Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
I think, in the hands of an experienced user who knows what they are doing, the look that Fauvist likes come from manipulating the haze. You can change it's colour, density, thickness and base height.
To expalin this image
so my peripatetic fairy popped over to keep him company.
I did wonder about haze, but two of the images (interiors) Fauvist linked to didn't seem to have any.
'Aliasing' is a computer graphics term for the abrupt transitions between adjacent pixels, creating a jagged effect. Imagine, for example, that you have a 45° diagonal black line on a white background. If all your pixels are either black or white, that line will look jagged when you look closely at the image.
Anti-aliasing is a technique to 'smooth out' the images by averaging the pixels. If you have a black pixel next to a white pixel, the anti-aliasing algorithm might turn the black into dark gray, and the white into a lighter gray. To the eye, the resulting image seems 'smoother', because the transitions are less abrupt.
Most rendering programs will perform some kind of anti-aliasing to make the image look better. In Bryce's normal rendering mode, the final pass through the image is an anti-aliasing pass. Bryce looks at areas of high contrast in the almost-final image, and then anti-aliases the edges between regions of noticeably different colors so that the image appears less pixelated and generally smoother. You can think of anti-aliasing as a kind of selective blurring operation, which blurs just the bits of the image where the contrast is greatest and the 'jaggies' are most obvious.
The downside of anti-aliasing is that fine detail can get lost. If you had a texture with, say, tiny white dots speckled on black, then each white dot would be seen by Bryce as an area of high contrast in need of anti-aliasing. So it would average their color values with adjacent pixels, turning them dark gray. The white pixels would disappear, which might not be what you want.
In the sample image you posted, I imagine that the artist might be concerned about the stone of the castle, where alternating colors create a 'stonework' effect. Anti-aliasing would average everything out, creating a uniform gray. And there's a crispness about the foliage that I think you might lose with anti-aliasing enabled.
Much of the time you want anti-aliasing, but sometimes it destroys a particular effect that you're aiming for. Bryce lets you explicitly switch off anti-aliasing for the whole image (and possibly for individual objects; I can't remember, and I'm too lazy to boot up a Windows VM just to find out) for cases like these.
I haven't seen the ability to switch off anti-aliasing in other renderers, but I don't think this feature is a major contributor to the claimed uniqueness of Bryce images.
Okay, I guess this is going to be the closest I get to for an example of what I'm trying to explain in words. These are 2 renders by Vashek Podvala (aka Vapo). He is the artist who created the poses for the male version of Jepe's SHINY SEETZ products. The render on the left is from Jepe's https://www.daz3d.com/shiny-sheetz-michael-6-and-gianni-6 , and the render on the right is from Jepe's Orso https://www.daz3d.com/jepe-s-orso
The render on the right gives credit to BRYCE for the render, the render on the left doesn't. The renders look different. Vashek Podvala's BRYCE renders, from here, and from Renderosity, and from DeviantArt and from Pintrest all have this same quality.
His Bryce renders have a soft quality - not out of focus or blurred - but, like glowing, or hazy. The Bryce renders also seem to somehow have less contrast, but less contrast in the middle range of contrast, not that they don't have maximum black or white. The shadows on the Bryce renders seem to be brighter, or less dense. So the Bryce renders have a soft glowing quality to them and appear to be an "illustration" almost like pencil crayon and watercolor wash, rather than a "photo realistic" rendering.
To get from the left to the right, turn off any SSS and translucency, turn on low-level ambient everywhere (can use a white "HDR" at low intensity), put reflectivity on everrrrrrything (okay mostly the clothing), and add a watercoloresque background. If you are rendering in Iray turn off the crush blacks and burn highlights.
...from what I read about the Poser > Vue posing process, it can be a resoruce intensive while running. Also already have Bryce, (running it as large address aware to give it a bit more headroom), know how to work with it, and don't have 399$ for Vue Studio plus the funds to buy enough Vue content to make it useful.
...true, but if if you don't have the pose set just right to match an uneven ground plane only the foot closest to the ground will end up squarely on the ground.
Don't get me wrong, I love Bryce. It's just that character integration can be a pain sometimes.
Bryce shadows are infinitely variable. You can vary the amount of shadow you want and you can enable soft shadows and vary the amount of softness in the shadow. If you are using the default sun to light your image you can blend the atmosphere with the sun, either by colour or by luminance, or by both, and again variable on a slider from 1 to 100. You can choose to blend both fog and haze if they are both used, or just haze. The atmospheric controls in Bryce are quite something once you sttar exploring them
I love the fact that I can get an illustrative look straight out of Bryce with no post work.
Although I've not done it extensively, my solution to this issue was to put the lower foot on the ground, then add one or more rock objects textured using the same material as the ground under the higher foot. So instead of adjusting the figure's pose to match the ground, I just bring the ground up to the foot by raising/lowering the rock object. Obviously this won't work if the ground needs to be flat, but works great if the ground is supposed to be rocky.
If you import Daz characters to Vue in the dae format you can pose them and animate them in Vue, without Daz running
like you get with Poser. And if you have skinvue they are almost a realistic as Iray renders.
...again as I read a while back, that function can be very resoruce intensive and if you have an older system like I do it could cause freezes and crashes.
Thank you!!! That was the explanation I was looking for. I have Bryce 7 that I bought a long time ago and never used because I couldn't figure it out. You've convinced me that it's worth trying again!
Could I ask you what this picture is? https://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/heavenly-organ-/1613777/?p
I don't think this is an object. Is there some way to do some kind of art in Bryce other than posing 3D models?
..oh yeah, Bryce is great for creating fractal images, and though limited, it's modelling tools can create some pretty unique objects.
Primitives, alternative primiotives, meshes built outside Bryce and imported, boolean techniques, smoke and mirrors.
Take a look at one of the Bryce PAs gallery here https://www.daz3d.com/gallery/#galleries/678/
And how about a 3d advert for Bryce, all built and rendered in Bryce. https://www.daz3d.com/gallery/#images/1044
A Commercial advert all built and rendered in Bryce https://www.daz3d.com/gallery/#images/1034
And the coloured version of the modal https://www.daz3d.com/gallery/#images/1031
Well clearly modern software requires modern powerful hardware.
So indeed older sytems will have problems with IRay, Dforce and
every new hardware intensive option going forward.
But at least those, with the money ,can improve performance with hardware upgrades
Bryce is limted by it 32 bit State even with the "large Address aware" hack
you get maybe 5 gigs in a system capable of 18 or higher??.. no thanks.
Also "reposing in vue" feature is for minor adjusments
No intelligent person imports figures in the "T pose"
and perfoms all of their posing within vue
That is what "Poser" is for.
oh, and there was me thought it was a plug in for Bryce.
Bryce was a great tool back in the day and it still has some applications now. Unfortunately, DAZ pretty much kicked it to the curb years ago so it's now woefully underfeatured compared to comparable programs, and it's only the work of a handfull of die-hard PAs and software enthusiasts that has kept it going. That said, you can often pick it up for next to nothing and every so often DAZ gives it away for free. It's fun to play with, though, as noted by others above, VUE is generally vastly superior as a landscape generation package.
I like old technology. I prefer the sound of undigitized vinyl records and the look of 3-strip Technacolor movies of the 40s and 50s. I prefer randomly grainy movie film to grain-less visually dead video tape, and uncolorized black and white movies of the 30s to fake looking colorization. Bryce seems to give a visual look to renders that I haven't seen come out of other render engines. I think the direction 3D is going - in the direction of photorealistic images - is a dead end. There are already 500 trillion photographs on the Internet, and tens of millions of stock photographs of every conceivable subject. In the art world - unique and individual style is what sells, not generic reality. For feature film makers, photorealistic is useful, for artists, it's extremely limiting. I would actually prefer software that does one function supremely well. I don't mind at all using half a dozen programs to perform different tasks. Having art software that tries to do everything and be everything to every user is a real PITA. Digital cameras that you have to push 10 buttons and turn 6 dials and go through 10 menus just to take a snapshot are useless to me.
This^
Thanks for the links. I might get the Smoke and Mirrors tutorial and see if I can figure it out.
And if you get any problems, pop over to the Bryce forum and ask for help. We love helping people and we don't bite.
What if the "artis" actually desires a photorealistic
image of something that does not actually exist
in the real world or in the "50 trillion photos on the net",
but only in his/her imagination.???
Must disagree .e-onsoftware.com/showcase/?page=gallery
Mod Edit:- Unsoclicited Off Site Commercial Link removed
I don't know what you mean. Other than for movies or TV, what artists use photoreal things that don't exist? Most artist I'm familiar with who need photoreal stuff just cut and paste actual photo images together to make it, like a dogs head on a dinosaurs body flying in outer space.
...
...
as well.
I have an extensive record colection with classical LPs that go back to the 1950s. I don't have to pay to "rent" them from some online music service.
I have an old manual 35mm SLR with several different lenses, that uses this stuff called "film". Relatively simple to use and still takes great pics at really nice high resolution. I also read that Kodak is going to start producing Ektacrhome (one of my favourite transparency films) again.
...oh yeah forgot, Bryce has a direct import bridge form Daz.
...only if you have most of the plugins. The base programme itself is pretty limited. Bryce and particularly Carrara can create nice environments without requiring a lot of additional outlay. Both programmes also accept Daz content as well.
Yes, being a Poser user I tend to forget that as well.
I have Bryce 7 Pro. What is the difference between that and 7.1 Pro? Will all the Bryce content in the DAZ3d shop work with Bryce 7?