorant to what is out there.... I think I was pretty close to a photoreal human with these pics... what gives it away is the teeth which I didn't finish (needs some kind of SSS or something) and the displacement on the hair...

    Hey LOOK! a PIC!

    Those are really nice! Maybe some SSS on the teeth or rework the teeth maps, if there are any,to get rid of the natural shadows that may be there. The eyes look absolutely real.

  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 1,301
    edited December 1969

    I come back to this occasionally in my scattered thinking with split shift work and all. But the things I've noticed looking at renders for all the high end render engines compared to the low end and in between... it all boils down to textures and lighting for the photoreal crowd. If you don't have the textures right and if the lighting isn't right, it doesn't matter what the render engine is, it won't look good.

    The Carrara render engine is still really fast, especially if you set up things properly. And approximations of GI with Tim Payne's light kit look as good as anything that's straight GI and it renders in a fraction of the time.

    Another thing that often gets overlooked in these rambling discussions, but even JoeMama points out, Carrara is IT if you want to have real fast and good render control of DAZ content.

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 14,643
    edited December 1969

    Holly's one of the rare ones still here but she never has been one much for photoreal.

    Thank you for considering that. It's totally true, I like Carrara because I can control it.... I try to pursue "my eye", but sometimes I think that is a rarity in 3D that no one else wants these days....

    The pursuit of photoreal is endless... :grrr: omg I'd rather have a plugin. LOL!!

    I'd put Carrara's renderer against anything out there. Maybe that is bragging or maybe I am really ignorant to what is out there.... I think I was pretty close to a photoreal human with these pics... what gives it away is the teeth which I didn't finish (needs some kind of SSS or something) and the displacement on the hair...

    Hey LOOK! a PIC!

    Those are really nice! Maybe some SSS on the teeth or rework the teeth maps, if there are any,to get rid of the natural shadows that may be there. The eyes look absolutely real.The skin and face hair looks perfect as well. Notice how the lights is coming in on him? Notice the perfect combinations used between the Highlight and Shininess channels? Light and shaders. That's the key. Great person, Holly!

    Hey, check out what Project Dogwaffle has in it's long list of capabilities (3d designer, it's called). Rosie's buying this for me before February comes to a close! PD Pro Howler 8.2!!!

    PD8-3ddesigner3.jpg
    890 x 260 - 48K
    PD8-3ddesigner2.jpg
    890 x 263 - 70K
    PD8-3ddesigner5.jpg
    890 x 228 - 47K
  • GarstorGarstor Posts: 1,411
    edited December 1969

    But buying someone the actual paints that Picasso used isn't going to guarantee anything!

    Okay, now I definitely have to buy you dinner when I visit Madison! That was beautiful!

  • FenricFenric Posts: 348
    edited December 1969

    OK, by now I hope it's clear that I'm not exactly a cheerleader here, but seriously...

    Unbiased renderers save you the trouble of learning to place lights correctly. For that assistance, they take FOREVER to work, and slap your work solidly in the uncanny valley because as "un-biased" as they are, they still do not capture every nuance of real lighting. My opinion is still solidly this: if you want to take photographs, go grab a camera. Lighting is not everything, and if you want to make art, then learn how for goodness sake and stop hoping that a piece of software will do the work for you.

    My "other" experience is with Maya.

    Maya has a stable of renderers: "Maya hardware" looks like crap. "Maya Hardware v2" looks like crap after a night of too-spicy thai food. Maya software looks like PovRay 2.0. And Mental Ray is a right royal PAIN IN THE ASS. It is not fast, the shaders don't even vaguely resemble the preview, and it crashes if you sneeze during a render.

    And that brings us to stability: Yeah, I get sick of "an error has occurred" in Carrara... But Maya 2012 dumps me unceremoniously to the desktop if I put a texture into hypershade and dare to try to look at the preview. I swear it counts the number of test renders and crashes after six of them.

    Oh, and scripting. Yeah, MEL is great... except that it's still the only decent way to get some animation things done, it crashes a lot, and it's got syntax that the late, lamented SGI thought was nifty way back in 1993.

    Maya's UI feels remarkably like Carrara's... except it's cluttered with meaningless icons layered three rows deep interspersed with text menus. On the quick-tool pallette to the left I've got a pointer, a pointer pointing at a dashed-line blob, a paintbrush on a circle with yellow boxes, a cone with an arrow at the bottom, a sphere with a weird round arrow-circle, a cube with arrows pointing awway from the cornders, and two things I'm not quite sure what they are... and then the view option boxes.

    My $0.02? Save yourself $3375 and go by a copy of "Digital Lighting and Rendering" instead of a copy of Maya (or 3DStudio, or Lightwave, or Cinema 4D)

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 14,643
    edited December 1969

    Okay, okay! We'll pick some place really expensive - and we can hang out and... well... eat :-P

  • GarstorGarstor Posts: 1,411
    edited December 1969

    Okay, okay! We'll pick some place really expensive - and we can hang out and... well... eat :-P

    Fair 'nuff! :)

  • wetcircuitwetcircuit Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    :red: Hmmm. After just now visiting the bugtracker I'd say we are back underway... There are a ton of new (unaddressed) reports, but there is activity from DAZ side....

    I'm not holding my breath for that announcement, but I'm also satisfied the private beta has continued at least a version or two since the last public beta.

  • FenricFenric Posts: 348
    edited December 1969

    Garstor said:
    Okay, okay! We'll pick some place really expensive - and we can hang out and... well... eat :-P

    Fair 'nuff! :)

    *sigh* I miss it there. Last time, I ended up back at Ella's again - which was somewhat disappointing, honsetly. I wish we had somewhere like Husnu's here, though (assuming they're even still there).

  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 14,643
    edited December 1969

    Fenric said:
    Garstor said:
    Okay, okay! We'll pick some place really expensive - and we can hang out and... well... eat :-P

    Fair 'nuff! :)

    *sigh* I miss it there. Last time, I ended up back at Ella's again - which was somewhat disappointing, honsetly. I wish we had somewhere like Husnu's here, though (assuming they're even still there).I love Husnus. Ella's Deli is still fun, now and again - it isn't what it used to be though - perhaps because I grew up? Maybe it was always just... ordinary, besides the ccol robots, merry-go-round and huge ice cream selection

  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,004
    edited December 1969

    carfor said:
    I knew it was starter software, and I wouldn't be able to grow too far with it.

    Perhaps. But it contains so many valuable tools for a Daz3d Published Artist that it's impossible to ignore - or consider it to be unnecessary. With the CCT now built in, it's a powerhaus! There was all of this discussion regarding ways of using Modo and Zbrush for making morphs and adding morphs to genesis clothes and such. One of us stepped in all innocent like, it was so funny. "What about Hexagon and its bridge to D|S?"
    Age of Armor was like, oh man, yeah! I'll be back! It was just cool! Well, he's a really cool guy! But so many people write these apps off as junk or something just because they're cheap or free. Their really only cheap and free because Daz3d allows them to be. They want their family of friends (I don't really know the new CEO that much yet, but Dan Farr always took it to heart when customers wanted something that they couldn't have - or didn't like what was going on. He considers all of us, the customers and forum members, his friends) to have the tools they need. It's not just good for business, it's just good sense. They have the power to do it, so they do - and smile about it!
    I love Daz3d!
    Hexagon is a formidable modeler. I feel that way about Carrara, too. D|S has some incredible tools under its hood and I can't wait to see what kind of beauty I can get Bryce 7 pro to give me. I may be no expert, but I have a talent for seeing beyond the norm.


    I know you love DAZ Dart, but D/S is still starter software with serious limitations. Some of those limitations can corrected- If you buy the plugin. There are some limitations that D/S has that no plugin can correct, short of a complete re-write of the software. D/S is fine software- For what it is. I would also remind you, that just because it says DAZ doesn't mean that it's always a winner. I've seen some awful clunkers from them before. Both in the models/figures they sell and the software they publish. I don't care what the company is, or what they sell, always look at their products with a critical eye.

  • evilproducerevilproducer Posts: 9,004
    edited February 2013

    Fenric said:
    Garstor said:
    Okay, okay! We'll pick some place really expensive - and we can hang out and... well... eat :-P

    Fair 'nuff! :)

    *sigh* I miss it there. Last time, I ended up back at Ella's again - which was somewhat disappointing, honsetly. I wish we had somewhere like Husnu's here, though (assuming they're even still there).I love Husnus. Ella's Deli is still fun, now and again - it isn't what it used to be though - perhaps because I grew up? Maybe it was always just... ordinary, besides the ccol robots, merry-go-round and huge ice cream selection


    Hah! One of my brothers tried to order a BLT there. They said they couldn't- Jewish deli and all, so he says (in all seriousness), just give me a ham and cheese instead! :snake:

    Post edited by evilproducer on
  • ShannonHoppeShannonHoppe Posts: 0
    edited February 2013

    (Self Edited)
    Carrara is a VERY capable software. As with any 3D package, one has to spend some time with the tools and enjoy the process of creation. Bob Ross was an excellent painter. His line of paints and paint supplies were, and still are, extremely popular sellers. It would be crazy for someone to expect to be able to paint like Bob Ross just because they bought that line of products. Newcomers need to hear the positives of Carrara. All 3D softwares have disadvantages. None are perfect. Carrara is not perfect but it is a VERY powerful set of 3D tools by any estimation. Like everyone else I would love to hear that Carrara is going to be updated. I personally feel the best way to assist that outcome is to allow potential new purchasers of Carrara to see and read the positive results. There's a lot of folks using Carrara. We're just not as visible as we used to be ;)
    Happy Creating!

    Post edited by ShannonHoppe on
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 14,643
    edited December 1969


    I know you love DAZ Dart, but D/S is still starter software with serious limitations. Some of those limitations can corrected- If you buy the plugin. There are some limitations that D/S has that no plugin can correct, short of a complete re-write of the software. D/S is fine software- For what it is. I would also remind you, that just because it says DAZ doesn't mean that it's always a winner. I've seen some awful clunkers from them before. Both in the models/figures they sell and the software they publish. I don't care what the company is, or what they sell, always look at their products with a critical eye.
    Ahhh, a prophecy that misread, it could have been.
    Granted, and point well, very well made. However (always wait for the 'but'),
    I never really cared for D|S. I mean, yeah... before Carrara, it was okay - and I really like how they made it so customizable, interface-wise. But that was then, this is now. It is a starter app, for those who want to pose, compose and render. A place where they can access all of their stuff and get it into a nice image - starter. For a starter in that realm, I feel that it is quite nice, indeed. I, however, am not much of a starter anymore - except when it comes to really using D|S Pro.
    I will be using D|S in my workflow pretty soon here, for some products I have on the burner. But not as starter software - as a professional application. I've run some quick example runs, a while ago - simply because some of the Devs at Daz were helping me leap over some hurdles. In doing so, I ended up having to see for myself what this thing is capable of - but not for posing, composing or rendering. For what I need to use it for, there are few resources, in my opinion and working taste, that can compare.
    Fair enough?
    ***Vagueness fully intended. Void in states where prohibited. Sign above or blow the dotted line, but not on it. failure to comply will result in prosecution to the fullest extent. Action figures sold separately.
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 14,643
    edited December 1969

    I'm a bit concerned that someone new to 3D that enters the forums may get the wrong perception about Carrara. I'm not a fanboy. I believe proof truly is in the pudding. So here's the proof I can provide and hopefully some assurance to newcomers that may be wrongly persuaded by the negative rather than being inspired by the positive. Link below provides a straight Carrara render without post work and screen capture to prove it did indeed come straight from Carrara. Simple 3 light setup and DOF, no hdri.
    http://shannonhoppe.com/forumposts/DagonaeCarraraProof_Hoppe.jpg
    Carrara is a VERY capable software. As with any 3D package, one has to spend some time with the tools and enjoy the process of creation. Bob Ross was an excellent painter. His line of paints and paint supplies were, and still are, extremely popular sellers. It would be crazy for someone to expect to be able to paint like Bob Ross just because they bought that line of products. Newcomers need to hear the positives of Carrara. All 3D softwares have disadvantages. None are perfect. Carrara is not perfect but it is a VERY powerful set of 3D tools by any estimation. Like everyone else I would love to hear that Carrara is going to be updated. I personally feel the best way to assist that outcome is to allow potential new purchasers of Carrara to see and read the positive results. There's a lot of folks using Carrara. We're just not as visible as we used to be ;)
    Happy Creating!
    Neat! Did you make the creatures too? and... Bravo on the Carrara defense! I feel the same way about the "No"-it-all posts. I probably act like a Carrara Know-it-all, but I'm not very close. Okay, not close at all. But I do know that what you said up there is true - been saying it all along. Almost makes you wonder how many potentials turn around and leave without giving Carrara half a chance, just because of it. People do have a right to express negativity just the same as my right to kick their a... oh wait. Last time I got arrested for that, they said that I do NOT have that right, but I can at least express my gleeful joy regarding this incredible suite of 3d art and animation tools.
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 14,643
    edited December 1969

    Fenric said:

    *sigh* I miss it there. Last time, I ended up back at Ella's again - which was somewhat disappointing, honsetly. I wish we had somewhere like Husnu's here, though (assuming they're even still there).
    I want a Gyro. Now I'm hungry for a nice, fresh, State Street Gyro. Ahhh that Greek yogurt sauce drizzled over that expertly carved lamb on a pita with onions sliced so thin....
    I want a Gyro
  • ShannonHoppeShannonHoppe Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    I'm a bit concerned that someone new to 3D that enters the forums may get the wrong perception about Carrara. I'm not a fanboy. I believe proof truly is in the pudding. So here's the proof I can provide and hopefully some assurance to newcomers that may be wrongly persuaded by the negative rather than being inspired by the positive. Link below provides a straight Carrara render without post work and screen capture to prove it did indeed come straight from Carrara. Simple 3 light setup and DOF, no hdri.
    http://shannonhoppe.com/forumposts/DagonaeCarraraProof_Hoppe.jpg

    Neat! Did you make the creatures too? and... Yessir, it's my original creation. The octopus is available here at Daz. I edited my original post to take out the link but am glad you quoted it. The link still works. My purpose was not to pimp my work but to show that Carrara is capable of providing capable end results straight out of the box.
  • DartanbeckDartanbeck Posts: 14,643
    edited December 1969

    Would you like me to remove the link?
    It's a really cool render!

  • magaremotomagaremoto Posts: 1,029
    edited December 1969

    @ carfor

    the success of many renderers is mainly due to materials presets, as Kevin pointed out. As such, octane has a huge db, arion has few presets, octane is wanted by all, arion not yet, nonetheless the quality is very similar and price too. If you want to be a cg artist and put your talent in your work, then sweat on carrara engine and you'll have your satisfactions. if only carrara had a good data base of shaders such as vray or vue (both biased) we would not be here to complain about carrara engine.
    attached are some examples about afternoon lighting setups where you can see that the render is realistic on materials that are convincing; the example above is fully IL, the bottom one is AO only. Rendering time is about 15 minutes and 7 minutes respectively.
    hope it helps

    http://www.adrive.com/public/UhcwSz/PM atmos.pdf

  • ShannonHoppeShannonHoppe Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Thank you Dartanbeck. Nah, the link is not a problem.

  • carfor-2225296carfor-2225296 Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Well It seems people have been here so long, arguing, that they've forgotten the main points.

    1. Very few people can get good realistic renders . { ie a handful of people - who are LONG GONE - took the
    settings with them. }

    a. { Sorry Holly, that does not look realistic to me at all } check Reality below

    2. Poor renders are being blamed on materials,, where as if you render in cycles / octane with NO materials,
    it still looks real { but of course just real geometry sitting there. }

    check reality image :

    http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/293/3/3/white_gaga_by_elianeck-d5idnvb.jpg

  • Kevin SandersonKevin Sanderson Posts: 1,301
    edited February 2013

    carfor said:
    Well It seems people have been here so long, arguing, that they've forgotten the main points.

    1. Very few people can get good realistic renders . { ie a handful of people - who are LONG GONE - took the
    settings with them. }

    a. { Sorry Holly, that does not look realistic to me at all } check Reality below

    2. Poor renders are being blamed on materials,, where as if you render in cycles / octane with NO materials,
    it still looks real { but of course just real geometry sitting there. }

    check reality image :

    http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/293/3/3/white_gaga_by_elianeck-d5idnvb.jpg

    Then check out Eliane's Carrara renders, too. http://www.elianeck.com/index.php?showimage=103

    I've seen crappy renders in Octane and Cycles... bad materials and not so talented artists at work. You can do really nice clay renders in Carrara, too. Some of the best unbiased renders I've seen are in Fryrender, but it was obviously the materials at work under nice GI.

    Post edited by Kevin Sanderson on
  • magaremotomagaremoto Posts: 1,029
    edited December 1969

    carfor said:
    Well It seems people have been here so long, arguing, that they've forgotten the main points.

    1. Very few people can get good realistic renders . { ie a handful of people - who are LONG GONE - took the
    settings with them. }

    a. { Sorry Holly, that does not look realistic to me at all } check Reality below

    2. Poor renders are being blamed on materials,, where as if you render in cycles / octane with NO materials,
    it still looks real { but of course just real geometry sitting there. }

    check reality image :

    http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/293/3/3/white_gaga_by_elianeck-d5idnvb.jpg

    "NO materials" is a nonsense, every shader - even simply black or white- interacts with light: they can be diffuse, specular, dielectric etc
    in a render engine they have to be finely set to be realistic: it's up to you to choose a preset or play around with the mat editor.
    Where carrara engine is defective imho is in the irradiance map, that does not compute bounce light rays well, especially in low lit rooms, as well as Modo or vray do: the example below, taken from the Modo gallery, seems impossible to get in carrara, even with
    IBL or emitting medium

    1a8eb4cb3a021367347d9c48235692bb.jpg
    1024 x 768 - 740K
Sign In or Register to comment.