PW Abandoned mine station... Seriously 4.3GB??!!

1235»

Comments

  • tsroemitsroemi Posts: 3,536
    MelanieL said:

    When I submitted this topic I really didn't expect it to last this long or get the response it has. I also want to thank everyone for the great input and the amount of information that has been passed about file size, compression software and information about texturing.

    I have submitted a ticket to tech support in the hopes of getting file size(s) added to the product listing. Now I just have to hope that it doesn't get tossed aside or ignored.

    A lot of products I bought cannot be used without 'laying-on-hands', or I abandon it completely.
    But at least this taught me which PAs to go for and which to avoid (for my specific usage).

    Absolutely agree with file size (and polycount) on product page.

    Thanks, I am glad I was able to help out, hopefully it will be something that gets added in the future.

    Me too - I'm also on a limited monthly download budget. I sort of yearn for the olden days when the product pages had that information (the attachment is from 2011, two shop upgrades ago).

    I didn't even remember that, interesting! So it really shouldn't be that hard to add the information in again ...

  • TheKDTheKD Posts: 2,711

    That is incorrect, you would download a file that contains everything but the runtime and them you would select either the high or low resolution zip to complete the set. There would be no need to download everything. I do not see how that would require a revamping of anything. You can select which files you want to download in DIM or connect.

    Now, you buy product, tell dim/connect to install it. That way, you would buy product, then pick which versions you want to install. Daz seems to want to make it idiotproof. I can't see them wanting to confuse new users with a choice. For people like me, it wouldn't make any difference, as I disect and rebuild everything before I install anything anyways.

  • shadowhawk1shadowhawk1 Posts: 2,208
    TheKD said:

    That is incorrect, you would download a file that contains everything but the runtime and them you would select either the high or low resolution zip to complete the set. There would be no need to download everything. I do not see how that would require a revamping of anything. You can select which files you want to download in DIM or connect.

    Now, you buy product, tell dim/connect to install it. That way, you would buy product, then pick which versions you want to install. Daz seems to want to make it idiotproof. I can't see them wanting to confuse new users with a choice. For people like me, it wouldn't make any difference, as I disect and rebuild everything before I install anything anyways.

    Then we are a lot a like. I manually download everything then strip out all the vanity folderts, support folders and tip files before putting everything in a custom built runtime that makes everything easy to use. I think that daz trying to make things idiot proof they are only going to make things worse for themselves in the long run.

  • shadowhawk1shadowhawk1 Posts: 2,208
    tsroemi said:

    Hi all, been following the discussion with a lot of interest, because I'm also one of those who has to take file size into account, download- as well as render-wise, so to speak. Just today, I bought a PC+ hair which was on my wishlist mainly because it looked like it would use a lot less resources than a pretty similar hair I already have, which uses lots and is therefore hard to handle for me. And now the download link tells me the zip size is more than 780 MB! For me, that is just insanely big. It's just one hair, not even with versions for G3 and G8, and it's short and all, so - WHY 780 MB??? Must be the textures I know, and I also know I can reduce them and all of that but - I just wouldn't have bought the hair in the first place if I'd have known. There are so many other options in the store. I would have chosen something else.

    Now I have a hair which will clutter up my much needed hard disk space and which I will barely ever use, and I feel chagrined and upset and generally not very good about the experience. So I'm very VERY much in favor of adding a file size info to the product pages. It could even just be for the newer things since the older stuff is generally not that big. This wouldn't exclude anybody from making close-up renders with really huge textures, and so wouldn't really be a problem for anyone.

    +1000 for the file size info!

    I completely understand your pain! Imagine my surprise when I purchased this set and expected it to be 400 to 500mb only to find out it is 4.3gb! I almost returned it, but I need it for a project so I had to grin and bare it and waste a full day of downloading just to get it all.

     

     

    MelanieL said:

    When I submitted this topic I really didn't expect it to last this long or get the response it has. I also want to thank everyone for the great input and the amount of information that has been passed about file size, compression software and information about texturing.

    I have submitted a ticket to tech support in the hopes of getting file size(s) added to the product listing. Now I just have to hope that it doesn't get tossed aside or ignored.

    A lot of products I bought cannot be used without 'laying-on-hands', or I abandon it completely.
    But at least this taught me which PAs to go for and which to avoid (for my specific usage).

    Absolutely agree with file size (and polycount) on product page.

    Thanks, I am glad I was able to help out, hopefully it will be something that gets added in the future.

    Me too - I'm also on a limited monthly download budget. I sort of yearn for the olden days when the product pages had that information (the attachment is from 2011, two shop upgrades ago).

    WOW!! Wish I would have known this before I filed the tech support ticket. Now I will be able to use this info if they actually respond to it. Thank you!

  • PerttiAPerttiA Posts: 10,024
    MelanieL said:

    When I submitted this topic I really didn't expect it to last this long or get the response it has. I also want to thank everyone for the great input and the amount of information that has been passed about file size, compression software and information about texturing.

    I have submitted a ticket to tech support in the hopes of getting file size(s) added to the product listing. Now I just have to hope that it doesn't get tossed aside or ignored.

    A lot of products I bought cannot be used without 'laying-on-hands', or I abandon it completely.
    But at least this taught me which PAs to go for and which to avoid (for my specific usage).

    Absolutely agree with file size (and polycount) on product page.

    Thanks, I am glad I was able to help out, hopefully it will be something that gets added in the future.

    Me too - I'm also on a limited monthly download budget. I sort of yearn for the olden days when the product pages had that information (the attachment is from 2011, two shop upgrades ago).

    That 6MB:s must have been just the readmewink

  • shadowhawk1shadowhawk1 Posts: 2,208
    PerttiA said:
    MelanieL said:

    When I submitted this topic I really didn't expect it to last this long or get the response it has. I also want to thank everyone for the great input and the amount of information that has been passed about file size, compression software and information about texturing.

    I have submitted a ticket to tech support in the hopes of getting file size(s) added to the product listing. Now I just have to hope that it doesn't get tossed aside or ignored.

    A lot of products I bought cannot be used without 'laying-on-hands', or I abandon it completely.
    But at least this taught me which PAs to go for and which to avoid (for my specific usage).

    Absolutely agree with file size (and polycount) on product page.

    Thanks, I am glad I was able to help out, hopefully it will be something that gets added in the future.

    Me too - I'm also on a limited monthly download budget. I sort of yearn for the olden days when the product pages had that information (the attachment is from 2011, two shop upgrades ago).

    That 6MB:s must have been just the readmewink

    Ah the days of V3 when there were no displacement maps to deal with. :)

  • j cadej cade Posts: 2,310
    tsroemi said:

    Hi all, been following the discussion with a lot of interest, because I'm also one of those who has to take file size into account, download- as well as render-wise, so to speak. Just today, I bought a PC+ hair which was on my wishlist mainly because it looked like it would use a lot less resources than a pretty similar hair I already have, which uses lots and is therefore hard to handle for me. And now the download link tells me the zip size is more than 780 MB! For me, that is just insanely big. It's just one hair, not even with versions for G3 and G8, and it's short and all, so - WHY 780 MB??? Must be the textures I know, and I also know I can reduce them and all of that but - I just wouldn't have bought the hair in the first place if I'd have known. There are so many other options in the store. I would have chosen something else.

    Now I have a hair which will clutter up my much needed hard disk space and which I will barely ever use, and I feel chagrined and upset and generally not very good about the experience. So I'm very VERY much in favor of adding a file size info to the product pages. It could even just be for the newer things since the older stuff is generally not that big. This wouldn't exclude anybody from making close-up renders with really huge textures, and so wouldn't really be a problem for anyone.

    +1000 for the file size info!

    Actually here's an excellent example where filesize might or might not be corelated with render times - a lot of times when hair filesizes are big its because they have very dense geometry rather than lots of textures. If the hair has a bunch of modeled strands, it frequently means they use less transparency and textures and can render faster (calculating a bunch of overlapping transparency is one of the slowest things to calculate in any renderer)

     

    (sidenote this also means Dforce hair tends to actually render faster than similar mesh hair and also depending on the hair be similarly resouce intensive. As, while it takes more memory for the geometry, it uses far fewer texture maps)

     

  • PerttiAPerttiA Posts: 10,024
    TheKD said:

    That is incorrect, you would download a file that contains everything but the runtime and them you would select either the high or low resolution zip to complete the set. There would be no need to download everything. I do not see how that would require a revamping of anything. You can select which files you want to download in DIM or connect.

    Now, you buy product, tell dim/connect to install it. That way, you would buy product, then pick which versions you want to install. Daz seems to want to make it idiotproof. I can't see them wanting to confuse new users with a choice. For people like me, it wouldn't make any difference, as I disect and rebuild everything before I install anything anyways.

    Maybe they haven't figured out yet, that it is practically impossible to design something that is you_know_who-proof, because you_know_who has a knack for un-proofing anything you have come up with and you end up with something that is not only, not-you_know_who-proof, but creates problems for everyone else.

    Just like child-proofing whatever... I find myself constantly helping my 78 year old mother, because she can't get the socket in the wall, open an oven or a pill-box etc...

  • tsroemitsroemi Posts: 3,536
    j cade said:
    tsroemi said:

    Hi all, been following the discussion with a lot of interest, because I'm also one of those who has to take file size into account, download- as well as render-wise, so to speak. Just today, I bought a PC+ hair which was on my wishlist mainly because it looked like it would use a lot less resources than a pretty similar hair I already have, which uses lots and is therefore hard to handle for me. And now the download link tells me the zip size is more than 780 MB! For me, that is just insanely big. It's just one hair, not even with versions for G3 and G8, and it's short and all, so - WHY 780 MB??? Must be the textures I know, and I also know I can reduce them and all of that but - I just wouldn't have bought the hair in the first place if I'd have known. There are so many other options in the store. I would have chosen something else.

    Now I have a hair which will clutter up my much needed hard disk space and which I will barely ever use, and I feel chagrined and upset and generally not very good about the experience. So I'm very VERY much in favor of adding a file size info to the product pages. It could even just be for the newer things since the older stuff is generally not that big. This wouldn't exclude anybody from making close-up renders with really huge textures, and so wouldn't really be a problem for anyone.

    +1000 for the file size info!

    Actually here's an excellent example where filesize might or might not be corelated with render times - a lot of times when hair filesizes are big its because they have very dense geometry rather than lots of textures. If the hair has a bunch of modeled strands, it frequently means they use less transparency and textures and can render faster (calculating a bunch of overlapping transparency is one of the slowest things to calculate in any renderer)

     

    (sidenote this also means Dforce hair tends to actually render faster than similar mesh hair and also depending on the hair be similarly resouce intensive. As, while it takes more memory for the geometry, it uses far fewer texture maps)

     

    Yeah I know, but it's not just about the render times, it's also about plain old space on my disk. I can't afford a bigger one for the nearer future so have to work with what I've got. Also, I've only got 16 GB RAM, so there's that to consider as well.

    It would be kinda cool if there was a gifting section in the DAZ store, I'm just thinking. The hair I talked about was real cheap and so I won't return it, but since I won't be using it much either somebody else might be a lot happier with it than I am. But of course, this wouldn't make much sense for a store.

  • HylasHylas Posts: 5,284
    Oso3D said:

    I'll point out that 'why not have lower resolution map options' is A) more work, and B) then makes the downloads even bigger, which is going to be a problem for some of the folks having issues.

    You can't suit everyone, so all you can do is try to suit the largest number of people in a way that makes you the most money.

     

    Make it two separate downloads, the same way some older products have a separate Poser download.

    Yes, it's more work, but wouldn't it make the product more broadly appealing?

  • SevrinSevrin Posts: 6,314
    Hylas said:
    Oso3D said:

    I'll point out that 'why not have lower resolution map options' is A) more work, and B) then makes the downloads even bigger, which is going to be a problem for some of the folks having issues.

    You can't suit everyone, so all you can do is try to suit the largest number of people in a way that makes you the most money.

     

    Make it two separate downloads, the same way some older products have a separate Poser download.

    Yes, it's more work, but wouldn't it make the product more broadly appealing?

    All that takes time, and time is money.  The prices of products would either need to go up, or PAs would have to do that extra work of resampling textures and creating separate preloads and presets for no additional revenue.  Also, the people who don't require this kind of modification would also have to pay for the additional work, while getting no benefit, thus subsidizing the customers whom it would benefit.  Now I'm all for socialized medicine, but socialized 3D content is a bit of a stretch.

    Perhaps Daz will add file sizes for new products, and that would be a good thing that shouldn't be a lot of extra work or difficult to implement.  Kind of have my doubts about it happening given Daz's current state, but it's worth asking.  I'd be surprised to see them go over their catalogue and update thousands of existing product pages with this kind of information, though.

    If Daz did go along with this, customers could make their choices and the market would decide what's what.

  • mmkdazmmkdaz Posts: 335

    Nooooooooo...oh my goodness. I really wanted that one too

  • shadowhawk1shadowhawk1 Posts: 2,208
    mmkdaz said:

    Nooooooooo...oh my goodness. I really wanted that one too

    Even after reducing all the textures this set ended up being almost 1.5gb. 

  • shadowhawk1shadowhawk1 Posts: 2,208
    Hylas said:
    Oso3D said:

    I'll point out that 'why not have lower resolution map options' is A) more work, and B) then makes the downloads even bigger, which is going to be a problem for some of the folks having issues.

    You can't suit everyone, so all you can do is try to suit the largest number of people in a way that makes you the most money.

     

    Make it two separate downloads, the same way some older products have a separate Poser download.

    Yes, it's more work, but wouldn't it make the product more broadly appealing?

    You hit the issue right on the head, offer two download options and that way everyone is happy. 

  • HylasHylas Posts: 5,284
    Sevrin said:

    All that takes time, and time is money.  The prices of products would either need to go up, or PAs would have to do that extra work of resampling textures and creating separate preloads and presets for no additional revenue.  (...)

    It's funny that this post is followed by...

     

    mmkdaz said:

    Nooooooooo...oh my goodness. I really wanted that one too

    ... in other words, an additional sale the PA would have made, had they done the extra work of providing an additional, more resource friendly set of maps.

    Now, I don't claim to know whether the additional revenue is worth the extra work. The fact that none of the PAs are doing it is perhaps a sign that it's not worth it. Fair enough.

    I'm just saying as a consumer, it's something I'd like to see.

     

Sign In or Register to comment.