Daz Studio Pro BETA - version 4.20.0.17! (*UPDATED*)

12729313233

Comments

  • skboaskboa Posts: 54

    IceCrMn said:

    Last thoughts before I get to bed. Have you tried changing the emission temperature instead of the color?

     Works nicely, also with color. Thanks for letting us know.

  • edited March 14

    While 4.20.0.6 seems capable of retaining the way you set it up between sessions, it looks like it's still unable to import the UI settings (layout, toolbars, actions, menus) created from a 4.16.

    As a result; one would have to readjsut all of these settings manually and recreate all custom actions again. 

    Post edited by second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 on
  • IceCrMnIceCrMn Posts: 1,784
    Fantastic, now we just need to figure out why my solution works. I'm at work right now, so will check into it when I get home this afternoon.
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 83,936

    second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 said:

    While 4.20.0.6 seems capable of retaining the way you set it up between sessions, it looks like it's still unable to import the UI settings (layout, toolbars, actions, menus) created from a 4.16.

    As a result; one would have to readjsut all of these settings manually and recreate all custom actions again. 

    What do you mean - Window>Workspace>Select Layout? Or trying to copy from another release channel? Or something else?

  • jbowlerjbowler Posts: 582

    skboa said:

    IceCrMn said:

    Last thoughts before I get to bed. Have you tried changing the emission temperature instead of the color?

     Works nicely, also with color. Thanks for letting us know.

    I expect that setting a (CIE) profile for the light would also work and that will allow colored lights.  That said, doesn't spectral rendering slow the render speed down by several factors, as more than three channels of data have to be processed?  (I've never tried spectral rendering, except perhaps by accident.)

  • edited March 14

    Richard Haseltine said:

    second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 said:

    While 4.20.0.6 seems capable of retaining the way you set it up between sessions, it looks like it's still unable to import the UI settings (layout, toolbars, actions, menus) created from a 4.16.

    As a result; one would have to readjsut all of these settings manually and recreate all custom actions again. 

    What do you mean - Window>Workspace>Select Layout? Or trying to copy from another release channel? Or something else?

    Ok Richard, I just gave it another go and it looks like it could just me not understanding how this works. I managed to export from 4.16 my layout, toolbars, and menus but not my actions. And I did it through Window>Workspace>customize. On the other hand, it works with the script you once linked to me named "Copy_UI_From_Channel.dsa" . So of course, I can always add my stuff to a beta from the main channel, but why won't exporting actions manually work? I cranked the actions export open in notepad++ and it even seems like the file didn't take in my list of customa ctions. Isn't that odd? O_o

    Post edited by second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 on
  • IceCrMn said:

    So, help me out.

    Did we just fix ghost lights with a simple white opacity map and turning on Spectual Rendering?

    Short answer? No.

    Long answer?

     - Change the Environment Mode to Scene only and repeat your experiment.

     - Note the unfilterable white dots where the geometry of the ghost light is.

    No matter what you try, you can't fully fix it without eliminating opacity mutliplication introduced by new Iray version because that multiplication requires cranking up the luminosity which in turn causes unfilterable artifacts.

  • M-CM-C Posts: 87
    edited March 14

    IceCrMn said:

    I think we have stummbled across a fix for ghost lights.

    And it makes them behave in just the same way as before the Nvidia "fix".

    It's simple, but I need someone to test it for me to see if they are seeing thesame thing I am.

    See this thread for background

    https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/556146/turning-spectral-rendering-on-blows-scene-out-with-light#latest

    ----

    The fix;

    Place an all white map in the opacity channel...

    The magic...

    Turn on Spectral Rendering.

    Heres the 2kx2k opacity map I used.

    I'm not seeing the GL in the mirror or in the scene.

    There is a huge ghost light between the camera and the yellow cube.

    The blue cube is behind the camera.

    You can see the blue cube, but not the ghost light.

    So, help me out.

    Did we just fix ghost lights with a simple white opacity map and turning on Spectual Rendering?

    I have used spectral rendering for a long time and was very happy with it but there have been changes to it with one of the latest installments of iray.
    You now have to choose one of several color profiles with spectral rendering which seems to be a good option in the first place.
    Unfortunately none of these profiles look exactly the same like a non spectral render.
    Rec709 is the one that comes very close but one should note that some of the colors might be messed up with the new way spectral rendering works.

    Post edited by M-C on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 83,936

    second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 said:

    While 4.20.0.6 seems capable of retaining the way you set it up between sessions, it looks like it's still unable to import the UI settings (layout, toolbars, actions, menus) created from a 4.16.

    As a result; one would have to readjsut all of these settings manually and recreate all custom actions again. 

    What do you mean - Window>Workspace>Select Layout? Or trying to copy from another release channel? Or something else?

    Ok Richard, I just gave it another go and it looks like it could just me not understanding how this works. I managed to export from 4.16 my layout, toolbars, and menus but not my actions. And I did it through Window>Workspace>customize. On the other hand, it works with the script you once linked to me named "Copy_UI_From_Channel.dsa" . So of course, I can always add my stuff to a beta from the main channel, but why won't exporting actions manually work? I cranked the actions export open in notepad++ and it even seems like the file didn't take in my list of customa ctions. Isn't that odd? O_o

    I'm not sure that the GUIDs used to identify Custom Actions, which are how they are referenced in the other files, are universal or if they are generated in a way that is machine-specific.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 83,936

    M-C said:

    IceCrMn said:

    I think we have stummbled across a fix for ghost lights.

    And it makes them behave in just the same way as before the Nvidia "fix".

    It's simple, but I need someone to test it for me to see if they are seeing thesame thing I am.

    See this thread for background

    https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/556146/turning-spectral-rendering-on-blows-scene-out-with-light#latest

    ----

    The fix;

    Place an all white map in the opacity channel...

    The magic...

    Turn on Spectral Rendering.

    Heres the 2kx2k opacity map I used.

    I'm not seeing the GL in the mirror or in the scene.

    There is a huge ghost light between the camera and the yellow cube.

    The blue cube is behind the camera.

    You can see the blue cube, but not the ghost light.

    So, help me out.

    Did we just fix ghost lights with a simple white opacity map and turning on Spectual Rendering?

    I have used spectral rendering for a long time and was very happy with it but there have been changes to it with one of the latest installments of iray.
    You now have to choose one of several color profiles with spectral rendering which seems to be a good option in the first place.
    Unfortunately none of these profiles look exactly the same like a non spectral render.
    Rec709 is the one that comes very close but one should note that some of the colors might be messed up with the new way spectral rendering works.

    We arte told:

    rec709 is the default (https://raytracing-docs.nvidia.com/iray/manual/index.html#iray_photoreal_render_mode#spectral-rendering), and thus what was always used prior to the option being exposed.

  • IceCrMnIceCrMn Posts: 1,784

    johndoe_36eb90b0 said:

    IceCrMn said:

    So, help me out.

    Did we just fix ghost lights with a simple white opacity map and turning on Spectual Rendering?

    Short answer? No.

    Long answer?

     - Change the Environment Mode to Scene only and repeat your experiment.

     - Note the unfilterable white dots where the geometry of the ghost light is.

    No matter what you try, you can't fully fix it without eliminating opacity mutliplication introduced by new Iray version because that multiplication requires cranking up the luminosity which in turn causes unfilterable artifacts.

    The scene I uploaded was setup for scene only.

    I tried with both Scene only and Sun - Sky only.

    I'm still seeing the same results.

    I know the Spectral Render changes the colors of the characters slightly red, or mostly red if you use the xyz color space.

    I'll work on that later tonight.

     

     

    DomeAndScene.jpg
    2558 x 1042 - 315K
    SceneOnly.jpg
    2558 x 1032 - 279K
    SunSkyOnly.jpg
    2560 x 1036 - 362K
  • IceCrMnIceCrMn Posts: 1,784
    edited March 14

    The lumens are default on those test results.

    I didn't apply the Daz fix.

    I just made a regular old mesh light.

    Set the opacity to 0.000001

    Set Luminance units to kcd/m2^

    Then enabled Spectral rendering at the default 709 conversion color space.

    You can see my settings in the screen shots.

     

    edit: I should note that Ghost Light 2 is actually emitting light directly at the camera in my tests.

    Post edited by IceCrMn on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 83,936
    edited March 14

    Richard Haseltine said:

    second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 said:

    While 4.20.0.6 seems capable of retaining the way you set it up between sessions, it looks like it's still unable to import the UI settings (layout, toolbars, actions, menus) created from a 4.16.

    As a result; one would have to readjsut all of these settings manually and recreate all custom actions again. 

    What do you mean - Window>Workspace>Select Layout? Or trying to copy from another release channel? Or something else?

    Ok Richard, I just gave it another go and it looks like it could just me not understanding how this works. I managed to export from 4.16 my layout, toolbars, and menus but not my actions. And I did it through Window>Workspace>customize. On the other hand, it works with the script you once linked to me named "Copy_UI_From_Channel.dsa" . So of course, I can always add my stuff to a beta from the main channel, but why won't exporting actions manually work? I cranked the actions export open in notepad++ and it even seems like the file didn't take in my list of customa ctions. Isn't that odd? O_o

    I'm not sure that the GUIDs used to identify Custom Actions, which are how they are referenced in the other files, are universal or if they are generated in a way that is machine-specific.

    The GUID is random, so the references in the Actions, Menus, and Toolbars files will not carry over unless the CustomActions file is also carried over.

    Post edited by Richard Haseltine on
  • Richard Haseltine said:

    The GUID is random, so the references in the Actions, Menus, and Toolbars files will not carry over unless the CustomActions file is also carried over.

    What would be the best way to do so? Copy it manually in the appropriate part of AppData/... ?

  • edited March 15

    Yep I think that's the same I tried, and indeed it works. When we say "another channel" we mean from beta to normal or normal to beta, right? It's a good one. What I'd like to be able to do though, just in case, would be to pack my UI/actions for safekeeping and reinjecting if needed be. Messing manually with AppData is always abit worrying.

    Post edited by second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 on
  • IceCrMn said:

    The scene I uploaded was setup for scene only.

    Sorry, I initially loaded the scene using drag & drop.

    I tried again by loading directly into Daz Studio 4.20.0.6 Public Beta (after replacing missing "Z:/GLOP.jpg" with "white_opacity.png") and I see that not only you have changed default firefly filtering settings (which may not work for all scenes), but you also turned your light away from the mirror (if you turn it towards it and rotate camera around you will see light reflection shimmering briefly in the mirror until you pause and allow the render to converge a bit). Anyway, the artifacts are still there and the light doesn't behave like in 4.16.0.3 General Release at all (especially not if you are using caustic sampler!) and you simply cannot see it because your test is too simple.

    I have attached three versions of a slightly more complex test scene.

    One scene file has a real ghostlight (you would have to own the product for it to work), the other scene has a fake ghostlight similar to yours (i.e. an emissive plane) -- I tried with and without all white opacity cutout map, but I did not try using special Iray node properties because I didn't see your fake ghostlight using any of them (unless they are somehow invisible). Finally, the third scene file has the fake ghostlight with Caustic Sampler disabled and luminosity adjusted up to compensate for opacity multiplication of new Iray version.

    My observations from the test I did in 4.20.0.6 Public Beta:

    1. You have to set the luminance to 1000000000 kcd/m^2 to get approximately the same brightness you had with 100 kcd/m^2.

    2. Light reflected from mirror and floor doesn't seep through the ghostlight onto the floor behind it.

    3. Edges are softer.

    4. Due to extremely high luminosity there are visible artifacts which reveal the ghostlight position.

    5. If you enable Caustic Sampler primary rays become ultra-bright as if opacity multiplication is not applied anymore so you need to dial down the luminosity back to 100 kcd/m^2.

    6. If you enable Caustic Sampler and dial down the luminosity to 100 kcd/m^2, primary rays will have approximately the same brightness, but you will lose all reflections in the scene.

    In other words, it seems that even Caustic Sampler is broken in the new Iray version.

    duf
    duf
    Fake_GLK_Test_No_Caustics.duf
    112K
    duf
    duf
    Fake_GLK_Test.duf
    111K
    duf
    duf
    Real_GLK_Test.duf
    116K
    daz_4_16_real_ghostlight.png
    1024 x 1024 - 654K
    daz_4_20_fake_ghostlight_no_caustics.png
    1024 x 1024 - 543K
    daz_4_20_fake_ghostlight_caustics_1000000000_kcd.png
    1024 x 1024 - 346K
    daz_4_20_fake_ghostlight_caustics_100_kcd.png
    1024 x 1024 - 480K
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 83,936

    second_technician_rimmer_9571136c47 said:

    Yep I think that's the same I tried, and indeed it works. When we say "another channel" we mean from beta to normal or normal to beta, right? It's a good one. What I'd like to be able to do though, just in case, would be to pack my UI/actions for safekeeping and reinjecting if needed be. Messing manually with AppData is always abit worrying.

    The meaning of the different release channels is covered here http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/990671/#Comment_990671

    There are scripts covering back up and restore here

    http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/referenceguide/scripting/api_reference/samples/file_io/file_zip_compress_each/start
    http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/referenceguide/scripting/api_reference/samples/file_io/file_zip_extract_each/start

    They write to/read from the Temp folder so you would probably want to edit that

  • skboaskboa Posts: 54
    edited March 16

    johndoe_36eb90b0 said:

    IceCrMn said:

    The scene I uploaded was setup for scene only.

    Sorry, I initially loaded the scene using drag & drop.

    I tried again by loading directly into Daz Studio 4.20.0.6 Public Beta (after replacing missing "Z:/GLOP.jpg" with "white_opacity.png") and I see that not only you have changed default firefly filtering settings (which may not work for all scenes), but you also turned your light away from the mirror (if you turn it towards it and rotate camera around you will see light reflection shimmering briefly in the mirror until you pause and allow the render to converge a bit). Anyway, the artifacts are still there and the light doesn't behave like in 4.16.0.3 General Release at all (especially not if you are using caustic sampler!) and you simply cannot see it because your test is too simple.

    I have attached three versions of a slightly more complex test scene.

    One scene file has a real ghostlight (you would have to own the product for it to work), the other scene has a fake ghostlight similar to yours (i.e. an emissive plane) -- I tried with and without all white opacity cutout map, but I did not try using special Iray node properties because I didn't see your fake ghostlight using any of them (unless they are somehow invisible). Finally, the third scene file has the fake ghostlight with Caustic Sampler disabled and luminosity adjusted up to compensate for opacity multiplication of new Iray version.

    My observations from the test I did in 4.20.0.6 Public Beta:

    1. You have to set the luminance to 1000000000 kcd/m^2 to get approximately the same brightness you had with 100 kcd/m^2.

    2. Light reflected from mirror and floor doesn't seep through the ghostlight onto the floor behind it.

    3. Edges are softer.

    4. Due to extremely high luminosity there are visible artifacts which reveal the ghostlight position.

    5. If you enable Caustic Sampler primary rays become ultra-bright as if opacity multiplication is not applied anymore so you need to dial down the luminosity back to 100 kcd/m^2.

    6. If you enable Caustic Sampler and dial down the luminosity to 100 kcd/m^2, primary rays will have approximately the same brightness, but you will lose all reflections in the scene.

    In other words, it seems that even Caustic Sampler is broken in the new Iray version.

    I've tested his method in a full interior environment, an old scene of mine, in which I used ghostlights before, it worked perfectly fine. There are a few fireflies, yes, but this works a lot better with close-to old style ghostlight values, than the new version do. I agree that it's still not the old behavior, but it's getting close.

    Now we'll have to wait and see if they forgot to "fix" the caustic sampler, or if it's intended behavior xD

    PS: there are no "real" or "fake" ghostlights, they're all just a simple mesh with luminosity enabled.

    Post edited by skboa on
  • skboa said:

    I've tested his method in a full interior environment, an old scene of mine, in which I used ghostlights before, it worked perfectly fine. There are a few fireflies, yes, but this works a lot better with close-to old style ghostlight values, than the new version do. I agree that it's still not the old behavior, but it's getting close.

    Now we'll have to wait and see if they forgot to "fix" the caustic sampler, or if it's intended behavior xD

    PS: there are no "real" or "fake" ghostlights, they're all just a simple mesh with luminosity enabled.

    If those "fireflies" don't bother you because your scenes are brightly lit then more power to you but for me they are unacceptable for me because I don't want to have to spend time cleaning them up in post-render.

    By the way, did you try enabling AI denoiser to see what happens with those?

    Furthermore, try this -- place say 25 kcd/m^2 ghostlight right above the floor (facing upwards) in a moderately lit room with dark floor and walls which has a ceiling light. I guarantee you won't get the same effect with new Iray. The reason is that ghostlight won't pass as much light on the floor as it used to. You could argue that I could set floor to be emissive, but then I can't easily toggle and/or adjust that light like I can with ghostlight.

    For me it only looks close to the old behavior in very simple scenes, and when the light itself isn't in view of the camera (which defeats the whole purpose of ghostlights).

    As for "real" and "fake" it might have been a bad choice of words, but I had to differentiate the scene files somehow.

  • Richard Haseltine said:

    The meaning of the different release channels is covered here http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/990671/#Comment_990671

    There are scripts covering back up and restore here

    http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/referenceguide/scripting/api_reference/samples/file_io/file_zip_compress_each/start
    http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/referenceguide/scripting/api_reference/samples/file_io/file_zip_extract_each/start

    They write to/read from the Temp folder so you would probably want to edit that

    Thanks, Richard, I'll give them a go. And I now understand the channel thing way better now. 

  • sandmanmaxsandmanmax Posts: 989

    Richard Haseltine said:

    This script will the layout options from another release channel http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/referenceguide/scripting/api_reference/samples/general_ui/copy_ui_from_channel/start

    Holy cow!!!  That was amazing!  Everything got brought in, my bookmarks, my custom script menu, even some little icons I made for the dashboard.  Thank you!!

  • IceCrMnIceCrMn Posts: 1,784
    edited March 18

    Here's a render of my ghostlight solution in action.

    There are 2 ghostlights in this scene that are viable in the camera's field of view.

    I won't point them out.

    I'll leave that to the viewer to find them.

    I stopped the render at ~15mins.It was looking good before that, but was typing a post so let it run a bit longer.

    I didn't get a caustic effect in there.I'll have to try a little harder for that next time.

    I just don't use caustics much so I don't have any experience in setting up scenes to use them.

    It does have volumetric effects though and yes, Spectral Rendering in enabled.

    There's also emissive surfaces other than the ghostlights.Torches/candles, boots, fire, glowing "stuff" in the cauldron and potion bottles.

    Good enough?

    I think so.

     

    edit:

    2022-03-17 21:51:14.651 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend progr: 87.28% of image converged

    2022-03-17 21:51:14.669 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend progr: Received update to 04474 iterations after 926.231s.

    2022-03-17 21:51:32.052 [INFO] :: Saved image: C:\Users\icecrmn\AppData\Roaming\DAZ 3D\Studio4 Public Build\temp\render\r.png

    2022-03-17 21:51:32.055 [INFO] :: Finished Rendering

    2022-03-17 21:51:32.077 [INFO] :: Total Rendering Time: 15 minutes 55.60 seconds

    2022-03-17 21:52:06.666 [INFO] :: Saved image: Z:\Kenzi Taylor\Kenzi Taylor Witchcraft 1.png

    2022-03-17 21:52:06.674 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:

    2022-03-17 21:52:06.675 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060): 4474 iterations, 5.582s init, 937.445s render

    Kenzi Taylor Witchcraft 1.png
    1473 x 963 - 2M
    Post edited by IceCrMn on
  • takezo_3001takezo_3001 Posts: 1,564
    edited March 18

    johndoe_36eb90b0 said:

    takezo_3001 said:

    I agree with this 134%, but the fact of the matter is that Daz chose to restrict people's access to previous versions of their software, so there needs to be a sticky made, or large post in a new beta/gen release thread letting users know that they cannot revert their changes unless they have made their own backups! 

    How is that sticky post in the forums going to help users who never install any Public Beta versions and never visit forums, but instead just update their Release version in DAZ Install Manager and then discover that half of their content no longer works as it did?

    It won't help them... At first, but those same users will eventually visit the forums anyway when they find out that they cannot roll back their changes without a backup!

    It's like not using road signs because there are people who don't drive, as to the people that update their software blind without knowing that they cannot roll back the changes, well, that's what the sticky is for... sure those users will miss out on the info initially, but they will be informed for the next time they want to update DS!

    Proper solution is to not allow users to update in DIM without reading release notes first. That would of course require that there are release notes available to begin with.

    Well, that's just another way of letting people know about Daz's restriction with previous versions of their software with the added benefit of being a hassle for such a mundane task as updating software... 

    Also, it wasn't you who said it, but the thinking that "it's users' fault for not having backup" is unreasonable because backups can fail.

    Daz Studio users are not IT administrators who know that the only real backup is if you store your files in at least 3 different places -- locally, online, and offline / off-site and then perform weekly tests to see if you can actually restore from those.

    You don't have to be an IT admin to back up 8 files, it's easy as copying/moving a file to a folder, the most basic of computer operations... I'm completely amazed at the pushback over such an easy and necessary thing, especially since the alternative is being stuck without a way to roll back changes made by installing new versions of the software.

    Locate the installation files, > make a folder  > move or copy the files to the folder; why is this such a controversial subject?

    Post edited by takezo_3001 on
  • PadonePadone Posts: 2,734
    edited March 18

    @takezo @johndoe

    Usually softwares are fully back-compatible, at least in the same release number, so a common user would assume that content for 4.15 will work fine in 4.20. That's not the case here. Please note that any asset using emission or thin walled is affected not just ghost lights. I understand what Takezo is explaining and personally I always do backups especially with daz. But I believe Johndoe is right in this case, if the new version breaks compatibility for any reason then there should be a big warning or at least a known issues in the main page, not "hidden" in the forum.

    The blog only enlights "fantastic" new features without any warning. The download page says nothing at all. This is just bad adv and not good customer support. From this point of view 4.20 is probably the worst release ever.

    Post edited by Padone on
  • takezo_3001takezo_3001 Posts: 1,564
    edited March 18

    Padone said:

    @takezo @johndoe

    Usually softwares are fully back-compatible, at least in the same release number, so a common user would assume that content for 4.15 will work fine in 4.20. That's not the case here. Please note that any asset using emission or thin walled is affected not just ghost lights. I understand what Takezo is explaining and personally I always do backups especially with daz. But I believe Johndoe is right in this case, if the new version breaks compatibility for any reason then there should be a big warning or at least a known issues in the main page, not "hidden" in the forum.

    The blog only enlights "fantastic" new features without any warning. The download page says nothing at all. This is just bad adv and not good customer support. From this point of view 4.20 is probably the worst release ever.

    Yes, I meant essentially the same thing in my original post, as in having a sticky warning people that there isn't any replacement installation files/beta risks; and to back up previous installation files as daz is taking the unique approach of not releasing previous versions of the software.

    I mean, they already give warnings for migrating your content, why not with DS installation files?

    We can have both, a sticky AND much more detailed information with the blog/product pages, but when all's said and done this is beta after all, bugs and stability issues shouldn't be a permanent issue to be carried over to the general release...

    Although plenty of bugs have migrated over to the general release, so the backup reminder will still go a long way; sure, it won't address ALL user's issues with rolling back to the previous files, but you bet that a lot more people would be saved from relying on the ticket system for older versions than we have right now.

    Post edited by takezo_3001 on
  • Sooo, did anyone test this with the latest beta?

    https://www.daz3d.com/iray-ghost-light-kit-one

     

  • DeeKayDeeKay Posts: 27
    edited March 21

    johndoe_36eb90b0 said:

    Sooo, did anyone test this with the latest beta?

    https://www.daz3d.com/iray-ghost-light-kit-one

     

    Yes, works well. IMHO a significant improvement over the original set and so worth the $2 upgrade price. Looking forward to the upgrades of sets 2 and 3.

    Post edited by DeeKay on
  • sunnyjeisunnyjei Posts: 406
    edited March 21

    DeeKay said:

    johndoe_36eb90b0 said:

    Sooo, did anyone test this with the latest beta?

    https://www.daz3d.com/iray-ghost-light-kit-one

     

    Yes, works well. IMHO a significant improvement over the original set and so worth the $2 upgrade price. Looking forward to the upgrades of sets 2 and 3.

    Do you mean that it is $2 more than the original price or is there an upgrade option somewhere for $2?

    Ah, found it! If you all hadn't mentioned it I would not have known :( This seems like something that should be an orange banner and if it was I missed it and own the originals

    Post edited by sunnyjei on
  • barbultbarbult Posts: 19,375

    sunnyjei said:

    DeeKay said:

    johndoe_36eb90b0 said:

    Sooo, did anyone test this with the latest beta?

    https://www.daz3d.com/iray-ghost-light-kit-one

     

    Yes, works well. IMHO a significant improvement over the original set and so worth the $2 upgrade price. Looking forward to the upgrades of sets 2 and 3.

    Do you mean that it is $2 more than the original price or is there an upgrade option somewhere for $2?

    Ah, found it! If you all hadn't mentioned it I would not have known :( This seems like something that should be an orange banner and if it was I missed it and own the originals

    Daz had some kind of bug with the orange banner. It only showed up AFTER you purchased the new product, not before.

Sign In or Register to comment.