Loading...
> >

“...accurate character tolerances made Daz a go-to solution on CAPTAIN AMERICA, THOR, and IRON MAN.”

13»

Comments

  • Kendall SearsKendall Sears Posts: 2,995
    edited May 2016

    As one who uses all of the packages listed, I will say that ANY of them can do the job, given the right operator.  In the end, it is the rendering engine that is responsible for the real work.  *ANYONE* that uses settings from the design package is an amateur.  PERIOD.  ALL of the professional work for shading, lighting, and such are done CUSTOM by experts in their fields.  Read the credits for any professional picture and you'll see numerous LIGHTING, numerous TEXTURING (SHADING), and numerous QA for both.  These folks are not dropping in presets from Maya or C4D, they are designing them at the low levels.  Also, the render engines are not running under the control of the design package, and subsequently getting the limitations inherent to such, but are running in their separate and self-contained state.  For RenderMan output, RIB files are generated, manipulated, and then interpreted by the Rendering Engine in its full state -- likely in a clustered render farm.  The same is true of any production use of PBR engines, though I don't know of any major productions that actually used PBR for more than small, short pieces.

    To argue about the package used is hilarious.  From Creative Bloq, July 2015 (http://www.creativebloq.com/vfx/tips-getting-job-game-thrones-71515642).

    "

    06. Bring your own toolkit

    Joe says don't worry about the software you use, as long as you came to it through trial and error and can produce the best work. "The software usage these days is interactive and almost intuitive: how do you go into this software programme and get what you need out of it and then take the results into another programme and refine them?

    "I used to always ask various facilities what they were using but ultimately they've all come to their 'tool kit' by various means and it ultimately doesn't matter. The important thing for me is just to give them as much as I can out of our production process and then guide them toward what we want to see at the end."

    "

    The fact is that anyone who says "everyone uses X" is a poser.  

    Kendall

    EDIT:  The section header got cropped in the quote.

    Post edited by Kendall Sears on
  • StratDragonStratDragon Posts: 3,273
    Khory said:

    So it isn't that it is not true, it is that you simply do not like the comparisons? Though I doubt if they felt they were not being candid about the comparison since it is truthful  and honest as to what studio does. In what way can Studio not back up its claims to be able to do any of the ticked boxes? I suppose it depends on who you are assuming they were marketing to. If in fact they were marketing to a professional looking to move from from Maya then perhaps your right. I would also expect such a qualified individual to have other things that they were looking for, though it is clear that studio does not model or texture so it would need to be something other than that. But I doubt many people will accept that as the primary market that Daz has attempted to appeal to since they came out with Studio. I think it is an accepted fact that studio is aimed more at the intro to mid level market in most cases. Skilled users obviously can and do use it professionally just as is true for other intro to mid level programs like poser. If Poser were on the list it would be just below Studio with the same boxes checked and a price of $499.99 per the SM site. Actually, I suppose to avoid disingenuous behavior it would be below Carrara which would have more boxes ticked than either and a price of 285.00. So it would be Studio free, Carrara with more capabilities at 285.00 and then poser with the same boxes ticked as studio at 499.99 and then lightwave.

    or Blender with all the capabilities of Maya, Lightwave and 3DMax but same price point as Studio if they want to justify the comparison fairly against commercial 3D applications, and on that note I don't need a commercial license to use maya, lightwave, 3dmax or Bender for commercial game assets in any form for the full versions of the first 3 and Blender has no commercial restrictions whatsoever, you could actually take their code and rebrand, modify it and charge for it it as long as you credit them for the source.

     

     

  • Canary3dCanary3d Posts: 2,033

    Here is the music box prop from Oz the Great and Powerful. He used Michael and Victoria in the early stages of developing the posed figures. The prop figures were 3d printed. 

     

  • IkyotoIkyoto Posts: 1,159
    edited May 2016

    So the three contracts I got doing stillillos using nothing but DAZ Studio and Photoshop don't count? huh... guess I'd better get the newest Maya instead of doing things the way where I learn to use"low end" crap.

    And Canary3d - thanks for the post.

    Post edited by Ikyoto on
  • IkyotoIkyoto Posts: 1,159
    Kendall Sears said:

    As one who uses all of the packages listed, I will say that ANY of them can do the job, given the right operator.  (snip)

    Kendall

    EDIT:  The section header got cropped in the quote.

    Well said.

  • mjc1016mjc1016 Posts: 15,001

    I think the final take away point of this whole thing should be...

    Daz assets are used in many unexpected places and ways.  The Daz software, too.  How much, how far and exactly where in any given production, be it major movie or 30 second TV spot is only absolutely known by those who were working on that production.  But the simple fact is...they ARE being used in 'pro' environments.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 108,053

    Please keep the discussion civil and address comments to the topic and not the poster.

  • KhoryKhory Posts: 3,854
    StratDragon said:
    Khory said:

    So it isn't that it is not true, it is that you simply do not like the comparisons? Though I doubt if they felt they were not being candid about the comparison since it is truthful  and honest as to what studio does. In what way can Studio not back up its claims to be able to do any of the ticked boxes? I suppose it depends on who you are assuming they were marketing to. If in fact they were marketing to a professional looking to move from from Maya then perhaps your right. I would also expect such a qualified individual to have other things that they were looking for, though it is clear that studio does not model or texture so it would need to be something other than that. But I doubt many people will accept that as the primary market that Daz has attempted to appeal to since they came out with Studio. I think it is an accepted fact that studio is aimed more at the intro to mid level market in most cases. Skilled users obviously can and do use it professionally just as is true for other intro to mid level programs like poser. If Poser were on the list it would be just below Studio with the same boxes checked and a price of $499.99 per the SM site. Actually, I suppose to avoid disingenuous behavior it would be below Carrara which would have more boxes ticked than either and a price of 285.00. So it would be Studio free, Carrara with more capabilities at 285.00 and then poser with the same boxes ticked as studio at 499.99 and then lightwave.

    or Blender with all the capabilities of Maya, Lightwave and 3DMax but same price point as Studio if they want to justify the comparison fairly against commercial 3D applications, and on that note I don't need a commercial license to use maya, lightwave, 3dmax or Bender for commercial game assets in any form for the full versions of the first 3 and Blender has no commercial restrictions whatsoever, you could actually take their code and rebrand, modify it and charge for it it as long as you credit them for the source.

     

    I don't see a problem with listing blender actually. My money would all be on the same people who gravitate to studio gravitating to studio rather than blender. I suspect a very high percentage of users have used blender at some point because it does sound so full of goodness. It just is not full of goodness that most people can wrap their minds around with ease. I just would hope they don't start with blender and assume that ever program is that complex and give up. I know that I tried blender first and poser second and finally found studio and it took.

    "and on that note I don't need a commercial license to use maya, lightwave, 3dmax or Bender for commercial game assets in any form for the full versions of the first 3"

    I'm not sure if your saying your a student or what. The only reference I saw for them other than the commercial licenses were for student versions. I did see that of the three the only one with the student price listed was light wave and it is $195. Still more expensive than Studio and Carrara but cheaper than poser.

  • Lissa_xyzLissa_xyz Posts: 6,116
    Khory said:
    StratDragon said:
    Khory said:

    I did see that of the three the only one with the student price listed was light wave and it is $195. Still more expensive than Studio and Carrara but cheaper than poser.

    Autodesk's 3ds Max and Maya have free 3 year student licenses, which is why you found no pricing for those. Only the full price packages can be used commercially, not the free student licenses.

  • Ken OBanionKen OBanion Posts: 1,455
    Richard Haseltine said:

    It sounded to me as if they used it in the inital stages, when planning how things woudl look, and then used the results as a basis for teh custom models used on screen in most cases. It also sounded as if they largely used the bases and morphs, not a lot of content from the store.

    My guess would be the 'storyboarding' stage....

  • wolf359wolf359 Posts: 3,931
    Kendall Sears said:

    As one who uses all of the packages listed, I will say that ANY of them can do the job, given the right operator.  In the end, it is the rendering engine that is responsible for the real work.  *ANYONE* that uses settings from the design package is an amateur.  PERIOD.  ALL of the professional work for shading, lighting, and such are done CUSTOM by experts in their fields.  Read the credits for any professional picture and you'll see numerous LIGHTING, numerous TEXTURING (SHADING), and numerous QA for both.  These folks are not dropping in presets from Maya or C4D, they are designing them at the low levels.  Also, the render engines are not running under the control of the design package, and subsequently getting the limitations inherent to such, but are running in their separate and self-contained state.  For RenderMan output, RIB files are generated, manipulated, and then interpreted by the Rendering Engine in its full state -- likely in a clustered render farm.  The same is true of any production use of PBR engines, though I don't know of any major productions that actually used PBR for more than small, short pieces.

    To argue about the package used is hilarious.  From Creative Bloq, July 2015 (http://www.creativebloq.com/vfx/tips-getting-job-game-thrones-71515642).

    "

    06. Bring your own toolkit

    Joe says don't worry about the software you use, as long as you came to it through trial and error and can produce the best work. "The software usage these days is interactive and almost intuitive: how do you go into this software programme and get what you need out of it and then take the results into another programme and refine them?

    "I used to always ask various facilities what they were using but ultimately they've all come to their 'tool kit' by various means and it ultimately doesn't matter. The important thing for me is just to give them as much as I can out of our production process and then guide them toward what we want to see at the end."

    "

    The fact is that anyone who says "everyone uses X" is a poser.  

    Kendall

    EDIT:  The section header got cropped in the quote.

    @kendal sears THANK YOU!!.. for this informative& much needed post

Sign In or Register to comment.