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
© 2026 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
...unfortunately scripting is definitely not my strong suit (and not what I got into this for) so I have to depend on others like Kettu, Wowie, and Parris to provide scripts/products (like Parris' IBL Master) to open more features.
However, discovered one utility I had that really helps to make normal glass in 3DL look convincing (with a bit of tweaking): AOA's Metallised Glass Shaders. Ran some experiments last night and it made a major difference (notice the tinted glass in the shelter windows, windscreen of the bus, and bottle by the trash bin in the attachment below).
----------
OK something glitchy with the forum software. When I added the attachment it did not show up as it usually should, so I tried a couple more times and nothing. Figuring something was borked with the software, I gave up (striking out the note about the image) and just posted the comment after which I saw four attachments of the same image.
.
I imagine the point is that even after all those years the current DS implementation is still behind in features compared to the features of the full 3DL at the time 3DL was first implemented in DS.
...guess I didn't quite read it that way. Sounded more to me like it was being said that 3DL in Daz was better then than now.
Clearly it is comprehensible that what I have been saying from the very beginning of my comment is that 3Delight could do more, as opposed to the version in DAZ Studio.
Thank you.
This is closer to what I mean. Even back then in the early days of DAZ Studio 3Dellight could do a lot more than the DAZ Studio's version. Of course, I am not dense and understand that DAZ Studsio itself lacked and lacks many of the technologies to take advantage of most of the advance features of 3Delight but stuff like the lighting could have been a thousand times better.
Yea, it sounds as if it's that which he's saying but as this isn't true AFAIK that doesn't makes much sense. The only thing that makes sense to me is the other interpretation.
The way it could make sense is if DAZ have later downgraded the licence / feature options in some way because it originally was too expensive. If there is more than one license option, I don't know anything about that.
But all I've seem to have noticed is that 3DL renders in general are looking better now than then, which I'd assume is because of an improvement.
Would be interesting to hear what DAZ have to say in that respect. I imagine some vendors may know something also.
OK, thanks for the clarification.
...well in seems it was downgraded in one respect. As I understand there used to be five passes in progressive mode (now there's only 4) and if something is glossy (not necessarily reflective) and produces a bright highlight, that highlight now has a jagged edge which is usually the result of poor anti aliasing. The only way to fix this I am told is through scripting, which as I mentioned is not in my area of expertise.
OK, what the reasons are for that DAZ only knows. May be compromises necessary to make room for other and better improvements, or reduce bloatedness.
...a real pain though as without scripting there is no way to fix the matter and progressive rendering works better with IBL Master as using the default bucket mode can produce unwanted shadow artefacts (a "known issue").
That is a vendors choice weather they will include a 3Delight shader or not, its just less hassle to set them up, I can tell you that. You should keep in mind that every single DAZ original model/ outfit comes with a 3DL shaders so you shouldn't worry about it. Most of the stuff you read is merely false... Unless its officially announced by DAZ 3dl will always remain apart of DAZ :3.
PAs can include whatever materials they want. Heck, they could support Bryce and Octane if they felt like it.
It comes down to what they judge is best return on their time.
I can see Daz PAs dropping 3Dlight support for their products but I can't see it disappearing from Daz Studio since it's the only option for people doing NPR renders.
I installed DS 4.11 and can't find 3Dlight anywhere in the render engines.
Word from on high id that it will always be a part of studio, and it appears to be missing from the 64 bit version.
Any ideahow I can get it for my installation?
Thanx
3DL is still included in DS, where are you looking?
It's a popup in ther Render Settings pallate.
Note: I'm on a Mac 64bit, but I doubt tht it's significantly different on a Wintel machine.
I have no interest in iray what so ever ... so if daz ever does drop 3DL, that's my last upgrade
....just ran a quick test using the 4.12 beta and no issues with 3DL here.
On W7 Pro. Older hardware (LGA 1366 i7).
UNder Render (engine) All I have is Iray and sketch. is there a file or switch I have to
flip?
AAaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh....... render => settings => editor...
thanx JOdel different operating system, still great advice.
for me it's the differance tween 1 hour render time and 20 houres render time.
Cheers
I think I learnt more using Daz because I have the ability to render in more than one engine and with a different paradign (biased vs. unbiased).
I really don't believe 3Delight 'used to be better' on older Daz Studio versions, that sounds like a nostalgia delusion.
far better shaders, faster CPUs, the collection of ten years of improvements in more areas than just Studio.
As to 3Delight being faster than Iray, yes and no.
- Iray is reliable, 3Delight can be faster, but it can also get bogged down for hours (and hours and hours and hours) on some part of the image (staring at clumps of those little '!' for hours is no fun). Iray defaults to a cap of 1 hour 40.
- The Studio 3Delight engine may be max core free, but I mostly do my 3Delight renders in the standalone on GNU/Linux, and the capped render engine is so much faster (ok, that might be a 'Linux advantage)
Lux is glacially slow, but has one overriding advantage over Iray (and 3Delight) - being able to pause render and actually close the process and resume where you left off later.
3dl is way faster... assuming you are willing to go with very limited/basic lighting. IMO, it's somewhat harder to bring IRay down to the simplest 3dl options than to bring 3dl up to most of what Iray can do.
That said, you can trim Iray a lot and I've mostly moved to it.
Except for using PWToon. I still LURVE it for fast, reasonably solid toon style stuff. (Oso Toon and LineRender9000 are better in a number of ways, but at the cost of speed, so it depends on what your sweet spot is.)
When what you want is a quick render to see if things are the way you want,3Dl works well, once you've verified that's what I want,THen you can run the lifelike rendering features of Iray
I just like the options. firefly is ok, superfly is scary first time you see it render, and the scene's brighter.the image sharper.
Cheers
I use both myself, I use 3delight for backrounds with lots of charaters, and use Iray for closeups of main characters and composite in Photoshop. I also cheat with Opengl for out of focus background images. Oh, and if you are just looking for a flat looking quick renders to take into photoshop or comic creation software Opengl is impossible to beat unless you need shadows and quick animation renders. If you do I would recommend the new evee render engine in Blender. I don't think the 3dl is going anywhere but I would like to see Daz studio Opengl upgraded with shadows, or a offical bridge that converts shaders to blender evee. For stills Daz still works great!
...just did a comparison render of the same test object in Iray using GPU mode with IBL lighting, and 3DL using a UE IBL. The Iray render finished in a minute and five seconds, The 3DL UE one took about eight minutes.
I'm new to Daz, so I have no legacy investment in 3DL assets, or fond memories of it. What I do know is that it takes longer to produce textures, etc. for 2 engines than it does for one. In the time it takes to produce a second set of materials, the PAs could be adding more interesting touches or otherwise refining their models or else move on to new projects, thereby increasing the variety of higher quality choices we have while reducing the cost to produce assets. I also know that I'm paying for textures I'll never use. In effect, people who have moved on to Iray are subsidizing the people who haven't, as are people who have never used 3DL. However, if it weren't for all those 3DL die-hards who purchased all those 3DL assets over the years, there probably wouldn't be any Daz Studio for me to enjoy today, so I don't mind.
Not exactly a fair comparison.
So this is going off topic. Just want to add that the two render engines use the same type of textures, you wouldn't produce one set of textures for IRay and another for 3Delight.
One thing I find problematic about Daz’ implementation of 3delight is compatibility; so many shaders and lights won’t work together and it can be confusing. And very annoying when you don’t realize, wonder why something looks weird in your render.
...true, but Iray is a GPU based engine. To get the best quality out of 3DL means using UE. In CPU rendering tests, both come out around the same time wise.
The longest render time I ever dealt with (outside of Reality/Lux) was a five frame motion blue using 3DL and a UE HDR. Total time 16 hrs 30 min.