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
That's why I buy Corel products. I have the option of updating my products when I want to. They offer product assurance if you want to buy the yearly thing so you can get all updates. I don't because the upgrade price is actually cheaper for me when I decide to do so. And there is no limit to how many versions behind you are. Photoshop (. abr) brushes are compatible with Paintshop pro.
Good that there is some positive aspects to this thread, alternatives for the day I don't NEED Photoshop.
...again I'm not very thrilled about software. by subscription However, there are cases, like with Photoshop and Octane, where it does make it easier for someone on a tight budget to have access them. There is no way particularly now that I am on a very meagre fixed income, that I could shell out 700$ for a PS perpetual licence (if they still had one) or 600$ for an Octane perpetual Licence and the Daz plugin. Crikey, can't even afford the Pro version of 3D coat (the Amateur Edition only allows for up to 2048 resolution and 7 layers). 145$ for Substance Painter/Designer was a more "realistic" price for me.
Fortunately where Photoshop is concerned I have become quite adept as using Gimp over the years and for being able to design my own effects and filters I am considering the Exposure X4 Bundle. I worked with the trial version and really liked how easy it is to use, evne created my own filters one of which I used here to create an old faded 1960s photo look:
...good point.
I'd like to address a few things you mentioned :)
"There is no way particularly now that I am on a very meagre fixed income, that I could shell out 700$ for a PS perpetual licence (if they still had one)"
Affinity Photo is 50 bucks and only 50 bucks. No subs, nothing further to pay. And for most hobbyists, it's more than sufficient. And for cheap software, it's darn good, surprisingly. GIMP, Krita, etc. are also viable options.
"Crikey, can't even afford the Pro version of 3D coat (the Amateur Edition only allows for up to 2048 resolution and 7 layers)."
I got pro 3D Coat on one of their annual sales for around $250. Not super cheap exactly, but not a deal-breaker either. For instance, they have a sale during the summer that they have every year at around the same time so planning for it is easy. And for that money you get not just painting, but sculpting, retopo, uv mapping (which is excellent)....the whole enchilada. Could other software do it better? Sure, if you got the bucks for Zbrush (which I don't). So 3D Coat it is. Maybe not the greatest, but still gold.
:)
Laurie
Edit: One more thing about 3D Coat. I got it a couple years ago when it was still version 4.7. You get free updates until it hits a whole number version (in my case 5.0 will be the last of my updates). Did I mention I've had it for a couple years? And I'm still getting updates. Not a bad deal.
@Szark, It isn't subscription models per se that are the issue for me. It's when the subscription is the only way to use the software that I balk.
When I look at all the money I've paid Adobe over the years for Photoshop, and later for the Master Collection, robbing Peter to pay Paul, so to speak, to put myself into a position to be able to afford the annual upgrades, Adobe going to subscription-only software is really insulting. Because of software piracy, Adobe punished their most loyal customer base: Individuals who loved the software so much they moved heaven and earth to pay for it.
The subscription model works really well for companies: The entire cost of the software is tax-deductible; No additional cost for upgrades, their copy of the program(s) never become obsolete; They're not locked into an older OS because of their older version of the program(s)… Subscription software is a boon to companies. Turnover doesn't matter, the software is always there for the current user(s) at an easy to budget, tax-deductible, monthly charge. And if the company goes under, who's going to care that they no longer have access to the software?
But for the individual like myself, this move is both insulting and devastating. I supported Adobe. I helped them grow. I helped them innovate. A drop in the bucket, but still it was my money to spend and I spent it on them, rather than one of their competitors. I had a vested interest in them. And with one marketing decision, they showed me they couldn't care less about my sacrifices to be a paying customer.
All I wanted was a way to keep the programs I used the most from the CC when, many years later, I retired and went to a fixed income. I'm not talking about getting a hard copy of the latest Photoshop after a year of subscriptions, but rather a way to keep using my favorites after five or more years when a fixed income made continuing to pay a monthly subscription out of the question. But there was nothing. Not for customers who had paid thousands of dollars prior to the subscription format and then several years of subscriptions. Not for customers who paid subscriptions for decades. Nothing.
When any company stops looking at their customer base as an intergral part of their success, and only sees the money, decisions are made that allienate the existing customer base. Some customers are upset enough to leave, some customers are upset but stay, and new customers come along that don't know what things were like before and so are satisfied with what they're paying for.
And I'll be the first to say Adobe's subscription model allows many people to use software they would never be able to afford otherwise. And 10, 20, 30 years from now, it might not even bother those people that they lose the use of the software once they can no longer afford the subscription.
But it bothers me.
And so I'll continue to use my CS6 programs. They do what I need them to do.
All good valid points. That is the part of big Corporations that gets to me these days.
Count me as one who won't buy it now, I'm still using Lightroom 5.5 (Lightroom 6 was stiall available as a perpetual license BUT required installing the Adobe downloader/tracker)
..even 250$ on my budget is more than I can handle. I get less than 1,000$ a month in SS.
145$ was still a bit of a stretch but manageable..
Been looking at some of the alternatives mentioned in this thread. I'm a big fan of open source (I use GIMP and Blender especially) but in the case of Substance Painter (and Designer) I had previously heard of little to compare.
Armor Paint is great - still needs a lot of development but I was happy to drop the 16 Euros to support it. It runs fine (Windows 64-bit here) and painting is smooth. It can even paint with texture maps like in Substance, the input of which is easy to set up in a node-based format (though time consuming). It needs a few more convenience features but looks like they're coming. Hobbyists should give it a look, but it'll be a while before it's ready for a professional pipeline. So I'm playing with it but sticking to Substance for my work, at least for the time being.
Materialize is great - a little less intuitive than Bitmap-2-Material but once you've played with it (or read the manual) it's easy enough and produces good results. I could happily replace B2M with Materialize.
NeoTextureEdit is fine - very similar to Filter Forge (but lacking the vast library that FF has). Easy enough to use if you're familiar with node-based processing. Can't see myself using it, but if you're comfortable with creating materials from nodes, you can get results.
I use Paintshop Pro too and they often have discounts on both upgrading and full versions plus each one comes with extras and yeah is way cheaper than photoshop and has many same features maybe they'll create something like substance painter
After 50 pages of outcry, Allegorithmic has locked the original thread and gone to "Part 2," hoping to curb the more over-the-top reactions. Not sure if it's working.
There are posts in both threads where people are convinced we will soon see many competitors hoping to take over Allegorithmic's now vacant spot as the "rockstar" indie company with innovative 3D tools, both existing software improving and new software. Could get interesting.
I just threw Armorpaint some money. Not because I'll use it (at least not at first - I have 3D Coat), but because we need some competition out there ;).
Laurie
substance painter had quickly established itself as the "go to" material creation software for the
Small /one man indie game Development market.
The video game market is where the most growth is occurring in the area of CG/3D
https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/30/newzoo-global-games-expected-to-hit-180-1-billion-in-revenues-2021/
The major engines are free
Videogame content creation tools are where all of the competition will be going forward
Adobe aquired mixamo
they have Fuse and their own budding 3D rendering application"Dimension"
and now Algorithmics products as part of their long term strategic plan to get into that market
I cant honestly blame them, it is wise business.
Anyone in the 3D content creation business today who is ignoring the video
game industry is making a mistake ( wake up Maxon!!)
As far as the subscription aspect,
I personally believe that the days of perpetual licences may be drawing to a close
,at least for top level software used in professional environments, as it generates steady revenue
and has essentially defeated the rampant piracy of years past.
Maintenance contracts also generate a steady revenue but also allow access by the indie developer who might not upgrade every year and let their maintenance contract lapse BUT still allows access to the software! Subscription models block access as soon as you stop paying and are always more expensive in the long run. I used to use Lightroom, £50 per year for upgrades was no problem but I will not pay £120 a year for the same upgrades plus lose access to my data as soon as I stop paying. I don't like ransomware.
I guess I am the lone outlier here but I have had a very good experience with the adobe photography plan. I get photoshop and Lightroom for just over $10 a month. In addition I get access to great tutorials and adobe has added to that bundle without changing my cost over the last three years. I wanted photoshop for years but it had a price tag that kept it out of reach. Now for the cost of two cups of decent coffee a month , I have what I want. For a hobbyist on a budget, it’s been a tremendous value.
In the case of Maxon if you let your "maintaince "contract lapse you can still use your
software for sure but there is no upgrade path after that only a new buy in at full retail price.
So you pay $3600 USD up front and pay $700 USD per year to get "free" upgrades
Gambling on the hopes that those upgrades will be signifigant enough to justify that $700
or Drop out of maintainence ( by missing one single $700 annual payment)
and take a chance that the version you have will serve your needs
for several years.
If some new game changing technology in the area of Rendering or Character animation
becomes wide spread and comes to C4D, again your price to climb back aboard the boat
is another $3600.
Alot of us in the C4D community realized the folly of "maintainence"
and dropped out years ago and spent that money on buying new versions of entire programs to fill many voids that still exist in C4D
Like Iclone pro for Character animation or Lightwave 3D or Houdini for VFX.
But sure we can still use our Older C4D apps for many things like motion graphics.
I said such a thing earlier in the thread about this so no you aren't alone. :)
You're not the lone outlier, @Daikatana. I know a lot of people who are happy with their photoshop subscription. And while you can't use the software if you let your subscription lapse, you can sign up again at a later date without paying a penalty.
I'd have been subscribing to the entire CC package since the beginning if there was some sort of loyalty plan, in spite of owning a perptual license for the CS6 Master Collection. But I won't get used to the new features of Photoshop only to lose them when I can't afford a subscription, (which is pretty much now, actually.)
I guess it's just us older folk who remember all the things we had to do in order to afford the software who are not happy with the subscription-only model.
When you look at the threads (and threds) that are coming in at the Alledoby forum, amounting at over 50 pages of largly (verry largly)) negative reactions, the 3D community has not been to keen on Alledobe's decision. Now I worked with Substance Painter and Designer on a daily basis. And yet I used a subscription because I understand the reasoning behind it. If you are in a growth market as a fledgling company and your user base is expanding you can fund your day to day operation on the revenues of your new sales. But when you start to dominate an industrie (games) like Allegorithmic did, then your new sales drop and old customers dominate your userbase. Only payed upgrades can help you stay afloat but when your package can please 95 procent of your customers needs and upgrades only ad fluf and bells and whistles, the need for upgrading sinks.....and revenues start to plumet no matter how succesfull you are.
What I would have understood is a move to stop perpetual licenses in favour of rented once. But what I do not and will not understand is the move to Adobe. In total I paid over 800 euro's for the packages and they were well worth it. And I own a perpetual license now (60 dollars extra including VAT).....I hope to be able to use the software for a few years more but when a new computer arrives due to old age of my current crate or I get a RTX2080, god knows what will happen. At least I save 24.07 per month and can save that for a copy of 3D Coat if push comes to shove....
No really this whole situation only points squarly in on direction.....Open Source Software.....currently we as Blender users are all enyoing an upgrade to 2.8 and EEVEE. It's a Beta but I allready used it in anger on an industrial video. And Blender gives you (in Cycles and in EEVEE) the possibiliy to make FULLY procedural materials that do not repeat themselves after 2 meters as the standard material in Substance painter do so often (you can edit but with limitations). And texture editing in Blender is also greatly upgraded in comparison to 2.79.
Greets
I was under the impression, from various posts, that using CC disabled any older licenses (CS6 or before) - but that may have been incorrect or a temporay glitch.
Not exactly. Upgrade paths exist for c4d from last three versions. Right now with R20 out: R19 studio to R20 studio is $995. R18 to R20 is $1695. R17 to R20 is $2195. From R16 and below then it's $3600, unless you catch it on sale (like during black friday).
I stand corrected
Still no bargain considering that since R17-R20 we still have no ability to retarget
Character motion Data to a C4D rigs natively
or simulate cloth on a moving Character Like poser/ Daz Dforce&optitex/Iclone cloth physics
or create lipsinc from audio files Like poser /Daz /iclone
A person who lapsed out at R17 could take that $2195 re-entry fee and buy lightwave3D for VFX
and still have nearly $1200 left for Iclone pro full pipeline& Character creator 3.
I just wanted to point out that the idea of having a subscription in addition to being able to purchase the software is not a bad idea...
It gives people the option to affordably try it out for a while and see if it’s good... it allows people who can’t afford it, to use it on a need basis.
Filter Forge is a good example of a company with both options... subscribe if you like, or buy if that’s your thing.
Its just when subscription is your only option that it is terrible.
It stinks when the only option is subscription. Or the only option is fixed pay.
Choice is cool.
You stated it best. I subscribe to Adobe Photoshop CC 2019 and I'm fine paying $9.99 a month for it so we shall see what the rent model for Substance Painter will be. I don't use their whole suite and have barely cracked open Painter but perhaps they will start to meld both PS with SP and might end up with a very powerful 3D painter app, that would be totally cool! This isn't happening right away either, this will all take place over the next few years from what I remember of the email from Allegorithmic
The problem is that those "purchased"
stand alone versions will end up on the torrent networks
undoing half of the reason for the existance of the
subscription versions.
Just watched a vid on this. No undo yet. So you make a mistake your stuck with it. Not usable like that!
This is a fallacy. Just because something is available illegally for free does NOT mean that those who want to purchase it will simply go the torrent route, nor will those who go the torrent route have been likely to buy the software if it had not been availble for free. There will always be a few who do, but those add up to a very tiny fraction.
Subscription models also don't always block piracy. It depends heavily on how much of the software resides off the computer, and how easily it can be patched around by the various crackers out there.
If I see a car with the windows down and the keys in it, so I could get the car for free, will I just jump in and drive off? No. Will someone who regularly steals cars and gets away with it bother to buy one if they reduce the prices to only double what they could afford? No.
SaaS and Subscription models are great for companies and professionals, since they can write-off the costs on their taxes regardless, and they get to amortize the costs. For hobbyists, students, and others.....they reduce the bar for entry, but end up being much more expensive in the long run (as those groups will rarely need all the features that the professionals and big corporate users will) nor is upgrading as much of a concern.
If I pay $15/month for CC, for example. If the cost to purchase it free-and-clear were comparable to when it was available in such a fashion, I would have to pay for 50 months (roughly, $750) to 'own' the software. That's just over 4 years. At the end of those 4 years, do I need to upgrade?
I still use Photoshop 7.0. It has most of the features I need, and the few it doesn't, I have other applications that can manage it. Why would I need to have continually paid for it since I got it some 15 years ago? And if I stopped paying, would lose access to it?
The SaaS and Subscription models have gained popularity with the large corporations as it gives them CONTROL over the application and its usage, as well as providing more consistent revenue streams. That control used to be in the hands of the consumer. And to me, that change in control is a BAD thing.