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
Not all software developers are comfortable with making their source code available to someone to enable that person to maintain it after the original developer dies; I know of at least one application in common use that hasn't been updated in over a decade because the creator had a provision in his will that the source be destroyed after his death. And as far as scripts goes, they would need to save two copies to be able to make them available in the event the PA could no longer maintain them; I think this is part of the reason some freebie scripts are distributed as text versions.
Again, they can't require PAs to do this. It isn't DAZ's code. You're probably lucky the product doesn't get pulled from the store. I would think it's up to the next of kin to decide what's done with the code.
Well they probably could if they wanted to, but how the PAs would react I don't know. The vast majority of content is not protected against public abuse/piracy anyway, despite the option of encryption, and with scripts they would still be encrypted publicly.
The problem for DAZ is that you purchase something in their store and then the next DS update breaks it and there's no way to update it. Not something that makes customers happy.
Still this is not DAZ's code to change; and code breaking is part of the software cycle not limited to DAZ. I have programs that won't work past a OS version as well that weren't updated. A vendor dying isn't a valid reason for customer to be upset.. it seems to me rather selfish and callous. I can imagine DAZ contacting a grieving person saying "I'm sorry for your loss, but can we get that code because our customers need it?"
You know how exactly how that conversation will end.
No one have ever talked about that. If you give a copy of your code to someone (DAZ or whoever relevant) who can utilize it constructively and say "use it as you like when I'm dead", I can't see it can hurt anyone.
Personally I don't like the idea that people who have purchased my products suddenly can't use them anymore just because I've decided to take my code with me in the grave. So I am taking precautions to avoid that happening (not that I expect do die soon, but some day it will happen, I suppose). I have nothing to lose but my customers may have, and I don't like to see anything get wasted unless there is a good reason for it. So to me it's an obvious and constructive decision.
How about this other situation: you wish to sell your product at another store...do you allow Daz3d to retain intellectual control after you have left? Even marriage has a "until death do you part" clause. Your contract is that your product should work in the current version of software and there is no post death warranty for any piece of software in the world. If I were the survivor and someone came to me to release intellectual rights to something a departed loved one made, I think I would have hard words with them before I got law enforcement involved. Realistically, in everything in life, there is an alloted lifetime; If you get a dog, the dog will pass away and the provider of the dog doesn't have to give you another one.
If you don't like the idea, then you sell your products outright before you die or you leave specific instructions. But this isn't the topic that was being discussed, it was that PAs should be required to give encryption keys to the store so when they die the store can use the products they don't actually own. If someone isn't keen on the idea of someone dying and their code not becoming usable, then it's probably best they don't use any indie software. Software offered in the 3D industry is no different than any software industry so the same rules will apply to all.
No rules are etched in stone, anything is potentially subject to change. And I'm just giving some suggestions that might benefit many without hurting anyone. Anyway, enough said.
But that wasn't what was discussed.. what was discussed was a requirement which can't be done. Yes if PA wishes the ownership to be transferred at their death, it's up to them, but it can't be a requirement.
...this took under 12 minutes to render in 3DL at 1,500 x 1.050 (still a WIP but the latest version).
Rendered on a 5+ year old system that has an i7 930 2.8 GHz CPU and 12 GB DDR3 1333 three channel memory.
KK: At a glance, it appears to lack SSS, bounce light, has a simple distant light + basic ambient light (maybe some AO).
So it's essentially stripped down to a basic style of rendering.
For roughly the same quality of render, you could do it with similar speeds in Iray CPU. Mind you, it wouldn't look the same; trade-offs are a little different in Iray; I expect the lighting would look a little better while it would look a little more grainy.
I'm jealous... for me, Iray was a godsend becauise all of my 3dl renders took hours and hours...
...if you were using UE, indeed, it crawled about as slow as Iray does on the CPU for me. In the attached pic I used Parris' new IBL Master.
...SSS is really only useful for close ups, this is a medium to wide shot. As I mentioned, this is still a WIP or more correctly an "experiment in progress".
Graininess is part of what bothers me about Iray . To me a "little more grainy" does not look "better" it looks like you used a low quality film.
This is a marked improvement over the original 3DL version I did over two years ago. I wanted to keep everything in the scene the same as it was in the original for the most part so the characters are still G2 (the older lady, Steph 5 [Genesis "Classic]). The only major differences is the sky backdrop as it has more depth than the flat photo background, and I used Skin Builder Pro on the three characters.
At least for my Iray renders, I have been gradually adjusting the mitchell filter so my iray renders are sharper and faster than my 3dl renders ever were.
I'm not an expert in 3Delight since now I use Cycles most. What I did in my example is to use a key light with shadows set to bitmap (no raytrace) and some point lights with no shadows for rims and fills. Plus a uber environment set to ambience only (no raytrace) for the overall light. That's old school lighting I used for fast rendering back with Lightwave 8 (that had a great raytracer anyway), and it seems it works fine with 3Delight too.
The advantage of raytrace over PBR is that you have so much control over what lights do so you can fake whatever you need. While with PBR you use "real" lights and cheating is harder or even impossible in some cases. As I said, I believe each engine has its strong and weak points depending on what you need.
EDIT. I included the scene files in my previous post for anyone interested.
I'm afraid you need to do more research on the topic. I mentioned significant differences. It's not just about more cores. The instruction pointer is IDENTICAL per core group. There is nothing like that on CPU. You need to write code specifically tailored for the GPU. And GPUs aren't used by crypto currency for the most part. They use ASICs because they can do hashing an order of magnitude faster. Not because they have more cores, but because the hardware is specialized. Crypto currency that uses the GPU has an algorithm that has a DAG. This DAG is a large data structure that cannot be used by ASICs. There is a lot more going on than just more cores. The irony of your argument is that the opposite is acutally true. Crypto currencies that use GPUs do so in order to SLOW DOWN the hash rate.
Ok now I understand what you did=)One can use raytraced shadows or shadowmaps. I thought you rendered with ray trace depth at zero in the render settings. Well I had to try it of course, and fact is that IBLM renders shadows with raytrace depth at 0
. That of course means all kinds of other problems with reflective/refractive stuff like eyes and so on, but very interesting
!
Agreed! And Petercat, sorry for the long sidenote!
You will have to go back to what I said in a previous post. My answer unfortunately has not changed. If you want me to expound on this, you'll have to send me a PM.
Nah, it's cool. This thread became a spectator sport for me a while ago. What was I talking about in the beginning?
Oh, yeah. Predatron stuff not working in older Studios. Nevermind.
Although I'd still like to know why it's only the ground, and was it intentional?
I wish Predatron would chime in, because if the problem wasn't intentional, maybe
they could fix it for the stubborn among us.
Maybe they built it, tested it in 4.10 and said "Good to go!" without even
realizing that it doesn't work in older versions.
I have no way of knowing, or asking.
One thing I just noticed about your original render - at least the tree & swing set (I don't have the other set), is that there is a central grass bank upon which the tree & bushes sit, and this is missing from your render: the tree is clearly floating above that base level.
I've done my research, and you didn't understand what I said. That's ok, I'm moving on.
Yeah, I forgot about that. That one grass patch killed the render also, but the other grass didn't.
That's why I'm wondering if it's unintentional.
Love your products, BTW. Now create more, I have a sliver of a gift card yet to spend.
https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/240071/coming-soon-mv-stella-engineering-deck-commercial#latest ;
Your timing is perfect, I will soon need an asteroid mining ship for my webcomic!
And I'm glad to see walkways and stairs, as my universe has artificial gravity.
So I'm assuming there will be three modules for sale... will there be an exterior?
This will be one of the few things that I buy at 30% off.
(One question - do you intend for it to work in older versions of Studio?)
Well one can imagine all kinds of problem scenarios but my opinion is that a PA must have the right to sign a contract with a company based on whatever terms they might agree on. The PA can then discuss these terms with his/her relatives before signing, if relevant.
Yes, things generally have an expected lifetime, depending on the context, but many things can actually live a lot longer, if needed (especially if the context is planned obsolescence). Why not extend the lifetime as long as possible if it can benefit someone, within reasonable cost-benefit terms. There are no absolute rules here, anyone can make their own rules if they want.
As for dogs you normally can't extend their natural lifetime but with software there are no real limitations; as long as it's relevant (someone wants it, necessary hardware etc. is available, cost-benefit allows it) you can extend its lifetime as long as you want. So you can't really compare these two things.
...oh, and by the way, I am fully aware that the version of 3DL in Daz is not set up for photoreal output like a PBR render engine is. I'm simply pushing it for all it has to get the best results I can wring out of it.
It will be interesting to see how much further it can go when Wowie's Ultra Shader system hits the store.
I think we agree on some points: "PA must have the right to sign a contract with a company based on whatever terms they might agree on" but I can't imagine how this would benefit either Daz3d or the PA. Software can have an almost infinite lifetime but the hardware it runs on doesn't. If one made a script and one (or your descendents) was required to recompile it everytime OS's change for eternity unless you are forced to give up your intellectual propertty seems like a pretty raw deal for a PA. I would prefer that the PA's be less encumbered so that they can work their creative magic and that Daz3d retain the rights to make and try to sell the products that spark them creatively. No one should be required to endlessly maintain a DOS version or OS 8 version of a program through decades. Finally, when you purchase a product, you enter a contract but even marriage contract dissolve on death.
Marriage, maybe, but if I buy a house, I still own it when the former owner dies, and I can add rooms and such freely.
The software for DAZ studio instead - I buy a scipt licence, and with the next update of DAZ Studio the script doesn't work any longer, and no one can fix this besides the original PA. If he/she doesn't, that's it.
Which ends in two ways (if I really loved to work with this software script):
1. I stay with an older version of DAZ Studio, won't buy newer products from DAZ or that PA, because they don't work with the older Studio versions in the long run.
2. I'm pissed off that I can't use my sparkling toy any longer, change to the new Studio Version and don't buy from that PA a second time.
In both version DAZ AND the PA loose sales.
lol, this is basically the asteroid mining ship out of a novel I'm writing. The full set will be 3 interior decks (already out) and an exterior. Haven't started work on that yet.
I don't really subscribe to artificial gravity of the "magic" sort, favouring gravity through thrust - which doesn't preclude ladders & stairs, it just means more handholds for the times when the engines aren't running. (Centripetal gravity is only for the strong of stomach, imho, since it's known to cause nausea through coreolis effect on the inner ears, unless you have a massive diameter centrifuge, that is.)
As regards older versions of Studio, I don't honestly know. I don't do anything deliberately to make it not work. But like most people I forget to make a backup of the old DS before it gets overwritten by the new one, and so I only have the current release. I do know that new versions get extra Iray shader parameters (for example) from time to time, and they will be saved in the .duf when you save a file with the new version. But whether an older DS will ignore parameters it doesn't understand, or if it will barf, I don't know.