Support for 3Delight - Is it Fading? . . . and why?

JasmineSkunk

Also...

I have learned a few tricks to help speed my render times on my old pc. 

One of them is to REMOVE everything not showing in your render. So... If you don't see your figures legs, for example, remove those textures. If you don't see the whole outfit of your character, you don't need it. (Maybe they don't NEED pants - LOL)

If your environment contains props and textures that are not seen. Remove them. That tip helped me TONS! 

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2

JasmineSkunk said:

kyoto kid said:

ebergerly said:

JasmineSkunk said:

If you come into this hobby, be prepared for it to change very rapidly. EXPECT that tomorrow (literally, maybe tomorrow) EVERYTHING you learned, everything you spent, and everything you love to fade into oblivion. Because it will. Probably sooner than later. You won't have time to prepare for the changes. They will and do come quickly.

This is because the technology is (also literally) changing BY THE MINUTE. 

Honestly, I think that our culture is being driven by a lot of incredibly shallow hype about the tech world. People really believe that technology now is so super advanced compared to what it was in the dark ages of the 70's and 80's. But in fact much of it is marketing, convincing people that they really do need this new technology because it's so important. You really do need to spend insane amounts of money on the latest iPhone because it can recognize your face. Really?  ​

If you take a look at the technology that was being developed back in the 80's, it's the basis for everything going on today. All of the new, awesome technology is just incremental improvements on that stuff from the 80's. It's just smaller, and faster. But it's the same technology. And no, we really don't need 90% of this stuff. Smartphones, tablets, Titan V GPU's, video games, social media, and so on. It's all just entertainment. If you look at 90% of the day-to-day lives of people in the 70's and 80's compared to people today, it looks absolutely identical. Most of the basic stuff hasn't changed. Houses the same, cars the same, stores the same, malls the same, airlines the same, computers the same, clothing the same, and so on. All we're talking about is a tiny incremental improvment in access to information (which most people really don't care about), and a HUGE shift in focus and $$ spent on entertainment.

Technology is not changing by the minute. My desktop, and all its components, looks identical to my desktop from almost 30 years ago. It's just faster. Most of the "change" is a brilliant way for our industries to convince us we need to buy stuff because it's new technology, and that means it's awesome, by definition. Yeah, we can produce more realistic renders, but in practice most of the renders I've seen over the years look pretty much the same. Technology doesn't make me, or any one of us, better artists, which is IMO far more important than a 20% increase in render speed.  

..I was there in the 80s and it was rough going as everything, geometry, textures, and lights al had to be coded from scratch. It felt so removed from using a brush, pen, pencil, or sculpting clay which is why I bailed and stayed with traditional art media until I no longer could hold the tools steady or apply the proper pressure required for different stroke and shading effects. As I mentioned before the software I dreamed about over thirty years ago has finally come to pass.

I apologise for coming off somewhat defensive when it is inferred that 3DL  it is "so yesterday" while Iray is the "future" for 3D art as well as those of us who still choose to use the "elder" engine will be "left behind".  Yes 3DL in Daz has it limits, though several people here are pushing beyond them and creating tools (like IBL Master and scripts) that open new possibilities for Daz's once "signature" render engine. Iray in Daz has some serious limits as well compared to the standalone version that other software like 3DS Max and Maya have access to.  Without knowing how to script MDL shaders it's full potential. which that other software can tap, cannot be unlocked.

It would be nice to have a newer system that is more capable of supporting Iray to where a render job doesn't take a good part of the day, but for some of us, that just isn't a reality short of coming into a moderate windfall.

Well, I don't know what you're experiencing on your system, but for me, IRAY looks to me like it will save me tons of time... in post work. I tried SO hard to achieve "realism" and never could get close with 3DL. I know many were able to do some really convincing stuff. An image of (Michael?? - Sorry don't remember his last name) with two robots playing chess comes to mind. It was amazing. And Dreamlight had some beautiful environments that I could not distinguish from reality...

but I never came close. I always had several passes, several renders, lots of compositioning, and layering and TONS of postwork to make my images...

And I have yet to really do anything with IRAY, as I am still learning it, but I can already see, just from my spot renders with nothing but the headlamp on, that this is going to cut my work time down.... A LOT.

Maybe I'm just getting lucky here. So far, even though my system is almost 10 years old and my motherboard has only integrated graphics (ATI Radeon 4200 - Google it for some old AF specs). I am still able to do what Daz Studio can do. I was even recently able to get dForce to work. (YAY!) So, even though I will be slow, I'm really excited to play with the new stuff and believe it will actually help me make the images I always WANTED to make... faster and better.

I don't know. I think it's all very exciting.

I'm not entering into the tech debate side, cos I could care less about that. But I must say, where are you people coming from saying Iray is way faster than 3dl? I use only Iray myself anymore. But I, and my friend Jon (who refuses to touch Iray) BOTH can get 3dl renders that look GREAT almost instantly. I am currently rendering panels for a teaser for a Star Trek fancomic I will be doing down the road in Iray, and if I want the renders looking as good as possible, I'm looking at an average of 4-6 HOURS, minimum. And my laptop is a MONSTER Asus gaming laptop modified for cg and film editing. Now, I am NOT able to get truly photorealistic 3dl renders, only because I don't know the ins and outs of 3dl. But I CAN get really, really good results from it in less than ten minutes. Again, the reason I am using Iray is ONLY because I want a photoreal look that I simply don't know how to get in 3dl. But to get that photoreal look, and looking GOOD, takes FAR longer than ANY 3dl render.

JasmineSkunk

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

kyoto kid said:

ebergerly said:

JasmineSkunk said:

If you come into this hobby, be prepared for it to change very rapidly. EXPECT that tomorrow (literally, maybe tomorrow) EVERYTHING you learned, everything you spent, and everything you love to fade into oblivion. Because it will. Probably sooner than later. You won't have time to prepare for the changes. They will and do come quickly.

This is because the technology is (also literally) changing BY THE MINUTE. 

Honestly, I think that our culture is being driven by a lot of incredibly shallow hype about the tech world. People really believe that technology now is so super advanced compared to what it was in the dark ages of the 70's and 80's. But in fact much of it is marketing, convincing people that they really do need this new technology because it's so important. You really do need to spend insane amounts of money on the latest iPhone because it can recognize your face. Really?  ​

If you take a look at the technology that was being developed back in the 80's, it's the basis for everything going on today. All of the new, awesome technology is just incremental improvements on that stuff from the 80's. It's just smaller, and faster. But it's the same technology. And no, we really don't need 90% of this stuff. Smartphones, tablets, Titan V GPU's, video games, social media, and so on. It's all just entertainment. If you look at 90% of the day-to-day lives of people in the 70's and 80's compared to people today, it looks absolutely identical. Most of the basic stuff hasn't changed. Houses the same, cars the same, stores the same, malls the same, airlines the same, computers the same, clothing the same, and so on. All we're talking about is a tiny incremental improvment in access to information (which most people really don't care about), and a HUGE shift in focus and $$ spent on entertainment.

Technology is not changing by the minute. My desktop, and all its components, looks identical to my desktop from almost 30 years ago. It's just faster. Most of the "change" is a brilliant way for our industries to convince us we need to buy stuff because it's new technology, and that means it's awesome, by definition. Yeah, we can produce more realistic renders, but in practice most of the renders I've seen over the years look pretty much the same. Technology doesn't make me, or any one of us, better artists, which is IMO far more important than a 20% increase in render speed.  

..I was there in the 80s and it was rough going as everything, geometry, textures, and lights al had to be coded from scratch. It felt so removed from using a brush, pen, pencil, or sculpting clay which is why I bailed and stayed with traditional art media until I no longer could hold the tools steady or apply the proper pressure required for different stroke and shading effects. As I mentioned before the software I dreamed about over thirty years ago has finally come to pass.

I apologise for coming off somewhat defensive when it is inferred that 3DL  it is "so yesterday" while Iray is the "future" for 3D art as well as those of us who still choose to use the "elder" engine will be "left behind".  Yes 3DL in Daz has it limits, though several people here are pushing beyond them and creating tools (like IBL Master and scripts) that open new possibilities for Daz's once "signature" render engine. Iray in Daz has some serious limits as well compared to the standalone version that other software like 3DS Max and Maya have access to.  Without knowing how to script MDL shaders it's full potential. which that other software can tap, cannot be unlocked.

It would be nice to have a newer system that is more capable of supporting Iray to where a render job doesn't take a good part of the day, but for some of us, that just isn't a reality short of coming into a moderate windfall.

Well, I don't know what you're experiencing on your system, but for me, IRAY looks to me like it will save me tons of time... in post work. I tried SO hard to achieve "realism" and never could get close with 3DL. I know many were able to do some really convincing stuff. An image of (Michael?? - Sorry don't remember his last name) with two robots playing chess comes to mind. It was amazing. And Dreamlight had some beautiful environments that I could not distinguish from reality...

but I never came close. I always had several passes, several renders, lots of compositioning, and layering and TONS of postwork to make my images...

And I have yet to really do anything with IRAY, as I am still learning it, but I can already see, just from my spot renders with nothing but the headlamp on, that this is going to cut my work time down.... A LOT.

Maybe I'm just getting lucky here. So far, even though my system is almost 10 years old and my motherboard has only integrated graphics (ATI Radeon 4200 - Google it for some old AF specs). I am still able to do what Daz Studio can do. I was even recently able to get dForce to work. (YAY!) So, even though I will be slow, I'm really excited to play with the new stuff and believe it will actually help me make the images I always WANTED to make... faster and better.

I don't know. I think it's all very exciting.

I'm not entering into the tech debate side, cos I could care less about that. But I must say, where are you people coming from saying Iray is way faster than 3dl? I use only Iray myself anymore. But I, and my friend Jon (who refuses to touch Iray) BOTH can get 3dl renders that look GREAT almost instantly. I am currently rendering panels for a teaser for a Star Trek fancomic I will be doing down the road in Iray, and if I want the renders looking as good as possible, I'm looking at an average of 4-6 HOURS, minimum. And my laptop is a MONSTER Asus gaming laptop modified for cg and film editing. Now, I am NOT able to get truly photorealistic 3dl renders, only because I don't know the ins and outs of 3dl. But I CAN get really, really good results from it in less than ten minutes. Again, the reason I am using Iray is ONLY because I want a photoreal look that I simply don't know how to get in 3dl. But to get that photoreal look, and looking GOOD, takes FAR longer than ANY 3dl render.

Ok. I'll try to be clearer.

I'm saying, even IF Iray takes a bit longer (as I've said, for me, my system is so old, time is not noticable) But, even if it DID take longer, the amount of time I will save in POST work would be worth it, as I spent MOST of my time post working my renders with 3DL.

kyoto kid

JasmineSkunk said:

Also...

I have learned a few tricks to help speed my render times on my old pc. 

One of them is to REMOVE everything not showing in your render. So... If you don't see your figures legs, for example, remove those textures. If you don't see the whole outfit of your character, you don't need it. (Maybe they don't NEED pants - LOL)

If your environment contains props and textures that are not seen. Remove them. That tip helped me TONS! 

..I've done that since my early days at this as I used to work on a duo core 32 bit notebook with only 4 GB of memory (2 GB available for programmes) and Intel integrated graphics. My Child of War scene was probably the most pared down one that tells a powerful story as it used only one wide angle Daz spotlight, a small portion of Stonemason's City Ruins Building 01 set that just surrounded the character. A couple props and that was it.  Anything more caused the render process to crash due to exceeding available memory.

However there are also times I need items off camera to say, provide proper shadows or something to see in reflections (premade reflection maps look awful).

As to postwork I find I need to do less with 3DL as there are so many "in render" effects tools and plugins I can use.  Postwork pretty much was limited to applying some sort of filter or text to an image.

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

kyoto kid said:

ebergerly said:

JasmineSkunk said:

If you come into this hobby, be prepared for it to change very rapidly. EXPECT that tomorrow (literally, maybe tomorrow) EVERYTHING you learned, everything you spent, and everything you love to fade into oblivion. Because it will. Probably sooner than later. You won't have time to prepare for the changes. They will and do come quickly.

This is because the technology is (also literally) changing BY THE MINUTE. 

Honestly, I think that our culture is being driven by a lot of incredibly shallow hype about the tech world. People really believe that technology now is so super advanced compared to what it was in the dark ages of the 70's and 80's. But in fact much of it is marketing, convincing people that they really do need this new technology because it's so important. You really do need to spend insane amounts of money on the latest iPhone because it can recognize your face. Really?  ​

If you take a look at the technology that was being developed back in the 80's, it's the basis for everything going on today. All of the new, awesome technology is just incremental improvements on that stuff from the 80's. It's just smaller, and faster. But it's the same technology. And no, we really don't need 90% of this stuff. Smartphones, tablets, Titan V GPU's, video games, social media, and so on. It's all just entertainment. If you look at 90% of the day-to-day lives of people in the 70's and 80's compared to people today, it looks absolutely identical. Most of the basic stuff hasn't changed. Houses the same, cars the same, stores the same, malls the same, airlines the same, computers the same, clothing the same, and so on. All we're talking about is a tiny incremental improvment in access to information (which most people really don't care about), and a HUGE shift in focus and $$ spent on entertainment.

Technology is not changing by the minute. My desktop, and all its components, looks identical to my desktop from almost 30 years ago. It's just faster. Most of the "change" is a brilliant way for our industries to convince us we need to buy stuff because it's new technology, and that means it's awesome, by definition. Yeah, we can produce more realistic renders, but in practice most of the renders I've seen over the years look pretty much the same. Technology doesn't make me, or any one of us, better artists, which is IMO far more important than a 20% increase in render speed.  

..I was there in the 80s and it was rough going as everything, geometry, textures, and lights al had to be coded from scratch. It felt so removed from using a brush, pen, pencil, or sculpting clay which is why I bailed and stayed with traditional art media until I no longer could hold the tools steady or apply the proper pressure required for different stroke and shading effects. As I mentioned before the software I dreamed about over thirty years ago has finally come to pass.

I apologise for coming off somewhat defensive when it is inferred that 3DL  it is "so yesterday" while Iray is the "future" for 3D art as well as those of us who still choose to use the "elder" engine will be "left behind".  Yes 3DL in Daz has it limits, though several people here are pushing beyond them and creating tools (like IBL Master and scripts) that open new possibilities for Daz's once "signature" render engine. Iray in Daz has some serious limits as well compared to the standalone version that other software like 3DS Max and Maya have access to.  Without knowing how to script MDL shaders it's full potential. which that other software can tap, cannot be unlocked.

It would be nice to have a newer system that is more capable of supporting Iray to where a render job doesn't take a good part of the day, but for some of us, that just isn't a reality short of coming into a moderate windfall.

Well, I don't know what you're experiencing on your system, but for me, IRAY looks to me like it will save me tons of time... in post work. I tried SO hard to achieve "realism" and never could get close with 3DL. I know many were able to do some really convincing stuff. An image of (Michael?? - Sorry don't remember his last name) with two robots playing chess comes to mind. It was amazing. And Dreamlight had some beautiful environments that I could not distinguish from reality...

but I never came close. I always had several passes, several renders, lots of compositioning, and layering and TONS of postwork to make my images...

And I have yet to really do anything with IRAY, as I am still learning it, but I can already see, just from my spot renders with nothing but the headlamp on, that this is going to cut my work time down.... A LOT.

Maybe I'm just getting lucky here. So far, even though my system is almost 10 years old and my motherboard has only integrated graphics (ATI Radeon 4200 - Google it for some old AF specs). I am still able to do what Daz Studio can do. I was even recently able to get dForce to work. (YAY!) So, even though I will be slow, I'm really excited to play with the new stuff and believe it will actually help me make the images I always WANTED to make... faster and better.

I don't know. I think it's all very exciting.

I'm not entering into the tech debate side, cos I could care less about that. But I must say, where are you people coming from saying Iray is way faster than 3dl? I use only Iray myself anymore. But I, and my friend Jon (who refuses to touch Iray) BOTH can get 3dl renders that look GREAT almost instantly. I am currently rendering panels for a teaser for a Star Trek fancomic I will be doing down the road in Iray, and if I want the renders looking as good as possible, I'm looking at an average of 4-6 HOURS, minimum. And my laptop is a MONSTER Asus gaming laptop modified for cg and film editing. Now, I am NOT able to get truly photorealistic 3dl renders, only because I don't know the ins and outs of 3dl. But I CAN get really, really good results from it in less than ten minutes. Again, the reason I am using Iray is ONLY because I want a photoreal look that I simply don't know how to get in 3dl. But to get that photoreal look, and looking GOOD, takes FAR longer than ANY 3dl render.

Ok. I'll try to be clearer.

I'm saying, even IF Iray takes a bit longer (as I've said, for me, my system is so old, time is not noticable) But, even if it DID take longer, the amount of time I will save in POST work would be worth it, as I spent MOST of my time post working my renders with 3DL.

That may be true for you, but it winds up being the same amount of postwork for me, though likely for totally different reasons. I use a TON of postwork fx in my art, regardless whether it's 3dl or Iray. so from that standpoint, for me, it's the same amount of postwork. Now my friend Jon does a comic strip called The Adventures Of Grant West(basically he does it as a means to have ready made storyboards should he ever get the chance to make it into a film or tv show), and he does 99% of his fx in Daz in3dl. He only uses a miniscule amount of postwork, mostly to edit panels into a strip. He can get a page a day using 3dl. Btw, I'm NOT coming down on you in any way, even if I disagree with some of what you're saying. I'm just giving my personal experiences. If it makes your workflow faster, fine. It winds up being the same amount of work for me regardless, but again, it's cos I do very different things in my postwork.

Examples: Two promos for an Ultraman fancomic I want to do. The first is 3dl, render time 5 mins per element. Postwork time: couple days. Second promo is Iray. the render times were two hours per element and roughly again two days postwork(I say two days only cos I'm adding my job to the total time per day. In reality, maybe 12 straight hours if I just count computer time.) Honestly, for the two original comics I want to publish, Crimson Angel and The Survivors, I'll likely have to go back to 3dl rendering, as it's frankly a bit more time efficient for me. Again, though, I'm very likely doing far different thing with my postwork than you.

JasmineSkunk

LOL. 

Well, in comparison to "traditional" media, (except maybe sketches) 3D art, in any form, is MUCH faster. Ever have to WAIT for paint to dry? Or worse: Watch it while it dries? LOL. 

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2

JasmineSkunk said:

LOL. 

Well, in comparison to "traditional" media, (except maybe sketches) 3D art, in any form, is MUCH faster. Ever have to WAIT for paint to dry? Or worse: Watch it while it dries? LOL. 

Actually, yes I have. I have painted pictures, and I build models. So I do know all about that. :)

Oso3D

There are two free scripts in the Freebies section.

One converts Iray to 3dl, the other allows you to select surfaces by name; the second is handy if you want to do something unusual to glass or emissive surfaces.

The converter works at LEAST as well as the Daz one does going the other way, and I’m frankly puzzled why people keep requesting something many of them have already heard of.

agent unawares

ebergerly said:

I have to laugh, imagining the AMD ad campaign for the Ryzen 7-1700...if it had said "Ryzen 7 ...well, it's better than a Pentium 4... it has a 20% higher clock speed !!!!" 

"Ryzen 7 ...well, it's better than a Pentium 4... it has a 20% higher clock speed !!!! ...unless you clock it to 4.0 GHz like you should do and can do with a stock cooler... And it has eight times the number of cores !!!! It's like eight 60% faster Pentium 4s in one !!!!"

Better? :P

ebergerly

     

agent unawares said:

ebergerly said:

I have to laugh, imagining the AMD ad campaign for the Ryzen 7-1700...if it had said "Ryzen 7 ...well, it's better than a Pentium 4... it has a 20% higher clock speed !!!!" 

"Ryzen 7 ...well, it's better than a Pentium 4... it has a 20% higher clock speed !!!! ...unless you clock it to 4.0 GHz like you should do and can do with a stock cooler... And it has eight times the number of cores !!!! It's like eight 60% faster Pentium 4s in one !!!!"

Better? :P

I thought they were saying with the stock cooler you should go to like 3.7 for all cores. Now it only does turbo or whatever on a couple cores at a time to 3.7 GHz. Anyway, I'm too much of a wimp to be an overclocker. 

And almost none of my apps ever use more than a couple of the cores, so maybe I could use a Pentium. Though I think it can only address a couple GB of RAM or something, so that 's a no-go. 

 

agent unawares

ebergerly said:

     

agent unawares said:

ebergerly said:

I have to laugh, imagining the AMD ad campaign for the Ryzen 7-1700...if it had said "Ryzen 7 ...well, it's better than a Pentium 4... it has a 20% higher clock speed !!!!" 

"Ryzen 7 ...well, it's better than a Pentium 4... it has a 20% higher clock speed !!!! ...unless you clock it to 4.0 GHz like you should do and can do with a stock cooler... And it has eight times the number of cores !!!! It's like eight 60% faster Pentium 4s in one !!!!"

Better? :P

I thought they were saying with the stock cooler you should go to like 3.7 for all cores. Now it only does turbo or whatever on a couple cores at a time to 3.7 GHz. Anyway, I'm too much of a wimp to be an overclocker. 

We'll say stick to 3.7 to be safe, still 48% faster, not too bad technological progress for 8X the cores in about the same space.

Kevin Sanderson

Oso3D said:

There are two free scripts in the Freebies section.

One converts Iray to 3dl, the other allows you to select surfaces by name; the second is handy if you want to do something unusual to glass or emissive surfaces.

The converter works at LEAST as well as the Daz one does going the other way, and I’m frankly puzzled why people keep requesting something many of them have already heard of.

I'm puzzled as well, Will. I always wonder about reading comprehension here.

DustRider

Kevin Sanderson said:

Oso3D said:

There are two free scripts in the Freebies section.

One converts Iray to 3dl, the other allows you to select surfaces by name; the second is handy if you want to do something unusual to glass or emissive surfaces.

The converter works at LEAST as well as the Daz one does going the other way, and I’m frankly puzzled why people keep requesting something many of them have already heard of.

I'm puzzled as well, Will. I always wonder about reading comprehension here.

And to be honest, the DAZ Uber conversion from 3Delight almost always needs some "help" too, just like the Iray to 3Delight conversion script.

JasmineSkunk

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

kyoto kid said:

ebergerly said:

JasmineSkunk said:

If you come into this hobby, be prepared for it to change very rapidly. EXPECT that tomorrow (literally, maybe tomorrow) EVERYTHING you learned, everything you spent, and everything you love to fade into oblivion. Because it will. Probably sooner than later. You won't have time to prepare for the changes. They will and do come quickly.

This is because the technology is (also literally) changing BY THE MINUTE. 

Honestly, I think that our culture is being driven by a lot of incredibly shallow hype about the tech world. People really believe that technology now is so super advanced compared to what it was in the dark ages of the 70's and 80's. But in fact much of it is marketing, convincing people that they really do need this new technology because it's so important. You really do need to spend insane amounts of money on the latest iPhone because it can recognize your face. Really?  ​

If you take a look at the technology that was being developed back in the 80's, it's the basis for everything going on today. All of the new, awesome technology is just incremental improvements on that stuff from the 80's. It's just smaller, and faster. But it's the same technology. And no, we really don't need 90% of this stuff. Smartphones, tablets, Titan V GPU's, video games, social media, and so on. It's all just entertainment. If you look at 90% of the day-to-day lives of people in the 70's and 80's compared to people today, it looks absolutely identical. Most of the basic stuff hasn't changed. Houses the same, cars the same, stores the same, malls the same, airlines the same, computers the same, clothing the same, and so on. All we're talking about is a tiny incremental improvment in access to information (which most people really don't care about), and a HUGE shift in focus and $$ spent on entertainment.

Technology is not changing by the minute. My desktop, and all its components, looks identical to my desktop from almost 30 years ago. It's just faster. Most of the "change" is a brilliant way for our industries to convince us we need to buy stuff because it's new technology, and that means it's awesome, by definition. Yeah, we can produce more realistic renders, but in practice most of the renders I've seen over the years look pretty much the same. Technology doesn't make me, or any one of us, better artists, which is IMO far more important than a 20% increase in render speed.  

..I was there in the 80s and it was rough going as everything, geometry, textures, and lights al had to be coded from scratch. It felt so removed from using a brush, pen, pencil, or sculpting clay which is why I bailed and stayed with traditional art media until I no longer could hold the tools steady or apply the proper pressure required for different stroke and shading effects. As I mentioned before the software I dreamed about over thirty years ago has finally come to pass.

I apologise for coming off somewhat defensive when it is inferred that 3DL  it is "so yesterday" while Iray is the "future" for 3D art as well as those of us who still choose to use the "elder" engine will be "left behind".  Yes 3DL in Daz has it limits, though several people here are pushing beyond them and creating tools (like IBL Master and scripts) that open new possibilities for Daz's once "signature" render engine. Iray in Daz has some serious limits as well compared to the standalone version that other software like 3DS Max and Maya have access to.  Without knowing how to script MDL shaders it's full potential. which that other software can tap, cannot be unlocked.

It would be nice to have a newer system that is more capable of supporting Iray to where a render job doesn't take a good part of the day, but for some of us, that just isn't a reality short of coming into a moderate windfall.

Well, I don't know what you're experiencing on your system, but for me, IRAY looks to me like it will save me tons of time... in post work. I tried SO hard to achieve "realism" and never could get close with 3DL. I know many were able to do some really convincing stuff. An image of (Michael?? - Sorry don't remember his last name) with two robots playing chess comes to mind. It was amazing. And Dreamlight had some beautiful environments that I could not distinguish from reality...

but I never came close. I always had several passes, several renders, lots of compositioning, and layering and TONS of postwork to make my images...

And I have yet to really do anything with IRAY, as I am still learning it, but I can already see, just from my spot renders with nothing but the headlamp on, that this is going to cut my work time down.... A LOT.

Maybe I'm just getting lucky here. So far, even though my system is almost 10 years old and my motherboard has only integrated graphics (ATI Radeon 4200 - Google it for some old AF specs). I am still able to do what Daz Studio can do. I was even recently able to get dForce to work. (YAY!) So, even though I will be slow, I'm really excited to play with the new stuff and believe it will actually help me make the images I always WANTED to make... faster and better.

I don't know. I think it's all very exciting.

I'm not entering into the tech debate side, cos I could care less about that. But I must say, where are you people coming from saying Iray is way faster than 3dl? I use only Iray myself anymore. But I, and my friend Jon (who refuses to touch Iray) BOTH can get 3dl renders that look GREAT almost instantly. I am currently rendering panels for a teaser for a Star Trek fancomic I will be doing down the road in Iray, and if I want the renders looking as good as possible, I'm looking at an average of 4-6 HOURS, minimum. And my laptop is a MONSTER Asus gaming laptop modified for cg and film editing. Now, I am NOT able to get truly photorealistic 3dl renders, only because I don't know the ins and outs of 3dl. But I CAN get really, really good results from it in less than ten minutes. Again, the reason I am using Iray is ONLY because I want a photoreal look that I simply don't know how to get in 3dl. But to get that photoreal look, and looking GOOD, takes FAR longer than ANY 3dl render.

Ok. I'll try to be clearer.

I'm saying, even IF Iray takes a bit longer (as I've said, for me, my system is so old, time is not noticable) But, even if it DID take longer, the amount of time I will save in POST work would be worth it, as I spent MOST of my time post working my renders with 3DL.

That may be true for you, but it winds up being the same amount of postwork for me, though likely for totally different reasons. I use a TON of postwork fx in my art, regardless whether it's 3dl or Iray. so from that standpoint, for me, it's the same amount of postwork. Now my friend Jon does a comic strip called The Adventures Of Grant West(basically he does it as a means to have ready made storyboards should he ever get the chance to make it into a film or tv show), and he does 99% of his fx in Daz in3dl. He only uses a miniscule amount of postwork, mostly to edit panels into a strip. He can get a page a day using 3dl. Btw, I'm NOT coming down on you in any way, even if I disagree with some of what you're saying. I'm just giving my personal experiences. If it makes your workflow faster, fine. It winds up being the same amount of work for me regardless, but again, it's cos I do very different things in my postwork.

Examples: Two promos for an Ultraman fancomic I want to do. The first is 3dl, render time 5 mins per element. Postwork time: couple days. Second promo is Iray. the render times were two hours per element and roughly again two days postwork(I say two days only cos I'm adding my job to the total time per day. In reality, maybe 12 straight hours if I just count computer time.) Honestly, for the two original comics I want to publish, Crimson Angel and The Survivors, I'll likely have to go back to 3dl rendering, as it's frankly a bit more time efficient for me. Again, though, I'm very likely doing far different thing with my postwork than you.

If you take a peek in my gallery, you will see an image I did of "Eve" staring lovingly at the fruit that will change her life forever.

That image required me to make about 4 seperate renders of the same scene, each with different light set ups and different shader settings, and MANY hours of post work in photoshop.

Now, maybe I just didn't understand 3DL or maybe I'm just not skilled enough at this stuff... but, even when I "finished" (which I only did because it was for a contest deadline) I was not satisfied with the final image. I just could never quite get the image in my mind to come out quite as I imagined it.

I'm really hoping Iray will help me achieve that more easily. 

agent unawares

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

kyoto kid said:

ebergerly said:

JasmineSkunk said:

If you come into this hobby, be prepared for it to change very rapidly. EXPECT that tomorrow (literally, maybe tomorrow) EVERYTHING you learned, everything you spent, and everything you love to fade into oblivion. Because it will. Probably sooner than later. You won't have time to prepare for the changes. They will and do come quickly.

This is because the technology is (also literally) changing BY THE MINUTE. 

Honestly, I think that our culture is being driven by a lot of incredibly shallow hype about the tech world. People really believe that technology now is so super advanced compared to what it was in the dark ages of the 70's and 80's. But in fact much of it is marketing, convincing people that they really do need this new technology because it's so important. You really do need to spend insane amounts of money on the latest iPhone because it can recognize your face. Really?  ​

If you take a look at the technology that was being developed back in the 80's, it's the basis for everything going on today. All of the new, awesome technology is just incremental improvements on that stuff from the 80's. It's just smaller, and faster. But it's the same technology. And no, we really don't need 90% of this stuff. Smartphones, tablets, Titan V GPU's, video games, social media, and so on. It's all just entertainment. If you look at 90% of the day-to-day lives of people in the 70's and 80's compared to people today, it looks absolutely identical. Most of the basic stuff hasn't changed. Houses the same, cars the same, stores the same, malls the same, airlines the same, computers the same, clothing the same, and so on. All we're talking about is a tiny incremental improvment in access to information (which most people really don't care about), and a HUGE shift in focus and $$ spent on entertainment.

Technology is not changing by the minute. My desktop, and all its components, looks identical to my desktop from almost 30 years ago. It's just faster. Most of the "change" is a brilliant way for our industries to convince us we need to buy stuff because it's new technology, and that means it's awesome, by definition. Yeah, we can produce more realistic renders, but in practice most of the renders I've seen over the years look pretty much the same. Technology doesn't make me, or any one of us, better artists, which is IMO far more important than a 20% increase in render speed.  

..I was there in the 80s and it was rough going as everything, geometry, textures, and lights al had to be coded from scratch. It felt so removed from using a brush, pen, pencil, or sculpting clay which is why I bailed and stayed with traditional art media until I no longer could hold the tools steady or apply the proper pressure required for different stroke and shading effects. As I mentioned before the software I dreamed about over thirty years ago has finally come to pass.

I apologise for coming off somewhat defensive when it is inferred that 3DL  it is "so yesterday" while Iray is the "future" for 3D art as well as those of us who still choose to use the "elder" engine will be "left behind".  Yes 3DL in Daz has it limits, though several people here are pushing beyond them and creating tools (like IBL Master and scripts) that open new possibilities for Daz's once "signature" render engine. Iray in Daz has some serious limits as well compared to the standalone version that other software like 3DS Max and Maya have access to.  Without knowing how to script MDL shaders it's full potential. which that other software can tap, cannot be unlocked.

It would be nice to have a newer system that is more capable of supporting Iray to where a render job doesn't take a good part of the day, but for some of us, that just isn't a reality short of coming into a moderate windfall.

Well, I don't know what you're experiencing on your system, but for me, IRAY looks to me like it will save me tons of time... in post work. I tried SO hard to achieve "realism" and never could get close with 3DL. I know many were able to do some really convincing stuff. An image of (Michael?? - Sorry don't remember his last name) with two robots playing chess comes to mind. It was amazing. And Dreamlight had some beautiful environments that I could not distinguish from reality...

but I never came close. I always had several passes, several renders, lots of compositioning, and layering and TONS of postwork to make my images...

And I have yet to really do anything with IRAY, as I am still learning it, but I can already see, just from my spot renders with nothing but the headlamp on, that this is going to cut my work time down.... A LOT.

Maybe I'm just getting lucky here. So far, even though my system is almost 10 years old and my motherboard has only integrated graphics (ATI Radeon 4200 - Google it for some old AF specs). I am still able to do what Daz Studio can do. I was even recently able to get dForce to work. (YAY!) So, even though I will be slow, I'm really excited to play with the new stuff and believe it will actually help me make the images I always WANTED to make... faster and better.

I don't know. I think it's all very exciting.

I'm not entering into the tech debate side, cos I could care less about that. But I must say, where are you people coming from saying Iray is way faster than 3dl? I use only Iray myself anymore. But I, and my friend Jon (who refuses to touch Iray) BOTH can get 3dl renders that look GREAT almost instantly. I am currently rendering panels for a teaser for a Star Trek fancomic I will be doing down the road in Iray, and if I want the renders looking as good as possible, I'm looking at an average of 4-6 HOURS, minimum. And my laptop is a MONSTER Asus gaming laptop modified for cg and film editing. Now, I am NOT able to get truly photorealistic 3dl renders, only because I don't know the ins and outs of 3dl. But I CAN get really, really good results from it in less than ten minutes. Again, the reason I am using Iray is ONLY because I want a photoreal look that I simply don't know how to get in 3dl. But to get that photoreal look, and looking GOOD, takes FAR longer than ANY 3dl render.

Ok. I'll try to be clearer.

I'm saying, even IF Iray takes a bit longer (as I've said, for me, my system is so old, time is not noticable) But, even if it DID take longer, the amount of time I will save in POST work would be worth it, as I spent MOST of my time post working my renders with 3DL.

That may be true for you, but it winds up being the same amount of postwork for me, though likely for totally different reasons. I use a TON of postwork fx in my art, regardless whether it's 3dl or Iray. so from that standpoint, for me, it's the same amount of postwork. Now my friend Jon does a comic strip called The Adventures Of Grant West(basically he does it as a means to have ready made storyboards should he ever get the chance to make it into a film or tv show), and he does 99% of his fx in Daz in3dl. He only uses a miniscule amount of postwork, mostly to edit panels into a strip. He can get a page a day using 3dl. Btw, I'm NOT coming down on you in any way, even if I disagree with some of what you're saying. I'm just giving my personal experiences. If it makes your workflow faster, fine. It winds up being the same amount of work for me regardless, but again, it's cos I do very different things in my postwork.

Examples: Two promos for an Ultraman fancomic I want to do. The first is 3dl, render time 5 mins per element. Postwork time: couple days. Second promo is Iray. the render times were two hours per element and roughly again two days postwork(I say two days only cos I'm adding my job to the total time per day. In reality, maybe 12 straight hours if I just count computer time.) Honestly, for the two original comics I want to publish, Crimson Angel and The Survivors, I'll likely have to go back to 3dl rendering, as it's frankly a bit more time efficient for me. Again, though, I'm very likely doing far different thing with my postwork than you.

If you take a peek in my gallery, you will see an image I did of "Eve" staring lovingly at the fruit that will change her life forever.

That image required me to make about 4 seperate renders of the same scene, each with different light set ups and different shader settings, and MANY hours of post work in photoshop.

Now, maybe I just didn't understand 3DL or maybe I'm just not skilled enough at this stuff... but, even when I "finished" (which I only did because it was for a contest deadline) I was not satisfied with the final image. I just could never quite get the image in my mind to come out quite as I imagined it.

I'm really hoping Iray will help me achieve that more easily. 

It will. You can even do that bloom effect in-render. Fantastic composition btw.

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

kyoto kid said:

ebergerly said:

JasmineSkunk said:

If you come into this hobby, be prepared for it to change very rapidly. EXPECT that tomorrow (literally, maybe tomorrow) EVERYTHING you learned, everything you spent, and everything you love to fade into oblivion. Because it will. Probably sooner than later. You won't have time to prepare for the changes. They will and do come quickly.

This is because the technology is (also literally) changing BY THE MINUTE. 

Honestly, I think that our culture is being driven by a lot of incredibly shallow hype about the tech world. People really believe that technology now is so super advanced compared to what it was in the dark ages of the 70's and 80's. But in fact much of it is marketing, convincing people that they really do need this new technology because it's so important. You really do need to spend insane amounts of money on the latest iPhone because it can recognize your face. Really?  ​

If you take a look at the technology that was being developed back in the 80's, it's the basis for everything going on today. All of the new, awesome technology is just incremental improvements on that stuff from the 80's. It's just smaller, and faster. But it's the same technology. And no, we really don't need 90% of this stuff. Smartphones, tablets, Titan V GPU's, video games, social media, and so on. It's all just entertainment. If you look at 90% of the day-to-day lives of people in the 70's and 80's compared to people today, it looks absolutely identical. Most of the basic stuff hasn't changed. Houses the same, cars the same, stores the same, malls the same, airlines the same, computers the same, clothing the same, and so on. All we're talking about is a tiny incremental improvment in access to information (which most people really don't care about), and a HUGE shift in focus and $$ spent on entertainment.

Technology is not changing by the minute. My desktop, and all its components, looks identical to my desktop from almost 30 years ago. It's just faster. Most of the "change" is a brilliant way for our industries to convince us we need to buy stuff because it's new technology, and that means it's awesome, by definition. Yeah, we can produce more realistic renders, but in practice most of the renders I've seen over the years look pretty much the same. Technology doesn't make me, or any one of us, better artists, which is IMO far more important than a 20% increase in render speed.  

..I was there in the 80s and it was rough going as everything, geometry, textures, and lights al had to be coded from scratch. It felt so removed from using a brush, pen, pencil, or sculpting clay which is why I bailed and stayed with traditional art media until I no longer could hold the tools steady or apply the proper pressure required for different stroke and shading effects. As I mentioned before the software I dreamed about over thirty years ago has finally come to pass.

I apologise for coming off somewhat defensive when it is inferred that 3DL  it is "so yesterday" while Iray is the "future" for 3D art as well as those of us who still choose to use the "elder" engine will be "left behind".  Yes 3DL in Daz has it limits, though several people here are pushing beyond them and creating tools (like IBL Master and scripts) that open new possibilities for Daz's once "signature" render engine. Iray in Daz has some serious limits as well compared to the standalone version that other software like 3DS Max and Maya have access to.  Without knowing how to script MDL shaders it's full potential. which that other software can tap, cannot be unlocked.

It would be nice to have a newer system that is more capable of supporting Iray to where a render job doesn't take a good part of the day, but for some of us, that just isn't a reality short of coming into a moderate windfall.

Well, I don't know what you're experiencing on your system, but for me, IRAY looks to me like it will save me tons of time... in post work. I tried SO hard to achieve "realism" and never could get close with 3DL. I know many were able to do some really convincing stuff. An image of (Michael?? - Sorry don't remember his last name) with two robots playing chess comes to mind. It was amazing. And Dreamlight had some beautiful environments that I could not distinguish from reality...

but I never came close. I always had several passes, several renders, lots of compositioning, and layering and TONS of postwork to make my images...

And I have yet to really do anything with IRAY, as I am still learning it, but I can already see, just from my spot renders with nothing but the headlamp on, that this is going to cut my work time down.... A LOT.

Maybe I'm just getting lucky here. So far, even though my system is almost 10 years old and my motherboard has only integrated graphics (ATI Radeon 4200 - Google it for some old AF specs). I am still able to do what Daz Studio can do. I was even recently able to get dForce to work. (YAY!) So, even though I will be slow, I'm really excited to play with the new stuff and believe it will actually help me make the images I always WANTED to make... faster and better.

I don't know. I think it's all very exciting.

I'm not entering into the tech debate side, cos I could care less about that. But I must say, where are you people coming from saying Iray is way faster than 3dl? I use only Iray myself anymore. But I, and my friend Jon (who refuses to touch Iray) BOTH can get 3dl renders that look GREAT almost instantly. I am currently rendering panels for a teaser for a Star Trek fancomic I will be doing down the road in Iray, and if I want the renders looking as good as possible, I'm looking at an average of 4-6 HOURS, minimum. And my laptop is a MONSTER Asus gaming laptop modified for cg and film editing. Now, I am NOT able to get truly photorealistic 3dl renders, only because I don't know the ins and outs of 3dl. But I CAN get really, really good results from it in less than ten minutes. Again, the reason I am using Iray is ONLY because I want a photoreal look that I simply don't know how to get in 3dl. But to get that photoreal look, and looking GOOD, takes FAR longer than ANY 3dl render.

Ok. I'll try to be clearer.

I'm saying, even IF Iray takes a bit longer (as I've said, for me, my system is so old, time is not noticable) But, even if it DID take longer, the amount of time I will save in POST work would be worth it, as I spent MOST of my time post working my renders with 3DL.

That may be true for you, but it winds up being the same amount of postwork for me, though likely for totally different reasons. I use a TON of postwork fx in my art, regardless whether it's 3dl or Iray. so from that standpoint, for me, it's the same amount of postwork. Now my friend Jon does a comic strip called The Adventures Of Grant West(basically he does it as a means to have ready made storyboards should he ever get the chance to make it into a film or tv show), and he does 99% of his fx in Daz in3dl. He only uses a miniscule amount of postwork, mostly to edit panels into a strip. He can get a page a day using 3dl. Btw, I'm NOT coming down on you in any way, even if I disagree with some of what you're saying. I'm just giving my personal experiences. If it makes your workflow faster, fine. It winds up being the same amount of work for me regardless, but again, it's cos I do very different things in my postwork.

Examples: Two promos for an Ultraman fancomic I want to do. The first is 3dl, render time 5 mins per element. Postwork time: couple days. Second promo is Iray. the render times were two hours per element and roughly again two days postwork(I say two days only cos I'm adding my job to the total time per day. In reality, maybe 12 straight hours if I just count computer time.) Honestly, for the two original comics I want to publish, Crimson Angel and The Survivors, I'll likely have to go back to 3dl rendering, as it's frankly a bit more time efficient for me. Again, though, I'm very likely doing far different thing with my postwork than you.

If you take a peek in my gallery, you will see an image I did of "Eve" staring lovingly at the fruit that will change her life forever.

That image required me to make about 4 seperate renders of the same scene, each with different light set ups and different shader settings, and MANY hours of post work in photoshop.

Now, maybe I just didn't understand 3DL or maybe I'm just not skilled enough at this stuff... but, even when I "finished" (which I only did because it was for a contest deadline) I was not satisfied with the final image. I just could never quite get the image in my mind to come out quite as I imagined it.

I'm really hoping Iray will help me achieve that more easily. 

Double or triple the amount of test renders, add in at least twelve hours of postwork, Iray or 3dl, and you'll hit what I have to do most of the time. I RARELY am happy with the final results. Even after I decide it's done. This here promo/cover art for my Godzilla fancomic I'm working on? Each element was at least five test renders, couple days postwork in PS, and I ended up THREE times re-rendering most everything till I was comfortable signing off on it. Then I ended up after being finished with it having to re-render the section with the three people in front because the woman's bra was poking through her shirt, and I'd never noticed!  My point is, there's never gonna be a cure all, regardless whther you render Iray or 3dl. To get what you want, you have to be willing to work for it. I keep trying to pound this into my friend Jon's head all the time, because he constantly will let crappy renders go and use them in his strip because he thinks it's more important to just put together an image, even when he's not happy with it. Not saying you're like that, but Neither Iray or 3dl are all in one solutions.

JasmineSkunk

agent unawares said:

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

dynagirlsdaddy_c70e7535d2 said:

JasmineSkunk said:

kyoto kid said:

ebergerly said:

JasmineSkunk said:

If you come into this hobby, be prepared for it to change very rapidly. EXPECT that tomorrow (literally, maybe tomorrow) EVERYTHING you learned, everything you spent, and everything you love to fade into oblivion. Because it will. Probably sooner than later. You won't have time to prepare for the changes. They will and do come quickly.

This is because the technology is (also literally) changing BY THE MINUTE. 

Honestly, I think that our culture is being driven by a lot of incredibly shallow hype about the tech world. People really believe that technology now is so super advanced compared to what it was in the dark ages of the 70's and 80's. But in fact much of it is marketing, convincing people that they really do need this new technology because it's so important. You really do need to spend insane amounts of money on the latest iPhone because it can recognize your face. Really?  ​

If you take a look at the technology that was being developed back in the 80's, it's the basis for everything going on today. All of the new, awesome technology is just incremental improvements on that stuff from the 80's. It's just smaller, and faster. But it's the same technology. And no, we really don't need 90% of this stuff. Smartphones, tablets, Titan V GPU's, video games, social media, and so on. It's all just entertainment. If you look at 90% of the day-to-day lives of people in the 70's and 80's compared to people today, it looks absolutely identical. Most of the basic stuff hasn't changed. Houses the same, cars the same, stores the same, malls the same, airlines the same, computers the same, clothing the same, and so on. All we're talking about is a tiny incremental improvment in access to information (which most people really don't care about), and a HUGE shift in focus and $$ spent on entertainment.

Technology is not changing by the minute. My desktop, and all its components, looks identical to my desktop from almost 30 years ago. It's just faster. Most of the "change" is a brilliant way for our industries to convince us we need to buy stuff because it's new technology, and that means it's awesome, by definition. Yeah, we can produce more realistic renders, but in practice most of the renders I've seen over the years look pretty much the same. Technology doesn't make me, or any one of us, better artists, which is IMO far more important than a 20% increase in render speed.  

..I was there in the 80s and it was rough going as everything, geometry, textures, and lights al had to be coded from scratch. It felt so removed from using a brush, pen, pencil, or sculpting clay which is why I bailed and stayed with traditional art media until I no longer could hold the tools steady or apply the proper pressure required for different stroke and shading effects. As I mentioned before the software I dreamed about over thirty years ago has finally come to pass.

I apologise for coming off somewhat defensive when it is inferred that 3DL  it is "so yesterday" while Iray is the "future" for 3D art as well as those of us who still choose to use the "elder" engine will be "left behind".  Yes 3DL in Daz has it limits, though several people here are pushing beyond them and creating tools (like IBL Master and scripts) that open new possibilities for Daz's once "signature" render engine. Iray in Daz has some serious limits as well compared to the standalone version that other software like 3DS Max and Maya have access to.  Without knowing how to script MDL shaders it's full potential. which that other software can tap, cannot be unlocked.

It would be nice to have a newer system that is more capable of supporting Iray to where a render job doesn't take a good part of the day, but for some of us, that just isn't a reality short of coming into a moderate windfall.

Well, I don't know what you're experiencing on your system, but for me, IRAY looks to me like it will save me tons of time... in post work. I tried SO hard to achieve "realism" and never could get close with 3DL. I know many were able to do some really convincing stuff. An image of (Michael?? - Sorry don't remember his last name) with two robots playing chess comes to mind. It was amazing. And Dreamlight had some beautiful environments that I could not distinguish from reality...

but I never came close. I always had several passes, several renders, lots of compositioning, and layering and TONS of postwork to make my images...

And I have yet to really do anything with IRAY, as I am still learning it, but I can already see, just from my spot renders with nothing but the headlamp on, that this is going to cut my work time down.... A LOT.

Maybe I'm just getting lucky here. So far, even though my system is almost 10 years old and my motherboard has only integrated graphics (ATI Radeon 4200 - Google it for some old AF specs). I am still able to do what Daz Studio can do. I was even recently able to get dForce to work. (YAY!) So, even though I will be slow, I'm really excited to play with the new stuff and believe it will actually help me make the images I always WANTED to make... faster and better.

I don't know. I think it's all very exciting.

I'm not entering into the tech debate side, cos I could care less about that. But I must say, where are you people coming from saying Iray is way faster than 3dl? I use only Iray myself anymore. But I, and my friend Jon (who refuses to touch Iray) BOTH can get 3dl renders that look GREAT almost instantly. I am currently rendering panels for a teaser for a Star Trek fancomic I will be doing down the road in Iray, and if I want the renders looking as good as possible, I'm looking at an average of 4-6 HOURS, minimum. And my laptop is a MONSTER Asus gaming laptop modified for cg and film editing. Now, I am NOT able to get truly photorealistic 3dl renders, only because I don't know the ins and outs of 3dl. But I CAN get really, really good results from it in less than ten minutes. Again, the reason I am using Iray is ONLY because I want a photoreal look that I simply don't know how to get in 3dl. But to get that photoreal look, and looking GOOD, takes FAR longer than ANY 3dl render.

Ok. I'll try to be clearer.

I'm saying, even IF Iray takes a bit longer (as I've said, for me, my system is so old, time is not noticable) But, even if it DID take longer, the amount of time I will save in POST work would be worth it, as I spent MOST of my time post working my renders with 3DL.

That may be true for you, but it winds up being the same amount of postwork for me, though likely for totally different reasons. I use a TON of postwork fx in my art, regardless whether it's 3dl or Iray. so from that standpoint, for me, it's the same amount of postwork. Now my friend Jon does a comic strip called The Adventures Of Grant West(basically he does it as a means to have ready made storyboards should he ever get the chance to make it into a film or tv show), and he does 99% of his fx in Daz in3dl. He only uses a miniscule amount of postwork, mostly to edit panels into a strip. He can get a page a day using 3dl. Btw, I'm NOT coming down on you in any way, even if I disagree with some of what you're saying. I'm just giving my personal experiences. If it makes your workflow faster, fine. It winds up being the same amount of work for me regardless, but again, it's cos I do very different things in my postwork.

Examples: Two promos for an Ultraman fancomic I want to do. The first is 3dl, render time 5 mins per element. Postwork time: couple days. Second promo is Iray. the render times were two hours per element and roughly again two days postwork(I say two days only cos I'm adding my job to the total time per day. In reality, maybe 12 straight hours if I just count computer time.) Honestly, for the two original comics I want to publish, Crimson Angel and The Survivors, I'll likely have to go back to 3dl rendering, as it's frankly a bit more time efficient for me. Again, though, I'm very likely doing far different thing with my postwork than you.

If you take a peek in my gallery, you will see an image I did of "Eve" staring lovingly at the fruit that will change her life forever.

That image required me to make about 4 seperate renders of the same scene, each with different light set ups and different shader settings, and MANY hours of post work in photoshop.

Now, maybe I just didn't understand 3DL or maybe I'm just not skilled enough at this stuff... but, even when I "finished" (which I only did because it was for a contest deadline) I was not satisfied with the final image. I just could never quite get the image in my mind to come out quite as I imagined it.

I'm really hoping Iray will help me achieve that more easily. 

It will. You can even do that bloom effect in-render. Fantastic composition btw.

I'm so looking forward to learning it!! (..and thanks). 

kyoto kid

...I have a feeling that Parris' IBL Master just breathed new life into 3DL.

Oso3D

Maybe, but we need something similar for directional lights and emissives, or a generally fixed UE2, and maybe the shader fixes/improvements people have been working on and talking about for years.

 

kyoto kid

...well there are a few people already working on the shader side (which is outside my sphere of expertise). 

The difference between 3DL directional lights and Iray directional lights, is that 3DL lights are shaders themselves and not physically based lighting. AoA's Distant and Spot lights are improvemnts on the standard 3DL lighting system.  The Spotlights also have various falloff parameters along with what mimics IES profiles in 3DL.